Posted on 03/28/2003 10:45:56 AM PST by quidnunc
George W. Bush delivered a speech yesterday at the U.S. military's central command headquarters in Florida.
There was little unusual about it, except perhaps for the clear emotion Mr. Bush showed when he came to that point, as he has done repeatedly in the week since the war in Iraq began, to give thanks for America's allies.
The British came first, of course — their ground forces, Royal Air Force, Royal Navy. Then came Australia, for her navy gunfire support and fighter aircraft. The President went on, thanking the Polish military forces who have secured an Iraqi oil platform in the Persian Gulf; the Danes for the early intelligence provided by a submarine crew; the Czechs, Slovaks and Romanians next. Soon, said Mr. Bush, Bulgarians and Ukrainians would be joining them.
The absence of a bow to Canada, for her contribution, was stark and awful for anyone with a memory that goes back 64 years or a decent enough grasp of history to recognize that Poles and Czechs, and Brits and Aussies and Yanks and Canucks have fought together before and that there is a rightness about it.
But it was in Mr. Bush's last thank you — to Spain, for its "important logistical and humanitarian support" — that the real message lay.
Canada never had to send soldiers, you see. Canada never had to become a slavering warmonger to maintain her neighbour's respect and affection. Canada never had to drop bombs on innocent Iraqi children, as goes the cant of the Left despite abundant evidence that coalition forces are doing — imperfectly, alas, as is inevitable — everything they can, including taking more casualties themselves, to avoid doing just that.
To be deemed a reasonable ally, Canada only ever had to offer moral support and to do a little something that was do-able within the bounds of her own political realities. Canada failed to meet even this modest test.
To put it in Don Cherry terms, Canada did not have to grab a chair and crack it over the head of the guy her American pal was pummelling in the bar, she had only to refrain from actively cheering the other fellow on — oh, and maybe buy the Yank a drink when the mess was over.
It is this national failure of nerve that is, as the modern lingo has it, the root cause of the wildly deteriorating state of relations between the two countries; why the U.S. ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci, said what he said this week (and why Mr. Bush, his close personal friend, gave him the go-ahead to do so) and why it now appears Mr. Bush's first visit to Ottawa, slated for this spring, may be in jeopardy.
Why would the U.S. President want to go there when collectively — and there is little need to review each of the telling statements that have been made, from Jean Chrétien on down to the lowliest of his backbenchers and everyone in between — official Canada has made plain not only its distaste for his war, but also its disdain for the man? Why would anyone be surprised that Mr. Bush and Mr. Cellucci — who lives in the nation's capital, after all, and had to bear the potshots aimed at his friend and his country up close — would take personally the bitter personal remarks?
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalpost.com ...
The quotation I found the saddest is on Page 65, from the British writer J.B. Priestley: "The Canadian is a baffled man because he feels different from his British kindred and his American neighbours, sharply refuses to be lumped with either of them, yet cannot make plain the difference."
Since those words were written it appears that Canadians have settled on Old Europe as the beau ideal to be emulated.
To put it in Don Cherry terms, Canada did not have to grab a chair and crack it over the head of the guy her American pal was pummelling in the bar, she had only to refrain from actively cheering the other fellow on — oh, and maybe buy the Yank a drink when the mess was over.
Who (or what) is Don Cherry?
It was announced today that Canada is now prepared to help the United States in its war against terrorism.
They have promised to commit 2 of their largest battleships, 6,000 armed troops and 60 fighter jets;
However, after the exchange rate, that comes down to a canoe, 2 Mounties and a flying squirrel.
As you were!
Not that I'm condoning it, but how does the booing of your national anthem in QUEBEC differ from the booing of our national anthem in Long Island last year, the very day we buried 4 soldiers that your boys killed in Afghanistan? How does that differ?? Come on, Tell me.
Don Cherry is probably the most famous on air hockey commentator in Canada, and appears on Hockey Night in Canada along side Don McLean. He is a former coach of the Boston Bruins, I believe in the Bobby Orr heydays. He's arguably one of the most knowledgeable hockey minds on the planet and absolutely LOVES being controversial. McLean plays a sort of straight man role next to him...the exchanges can be hysterical. He is about the most un-politically correct person on television...imagine Rush in full flight but on hockey instead of the Dems.
Don and Ron got into it over the war the other night. Cherry is VERY pro-American and while I didn't see the exchange, friends tell me that when McLean experssed mild opposition to the war (I don't believe there was any U.S. bashing involved - I'd be surprised because that's not McLean's style) Cherry just ripped into him like a chainsaw. Supposedly it was classic and great to watch Cherry just verbally maul the protesters, anti-American politicians, etc. The CBC (broadcaster of Hockey Night in Canada) was not particularly pleased with Don, but he is the most untouchable personality on Canuck TV. Hockey broadcasts are the only thing that makes a dime for CBC ($1 Billion per year in tax dollars keeps it afloat) and believe it or not, any decision by the CBC to go after Cherry would be a cause for outrage across the country (I'm not kidding here). The CBC is a hopelessly leftist anti-U.S. network but the fact is no one in the world does hockey like them and Cherry is a big part of that.
Believe it or not, there are a lot more Canadians like Cherry than our government or media would lead you to think. Unfortunately the voices get drowned out by our shrill and mewling media and infantile politicians. And the French in Quebec.
The Michigander looks at him quizzically and says, "Why'd you do that?"
The Texan shrugs, "We've got lots of beer."
The Michigander, upon drinking his beer, carefully tucks the bottle back in his saddlebag and shoots the Canadian.
"Why'd you do that?" Asks the Texan.
"Up in Michigan bottles can be returned for 10 cents," says the Michigander, "But we've got lots of Canadians.
It is my aim to keep my fellow countrymen informed about happening and attitudes in Canada vis a vis America.
Our neighbor to the north has flown under our collective information radar for too long.
One of the laments which I hear from Canadians is that Americans are provincial and ignorant of foreign lands and people.
Ultimately Canadians may wish they had remained below our radar.
You will find that some days I post nothing about Canada and other days I might post 3 - 4.
The Alliance represents a mere fraction of total seats in the Parliament. The liberals, with their Quebec base, have a lock on power in Canada
The answer is breakup; the Western Provinces should break off and join the US. All they need is a little nudge from the US.
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.