Report Says Pact to Allow US Troops to Operate in Canada

[toms3]

With all due respect to our US friend who frequent this site, I do feel that if it ever happened and a sizeable US force came to Canada in the event of an emergancy they would be here to stay....thats just my gut feeling.   I know this topic has been discussed before on this site, but I feel its is important.   I feel that if Canada had a decently sized military this would not even be an issue.  Read below

Report says pact to allow U.S. troops in Canada

CTV News Staff

American troops could soon be allowed to enter Canadian territory in the event of a crisis. A published report says Canada and the U.S. will announce an accord today that could see troops cross each other's borders.

The Toronto Star reports that U.S. soldiers would be under the control of the Canadian military when they cross into Canada. The paper says the reverse would be true if our troops were deployed south of the border.

"This is an important way of co-operating with the Americans on a common issue of security in a way that is constructive and at the same time preserves Canadian sovereignty, because we're not engaged in doing anything without the authority of the Canadian government," a senior government source told The Star.

The Star says the draft plans will detail how both countries would jointly deploy military forces in the event of a terrorist attack or other disaster.

Officials say Canada would have to approve the deployment of U.S. troops before they could move onto Canadian soil.

"Ultimately, governments on both sides of the border are going to have to approve the execution of it," the source told The Star.

The Star says the planning group will be headed by Canadian Lt.-Gen. Ken Pennie, who is the deputy commander of NORAD (North American Aerospace Defence Command).

The paper reports the accord will set up joint operation and military exercises aimed at fighting terrorism. In addition, joint maritime surveillance and intelligence gathering efforts will be fostered between the two countries.

Defence Minister John McCallum and Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham will hold a news conference in Ottawa Monday morning to announce the agreement to enhance Canada-U.S. security co-operation for North America.

 

[Harry]

It isn‘t bad enough that we can‘t defend ourselves, but this is the proverbial ‘icing‘ on the cake.

As if the US would ever need Canadian troops to conduct aid to civil power or war measures type enforcement in the US, but here, it shows that there is a very clear problem with our abilities to defend ourselves.

Poppa Doc Crouton, the banana boat has come in, prepare for the trip down river. :rage:

 

[Jarnhamar]

Thats really scarry.

Good legal way for them to come here and "pursuade" us.


"The soldiers holding guns pointing at you are here for your protection"

I dont really blame the us though, they must see their whole northern border as an unsecured front line.
I‘d do it if i was them.

 

[Cdn Soldier]

Non-issue IMHO.

NORAD has been operating along the same lines, albeit with aircraft, for how many years??

Also, foreign troops operate here already and we‘ve operated in foreign countries. Although not true in the early years, our presence in Germany during the mid to late stages of the Cold War didn‘t impinge on it‘s sovereignty, nor did the presence of RCAF Wings in France.

The truely imaginative here could even speculate that BATUS, BATSU(W) and GATES, when it was up, were double hatted. If we prepositioned in Europe, wouldn‘t the reverse make sense?? And what‘s up with putting the 10th Mountain Division in Fort Drum, NY?! Lots of hills in NY but not many true mountains.

Last point, if a major terrorist event took place, since we are "at war" with them, Article 5 of the NATO Charter (collective self defence) could be invoked and you could pretty much see any NATO nation arrive, much the same as the NATO AWACs patrolling American skies. Check out NATO AWACS for a list of who showed up to play...

 

[Harry]

Let‘s have some fun.

NORAD, why are we part of it. Hmm, had a lot to do with a VERY WEAK posture and position by Canada back in the early stages of the Cold War missile détente balance. The Americans established the DEW line and later the Pine Tree line here in Canada, we really had no choice in the matter and as a result of political appeasement we where included in NORAD, albeit as the poor cousin at first.

By the way, as a result of our status in NORAD, we had Nukes here, it was the tool that forced us to play the game. The Bomarc and Voodoo mean anything too you?

Foreign troops don‘t operate here, they train as part of allied agreements (BATUS, BATSU(W) and the flight school). Read the fine print of the NDA with regards to ‘Visiting Forces‘. No where does it include the employment or use of force in Canada.

Our presence in Germany, what planet did you get tele-ported in from. Our land forces where in Germany as part of the occupation forces initially under the BAOR in Northern Germany. With the escalation of the Cold War, we maintained our line status as part of the then newly minted NATO and the Air Wings where in France due West of our AO, not to forget that France was at the time part of NATO. Are you trying to equate what happened during the Cold War to what is happening today?

Really, I am impressed, geesh standing shoulder to shoulder with our American neighbors. Great, but it is a bit of a statement that they could, would or can operate on Canadian soil, under the guise of reporting to a Canadian. It tells me that maybe our government has finally been pulled up on the Uncle Sam matt and told to tow the line again in like fashion as NORAD.

If we had the ability to defend ourselves, I have a sneaking feeling this would never have happened.

The 10th Mountain Division in Fort Drum. Why don‘t you do a little homework and see when they actually set up camp there. Maybe it would make a little more sense to you then.

NATO is a collective protection agreement; this however is a license to allow US troops to operate on Canadian soil simply based on our inability to deal with a large or numerous security incidents/terrorist actions or requests for ‘aid too civil power‘. The US has been pushing this for a couple of months and Ottawa buckled, and based upon your reasoning then, why hasn‘t the US and Mexico entered into a similar agreement, oh right, they can mobilize a sizable military response.

As for your Cajones comment. I am sure you are a smart man, but with an oxygen deficiency from having your head sealed by your sphincter, I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

First and foremost, this topic deals with nothing more than our inability to ensure our own sovereignty and the concerns that the US has WRT it being a security risk to them.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Much ado about nothing.

Does anyone remember what happened to the German economy when the West had to absorb the East in the wake of unification?

Why would the US want to annex Canada and ruin their own economy in so doing?

And if the US did annex Canada - would it really change anyone‘s life? You hypocrites all watch American TV and movies, eat at US restaurant chains, and buy US-designed laundry soap, underwear and air fresheners for your cars, among other things.

So would it matter if Old Glory flew over your post office instead of the maple leaf, honestly?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

And the point about GATES is a good one. The Bundeswehr had more tanks and personnel carriers in Manitoba than the Canadian Army had in the entire world for many years. There is rule of law, and the Americans are the first ones to defend liberty and the law...can‘t really see them breaking international law by invoking "squatter‘s rights". That‘s about the dumbest thing I‘ve heard yet.

 

[toms3]

Cdn Soldier......I have no time for individuals who have nothing better to do than shoot off their mouths and try to look smart. If you want to debate something...thats fine...but you don‘t have to be insultive. I believe Harry sorted you out. Thanks Harry...good post.

Michael…slow down man…who said anything about annexing the country. It has nothing to do with eating at their restaurants or watching their TV. Hey….did you know that our comics and actors are invading them…oh…even Tim Horton’s and the Second cup have established a beachhead. Please. The point that was being made was simply that if Canada had a large enough, properly equipped armed forces we would not even be having this discussion. I never said the US would stay as an occupying force, however, I feel they would never fully leave.

Oh...and to answer your question...

"So would it matter if Old Glory flew over your post office instead of the maple leaf, honestly? "

My answer....yes...it matters...it would matter a great deal to me and I think many Canadains.

 

[humint]

I‘m playing devil‘s advocate :evil: here, so no need to jump all over me and claim my head is turning blue from sphincterisation, etc.

Just a thought -- may be the politicians are looking at this from a different perspective than we are.

If the big push these days is for homeland security, and the development of a defensive perimetre around North America, this may be a first step towards the unification or, at the very least, partial unification of military forces.

I‘m not just talking about CDNS fighting under the US flag/banner or in US units or viceversa, but an actual agreement between the CDN gov and the US gov to set up a combined military force, funded proportionately by each country -- a sort of military timeshare if you will. There would be standard equipment, procedures, communications, etc. -- a complete harmonization.

There is little doubt that the Cdn government is having trouble funding its military whereas the US dedicates a tremendous amount of funds to the cause. May be this is agreement is a testing ground for the CDN public for the implementation of a unified military or homeland defensive force. Think of this as the wading in period, the slow approach so the gov doesn‘t alarm the voting public.

There are already a number of other ways in which countries co-operate on related matters, and by this I am thinking of something along the lines of Europol or Interpol (i.e. intel sharing,. combined ops, etc) but for the military. We already co-operate, and have set-up certain standards, for NATO ops, etc, -- is this the next logical step?

Now, I‘m not saying that this is either right or wrong, or that this is the way to go, but am curious as to the real -- and by this I mean the political -- reasons for this agreement. Has anyone seen the interviews with McCallum? Doesn‘t he seem a little shady and evasive?

Let‘s, for one minute, assume this is true and what the govs are striving for, is it a good idea?

PS. claims that I am delusional and compltely paranoid are fully welcome! :blotto:

 

[Harry]

Just a thought -- may be the politicians are looking at this from a different perspective than we are.

Don‘t fret, I am not going to jump down YOUR throat, however I have a huge problem when people recite history and they haven‘t a clue where or what they are indicating, especially when they apply their twisted logic to modern day real time.

And to reason where our politicians are coming from. The US has been thumping the North American defence drum heavily for the past couple of months. They have sent several heavy hitters to Ottawa to get the message out. Something they didn‘t have to do with Mexico.

I think the straw that broke the camels‘ back was when Crouton got upset with the US Ambassador for knocking his government publicly for not beefing up and ensuring we have sufficient military resources to protect ourselves and tow the line internationally. I will surmise that the government was challenged on this fact and this agreement was offered as a face saving solution.

Political ‘put up or shut up‘.

Our inability to ensure our very sovereignty is a serious issue in today‘s geo political climate. This is considered a very serious threat to American Homeland Security and they have offered us a solution, much like that offered under the guise of NORAD.

Let us take pause for a second and reflect upon the significance of NORAD. It provided a buffer to the US. Most of the aerial/anti air weapons of the day were nuclear. Why is it no one had a problem with the possibility of large numbers of these weapons being detonated over Canada, and ironically over most of our heavily populated areas? Why, because the average Canadian had no idea we were part of the nuclear family with our own standoff weapons, albeit in most cases stamped with a US tag.

Now we have a new agreement. If anyone has been following the mood of the US electorate, you would know that there is a belief there that Canada is a safe haven for terrorists, Canada is an easy place to get into and out of. In essence many Right-Wingers believe our lax ways are a significant threat to the US.

Take it one step further and wonder why a loon like Buchanan can call us Soviet Canuckistan and it is not challenged at the grass roots, in fact it helped to fuel a fowl(er) mood towards us. Boys and girls there is growing sentiment South of the 49th that we are free loaders. Put American troops here for whatever reason to assit us, and it will most likely result in a wave of American calls for our annexation.

This concept of providing an American Security umbrella extending into Canada was floated in the House of Representatives this past summer but was kept on the back burner until after the recent mid terms. Lets see what happens if something significant happens here, bet some of you freedom loving people will have a second thought after a sizable force locks down large portions of Canada.

And what does it matter if the Stars and Bars fly over the post office, well to our hypocrite espousing friend. We send a lot of commerce south and they North. But at the end of the day, get it through your thick skull that Canada in what ever form whether a Dominion or what is a sovereign nation with it‘s own elected government, constitution and legal system. That is what sets us apart from being a part of the American Republic. This BS about eating, living acting. Get a grip, what a lame if inept vitriolic attempt to rationalize being absorbed, annexed or what not. Many of our big businesses and natural resource projects are American owned or financed and, big deal. The staus quo of the day is good for them, especially with our weak dollar.

It is the responsibility of this elected government to protect its citizens. Something that this government has done a crappy job of and now the cracks are starting to show in the system.

Too lament, we have air and no real airforce to patrol it, coasts with a Coast Guard that has no mandate to secure it. Territorial waters with no Navy to properly sail it and the second largest country in the world and our land forces could never secure it. And you wonder why we have a deal like this.

Now

Mike you ARE an intelligent man, what are you thinking WRT GATES. The German government during the time GATES operated had a special understanding with Canada. The Germans brought their equipment in the spring for the summer training cycle and in the fall shipped everything back to Germany. On paper the Germans, by their own request would never maintain a permanent presence in Canada. GATES had minimal permanent staff year round; however, the majority of troops equipment etc was shipped home at the end of the cycle. As they do in Goosebay with the other NATO fliers as well.

The Brits, well, they adhere to a similar system, however they maintain their equipment here. However, lets go back a couple of years. The US did maintain sizable troop levels in Canada for many years. Why, the defence of the US. Did we agree, yes, we had no choice they built, maintained and provided unilaterally and we submitted. Examples, Goose Bay in the post war years, Argentia, Stephenville, The original DEW Line facilities, and all staffed and maintained solely by American personnel. The Pine Tree Line is when we started to become actively involved in the early warning game and also started to have a presence in the actual NORAD HQ.

 

[riddleofsteel]

This really isn‘t on topic, but it was mentioned earlier in the thread...

And what‘s up with putting the 10th Mountain Division in Fort Drum, NY?! Lots of hills in NY but not many true mountains.

The name is an historic reference, as opposed to a specialty in mountain warfare. I understand that they do some mountain warfare training in the NE (if I‘m not mistaken they do that in Vermont). No, they‘re not big mountains like the Rockies, but they are mountains. It‘s a shame that they haven‘t specialized that much in mountain warfare.

 

[Jarnhamar]

i can see the americans justify moving troops into canada "to help us" simply because we can‘t help ourselves. They DO see us as a giant back door into their country and it‘s true. I‘ve known people from my home town of cornwall who not only smuggle weapons and cigarettes back and forth but also immigrants. If a bunch of highschool bums can pull this off then so can trained operatives. They move soldiers here to help out our cash strapped military and the gov‘t wouldnt do a thing to stop it. We couldnt kick them out if we wanted and for the gov‘t to admit that they want the americans to leave but can‘t for whatever reason is to lose face. They would come here under the guise of peace and im sure they wouldnt have hostile intentions but they WOULD come because they know we can‘t do our job.

"And if the US did annex Canada - would it really change anyone‘s life? "
My answer would be yes. I‘m canadian. if someone occupied canada, friend or foe, i would be the first one to pick up my hunting rifle and become a terrorist.

 

[Cdn Soldier]

I normally would just chuckle and carry on about my business but, since it‘s a slow day for me...

Digger: I‘ve re-read my post quite a few times and I can‘t see where I‘ve been insulting nor do I see where I‘ve shot my mouth off trying to be smart. You seem to feel that Harry has now somehow "sorted me out", however it‘s my opinion I didnt‘ need "sorting out" in the first place and he is the one who was insulting rather than engaging in reasoned debate. If you want to private message me with specific concerns which I may have missed I‘d be more than happy to discuss it with you out of the public eye.

Harry: Thanks for the luvin‘ with the sphincter comment. Quite laughable actually all things considered but hey, it‘s what I‘ve come to expect from a self-professed expert of all things Cdn Forces when faced with a contrary opinion. Proves my earlier post on why it is most of us don‘t bother to post much here anymore. I‘m not saying you aren‘t knowledgeable, you quite obviously have a fair amount of knowledge and are able to do research at the very least, however the automatic assumption and assertion that you‘ve seen more, done more, know more and are therefore in all ways superior to the rest of us regarding any given issue, is really quite pitiable, particularly since in most instances it is simply incorrect. I‘d also suggest you actually take the time to read a post, rather than just looking at it, prior to responding.

First, my para regarding BATUS et al, was a tongue in cheek shot at the conspiracy theorists out there. I threw the 10th Mtn Div in there to reinforce that allusion, given the amount of press the issue of it‘s location and role "to occupy Ottawa and sever the Ottawa-Kingston axis" got around 93-95. I figured this would make the intent of the para clear but perhaps some of us aren‘t as well read as we‘d like to think. Read this and this if you want a good laugh. The "mainstream" media picked up the story at the same time and it was a pretty hot topic in the can.* newsgroups as well. You can probably find these archived threads at groups.google.com. The additional dig about the Appalachians not being real mountains should have been an extra clue something was up. Next time I‘ll be sure to add a Tongue in Cheek tag at the start of the para so there is no confusion.

Second, since you brought up the nukes, you‘re a former MP so you must know some folks who served on the nuke sites. Talk to them about certain areas of those bases Canadians weren‘t allowed into no matter what and ask them what the SOP was for a breach in the Cdn perimeter, then talk to me about the use of force by foreign troops on Canadian soil issue and the abdication of sovereignty. Same goes for certain, select, pieces of current US kit when on Canadian soil.

Third, since you also trotted out the Visiting Forces Act, take a read of Part VI - Attachments To and From the Canadian Forces as well as the Visiting Forces Attachment and Serving Together Regulations, which detail attachment of foreign pers to the CF and vice versa. You‘ll see that these state, in part, "The statutes relating to the Canadian Forces shall apply to every member of another force attached to the Canadian Forces pursuant to Part VI of the Act and these Regulations, except that any provision of any such statute respecting superannuation pensions or veterans benefits shall not apply to such member." By extension, this includes Part VI of the NDA - Aid to the Civil Power. Although the focus of these docs is on "member", lots of individual members add up real quick. Now the question would be, would it be politically acceptable to have this happen? As previously alluded to in this thread, foreign troops openly using force on Canadians in an Aid to the Civil Power situation would raise a bit of a stink at the least.

Fourth, like I said, read my post, rather than look at it, in regards to Germany. What did you say differently than I?

Fifth, foreign troops operating here. You answer that one for yourself in your second detailed post. There are other examples, the inclusion of foreign troops on Sov Ops being one of them.

Again, my point is the current issue is a non-issue as the mechanisms already exist to put this into action if/when the Cdn Government feels it is required. This is, of course, not withstanding the fact the US would act unilaterally with or without the formalities if they felt it was something they needed to do to protect what they perceived to be a vital national interest, as they have in the past. Although I have not read the agreement in question, and I‘m pretty sure none of us have, I don‘t see this doing anything other than perhaps streamlining the process a bit. If anyone knows where the complete document is, please post a link so we can have a read.

I did find one assertion of yours slightly intriguing. Wish to expand on "The US has been pushing this for a couple of months and Ottawa buckled, and based upon your reasoning then, why hasn‘t the US and Mexico entered into a similar agreement, oh right, they can mobilize a sizable military response.". I‘d be interested to know how you‘d define this "sizable military response", particularly in terms of training, equipment, capability and actual size of the force available. Also, given Mexico‘s experiences in the past few decades, is the apparent lack of a similar agreement simply because other agreements are already in place which give the US similar, if not greater, access?

(Note: Edited a slight formatting error.)

 

[Harry]

Nuke sites.

Was pretty simple, we protected the bases, and then the US had a nice chain link fence inside which the nukes set, with an American flag perched above.

Now that we have cleared the air, I don‘t purport to be omni-knowledgable, but after getting out and doing time elsewhere as a public servant, consultant and contractor, it opens your eyes about this country of ours.

And yes I am a poli sci and history buff.

As for the Voodoo‘s, a tidbit. We originally bought the single seaters but the US decided for us we needed to two seaters. The single seaters went to Viet Nam and we took delivery of the two seaters.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Cdn Soldier, Harry,
I was in Comox with the Voodoo Sqn (409 Nighthawks). The standard deniability phrase was " We‘ll neither confirm or deny the existence of weapons of that type". As to the planes, the pilot flew the plane, and the nav flew the pickle. There was a small contingent of US MP‘s and some wpn techs. Canadian combat arms guys ran security around the ammo compound, which held everything on base. Two hot birds sat in the QRA with ground and flight crew around the clock. Just some more UFI for your conversation.

 

[Paul Gagnon]

So would it matter if Old Glory flew over your post office instead of the maple leaf, honestly?

You‘re god damned right it would matter. We are not the same as Americans, we may watch their TV but that doesn‘t make us the same. The core Canadian value system is fundamentally different.

This move by the government has nothing to do with national security. It is all about covering their asses. They are trying to relieve the pressure from the public and the media in recent weeks over the readiness(or lack thereof) of the Canadian Forces. Unfortunately instead of dealing with the problem they have asked someone else to take care of it.

 

[toms3]

Cdn Soldier - I read over those last few post, and i agree I was hard on you. I guess I was more upset at Michael Dorosh‘s post, who I read after yours

I am very passionate about this topic - the state of our forces and the need to defend ourselves.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I would not like to share a trench with Mr Michael Dorosh.

 

[jrhume]

Annex Canada?

Go up to any American. Let’s try that fat, balding guy over there.

“A quick question for you, sir. What shall we do about Canada?”

Wrinkled brow. “Canada?” Short stare into the sky. “Didn’t they just get an NFL expansion team?”


Canadians have an image problem. They are seen as a set of daft beer drinkers living somewhere far north of here. And that’s only for fairly mature Americans. Young ones have no demonstrated ability to tie shoes or dress themselves, much less give thoughtful consideration to concepts like other ‘countries’.

Americans are bewildered by Canada. A Canadian is alleged to have referred to Dubya as a ‘moron’. Why the media even bothered to report such a thing is mildly interesting.

Many of us confused when told that some Canadians would like to secede from Canada and form a country of their own, in which they would voluntarily speak only French. Such news is greeted by a hoot of laughter, followed by complete disbelief in Canada as a concept. Such a place has to be a myth – an urban legend.

Thus, the average American has little reliable information about Canada. For all we know, this alleged ‘Canadian Border’ is a creature of Hollywood and staffed entirely with Homeland Security agents.

“Wait!” says the fat, balding guy, “Canada! Don’t they make beer!?”

Indeed they do, eh?



Note: This is intended to be a humorous post.

Old Guy

 

[bossi]

I‘m delighted to hear I‘m not the only one who wouldn‘t want to share a trench with ... (no names, no packdrill).

On that note, I guess I‘ll be duly chastised for quoting somebody smarter than me (as opposed to original thought ... but you know what? I‘m too freakin‘ tired to give a rat‘s butt), but here goes:

"There is only one thing worse than fighting with allies, and that is fighting without them."
-- Sir Winston S. Churchill

And, I‘m not even going to bother looking up the other gem that comes to mind - I‘m just going to quote it from memory (so sue me if it‘s not perfectly correct):

Nations shall always have an army - if not theirs, then somebody else‘s.

If Canada is "invaded" by a foreign army, then we‘ve got nobody to blame but our government.

Please, I implore you - look up the origin of the word "quisling", then ask yourself:

How many quislings to we have in Cabinet right now?
(i.e. those whankers who would rather have a musical fountain in Shawinigan)