Posted on 08/16/2005 12:09:54 PM PDT by proud_yank
Dissapointment all the way around.
"stakeholders" is that doublespeak for envirowakos?
"... if America doesn't keep its end of the bargain, we should do what Layton suggests and put export taxes on gas, oil and uranium coming from Canada."
And we will block all your seaports and take over the western half of Canada. If the Canadians don't like it, they can send their military to the border.
Many Canadians really do feel that way and it does not offend me.
You are still young if you believe what these politicians say and not what they do.
If I recall, Mr. Chretien was elected under the promise that he would get rid of NAFTA.
But he didn't, and that is because Canada has done very, very well in its trade with the USA.
Even in the softwood industry.
Somehow I doubt that. Sorry.
It does raise an interesting point. If those provinces just JOIN the USA then there is no nafta to worry about.
I didn't say I believed him. But I would support that if it came to that. I'd really prefer to work it out like honorable men of integrity, not a petty economic slugfest.
Canada has done ok in NAFTA. But there are problems and I think people on both sides of the border agree that NAFTA should be reexamined. At the same time, we should abide by the agreements we make whil we still remain subject to them.
You'll also find few people who hate Chretienn and Parrish more than mme and the other Canucks here.
" If we don't like it, we can withdraw from NAFTA."
Don't let the door hit you in the A$$.
True. But if people like JeffersonRepublic keep talking that way, they won't want to join. Personally, I support western sovereignty, and if it doesn't happen soon, I may move to the states. But I think the West should remain free, and I think it would be better off for this century at least as its own country.
And actually, for NAFTA, you'd have to worry about Ontario too.
"If the United States persists in refusing to return the almost $5-billion"
You can cry about Americans not keeping our word, but the fact is, the Canadians are trying to use NAFTA to steal $5 billion from the US tresury. To bad Canadians can't fund their socialism with your hot air.
I have little doubt that America will defend her interests vigorously.
Ottawa undermines the USA through such measures as missile defense, the international court, and the land mine treaty that Americans felt put their soldiers in harms way in Korea.
IMO, these are the things that could really turn our relations sour, not softwood.
"Somehow I doubt that. Sorry."
It's about as likely as Canada starting a trade war with the US. I should have used a sarcasm tag.
"But if people like JeffersonRepublic keep talking that way, they won't want to join."
I doubt that Americans would want Western Canada to join the US.
I didn't mean to make you so heated first of all, and I appologize for that.
The thing that I find very interesting, is that if this is an issue that Canada takes 'very, very seriously', then why are they 'protesting' our decision by not meeting to talk about the issue at hand. According to the article, there are still issues within the U.S. International Trade Commission that need to be settled and brought forward (from an American perspective of course) before we deem an issue like this as being settled and an agreement can be reached.
How do you settle something by walking away from it? Here and CA are the only places I have lived where concepts like 'Social Activism / whining', 'protest / whining', and 'raising awareness / whining' equate to 'solving a problem'. That is why I found this article humorous and posted it.
Specifically, what I mean by Bush playing 'Hardball' is that, in my opinion, had Canada not had leaders in power like Chretien, who were very anti-American. Issues like this (and Mad Cow etc) could be resolved very quickly and easily, but instead, you get the joy of going through as much political BS as humanly possible. It all boils down to the old addage of 'you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours'. Of course it is an a$$hole thing to do, and I feel sorry for any conservative Canadians who get screwed in the deal.
But be honest and put yourself in the shoes of an American: Based on the policies and sentiments of many Canadian politicians, based on the negative coverage that the US receives in the CBC, Globe and Mail, MacLeans, etc...., and the strong anti-American sentiments that exist here both public and private, would you bend over backwards in a dispute like this, or would you be as big of a headache as you can?
Its not just or rational, its simply politics.
"..And we will block all your seaports and take over the western half of Canada. If the Canadians don't like it, they can send their military to the border."
I keep hearing this totally implausible knee jerk reaction from various Freepers. Never Happen. BUT..don't forget Canada is part of the Commonwealth. I'm farily certian the Brits, Aussies etc would back Canada in this scenario. Plus we're kinda good at the whole winter warfare thing.
Oh, get real.
No problem, apology accepted, and I apologize for getting so heated. Just in defence of my country and all that jazz.
Canada is not discussing it anymore because it was already decided. I fully understand the America first perspective, and by and large I support it. I also understand Canada has been a less than ideal ally.
The truth is that Canada can't force America to abide by it short of cutting off energy exports. That's our only real ace in our hand. And likely, this is just Liberal party posturing. They realize that the situation is only going to be corrected on the sufferance of America, unfortunately enough.
As you said, its just politics. But for me, the idea of integrity is a big deal. So, I am upset that America is not abiding by the rules it set and agreed to.
Speaking honestly, were I in the shoes of America, and thinking of longterm gain I would give Canada the 5 billion and then try to leave NAFTA, if a detailed study proved it was unbeneficial for my country in the longrun. But I can understand how America is taking the position it is, and I can see the possibility that I would take the same position given the right circumstances. That doesn't mean it's the honorable or proper thing to do however.
Oh, and Jefferson Republic. DU called, snookums. You got a C in flamebaiting 101.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.