Canada's View on Social Issues Is Opening Rifts With the U.S.

[LCK]

Hi, I'm a little late to this discussion but I'd like to add my two cents in:

Yes, in many ways I think my country (Canada) is good and decent, but I also have many criticisms. As a member of Amnesty International I have dealt with atrocities concerning my own country (as pertaining to the First Nations people). Our universal healthcare system is ideal in theory but in practise it is often two-tiered. Money still talks.

Our global reputation as a peaceful nation has been bought with the blood of others. Though we have our own war heroes here as well, the truth is that Canada can afford its liberal stance and low budget for civil defense bcause we can depend on the UK and / or the US to come to our defense should need be, like the little kid in the playground who can always speak his mind without ever having to fight cause he has big brothers....

One quote in the article: "After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, she said, an old roommate told her that "the U.S. deserved 9/11 because we're bullies." " is awful to hear. I can assure you that such a heartless comment is not typical of Canadians. Literally everyone I know, or have read in newspapers etc, considers 9/11 an UNPROVOKED terrorist attack.

I don't think there are true divides btw Canadians and Americans. For every issue presented, you can find ppl from both countries for or against something. Seems to me the main purpose of this article is to create such a divide and to stir up bad feelings.

 

[Katey]

well said!!

 

[kobayashi]

It is my hope that their merger with the Progressive Conservatives shoves out the extremists that have dogged the Canadian Alliance since its inception (Stockwell Day, anyone?), but I fear that, instead, the reasonable conservatives within the PCs will flee, and all that will be left is some form of American-style intolerant social conservatism.

Melon

unfortunately melon the latter scenario will take course and the defections have already begun.
brison shouldnt really be in the liberal party. he is fiscally conservative and has never sought a 'gay MP' billing, though he is openly gay. he simply wants to acknowledge the fact and then cut some taxes. i guess if there is a liberal govt he can live within, it is martin's in that sense.

 

[Dreadsox]

This is one of the most interesting interpretations I have ever read of this event. Any chance you have a single link to back this up? The part I put in bold that is........

Didn't think so

 

[Katey]

On Thursday, U.S. ships in the Red and Arabian seas fired dozens of cruise missiles at targets in Sudan and Afghanistan which the United States said were terrorist sites linked to Osama bin Laden, an Afghanistan-based Muslim militant suspected of financing and organizing this month's bombings at U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. More than 260 Americans, Kenyans and Tanzanians were killed in the embassy attacks, and more than 5,000 were wounded.

The U.S. Thursday attacked a plant in Sudan which Washington said was producing chemical weapons and an alleged terrorist training complex in eastern Afghanistan, near the border with Pakistan. The plant was actually produced about half of the medicine in Sudan includinh HIV AIDS drugs

The United Nations on Friday said the plant had provided medicine to Iraq under a U.N. program allowing Baghdad to buy food and medicine with oil proceeds.

'President Bill Clinton knew he was bombing a civilian target when he ordered the US attack on a Sudan chemical plant. Tests ordered by him showed that no nerve gas was on the site and two British professionals who recently worked at the factory said it clearly had no military purpose.' The Observer London England

"Since the attack occurred, the Sudanese government has called upon the United Nations or any other authoritative agency to send a qualified technical team to investigate the nature of the facility. Despite early American reluctance to support this request, this is something that now needs to be done."
--STATEMENT FROM JIMMY CARTER ON INVESTIGATING THE BOMBING OF SUDANESE FACTORY

The New York Times questions the attack ...
... within days of the attack, some of the administration's explanations for destroying the factory in Sudan proved inaccurate. Many people inside and outside the U.S. government began to ask whether questionable intelligence had prompted the United States to blow up the wrong building.
Senior administration officials concede that they made inaccurate statements about the plant on Aug. 20 and did a poor job of publicly stating their case against the factory.

"We were not accurate," a senior administration official said. "That was a mistake."

If it turns out the U.S. military attacks resulted in civilian casualties, which of the following statements would come closer to your view:

Civilian casualties are regrettable but the U.S. was right to attack, or,

The U.S. should not have attacked unless it was certain there would be no civilian casualties.

U.S. right to attack 65%

Should not have attacked
unless it was certain there
would be no civilian casualties 27

In the immediate wake of the U.S. missile attacks against terrorist
facilities in Afghanistan and Sudan, most Americans approve of the
attacks stating they were needed for national security Among those
with a definite opinion (61% of the public), five out of six express
approval of the U.S. military strikes

http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/africa/092198attack-sudan.html
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/africa/9808/22/air.strikes.follow/

 

[Dreadsox]

Am I having trouble communicating? I highlighted in BOLD exactly what you said which was innacurate.

[Q]Like in 1998, when there was a terrorist attack against Americans in Africa, the American ppl demanded that someone be punished[/Q]

Now you post an article that does not back up YOUR STATEMENT.

 

[Katey]

p.s it is partly humane nature to react and want to get back atthe people who do wrong to us.. If you look into there was strong public support to attack terrorist sites in Sudan at the time. Just as there was strong public support after 9/11. Not saying that there should or should not have been just stating . Prove me wrong on that and I will be happy to admit I am wrong.

People are quick to anger.. less quick to forgive.. me included

 

[Dreadsox]

I am well versed on this event...do not need any info on this situation having typed on it a few times in this forum. But to say the American People demanded someone be punished is

Many Americans, myself included were horrified that the president, AGAINST the advice of MILITARY ADVISORS launched the attack. Now why did he do this? It had nothing to do with the American people. Check your dates Katey. I do believe that the missles were launched the day the court deposition tapes were released showing the President say that depends on what the "definition of "is"is".

That was a pretty insulting post.

 

[Dreadsox]

Read the Bottom of the CNN article.....

Bill Gertz, in Breakdown writes extensively about how the Navy argued against the strikes if my memory serves me correctly, and if I am not mistaken, and I may be having faulty memory, one Admiral was threatened with being courtmartialed or with being relieved of command because he did not want to launch the missles into the factory. He argued that the factory was not even on their intel lists.....if I have not given the book out of my library I will try and PM you the quotes if I can find it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Katey]

no insult intended towards americans in anyways.. my intent purely to state that the defense that was used among some Bill Clinton supporters.. perhaps I stated that wrong .. my apologies..

I will not further debate the history of this event.. it is irrelevant at this point .. I am sure many Americans were discusted by Clintons actions..


I am just going to say this and take it with a grain of salt please becasue I know Americans inthe case as well did not support his move . It is not to be offensive and I am in no way comparing the two

"The Japanese began the war from the air at Pearl Harbor. They have been repaid many fold."
("Public Papers of the Presidents: Harry S Truman, 1945", pg. 197).

On Aug. 9, after Nagasaki was a-bombed, Truman made another public statement on why the atomic bombs were used:

"Having found the bomb we have used it. We have used it against those who attacked us without warning at Pearl Harbor, against those who have starved and beaten and executed American prisoners of war, against those who have abandoned all pretense of obeying international laws of warfare. We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans."
("Public Papers of the Presidents: Harry S Truman, 1945", pg. 212).


I respect you opinions greatly you are well versed and I admire that.. I respect the right of people to have opinions

Relax I am not attacking you or the US

 

[Dreadsox]

no insult intended towards americans in anyways.. my intent purely to state that the defense that was used among some Bill Clinton supporters.. Relax I am not attacking you or the US

None taken.......

I was infurated the day the missles were launched. It makes my blood boil.

 

[Katey]

sorry to bring up old feelings.. but glad you feel that way..
Cheers

 

[Elvis]

Just thought I'd share some thoughts...

It's absolutely amazing how just about any thread in FYM will result in discussion (aka, thread hijacking) about war, military, etc.... OR someone trying to blame one political party or another.

... and I wonder... don't those same people (that hijack the topics) ever get tired of trying to hammer their own views into others?


My point.....?

Last time I checked, the subject of this thread mentioned "Canada's View on Social Issues", not "Canada's View on political/military Issues".

 

[diamond]

Canada has nice ppl sure but Canada is has such a large void of intelleual stimuli, so for ppl thinking their social policies have superiorty over the USA's makes one giggle.

Canada reminds me of a beauitifully large,dependent dysfunctional child.

Oh Canada we love you so.

As far as topics segwaying into other topics, I dont see that as one person hijacking a thread.
Sure protocol dictates one should stick to a topic however as conversations evolve.. sometimes so do threads...

DB9

 

[Katey]

thanks for the topics evolve part .. but man whats going on with the constant disrespect for Canada.. I have some issues with the US Governemnt but i have them with Canada's as well . I have a great deal of respest for Americans and the values they represent

 

[Blacksword]

Void of intellectual stimuli? Right....

These posts of yours Diamond don't get any funnier with repetition.

 

[Dreadsox]

Just thought I'd share some thoughts...

It's absolutely amazing how just about any thread in FYM will result in discussion (aka, thread hijacking) about war, military, etc.... OR someone trying to blame one political party or another.

... and I wonder... don't those same people (that hijack the topics) ever get tired of trying to hammer their own views into others?


My point.....?

Last time I checked, the subject of this thread mentioned "Canada's View on Social Issues", not "Canada's View on political/military Issues".

Elvis,

You make excellent points. I do have a question.

Are we supposed to IGNORE blatantly incorrect statements thrown into threads? It does not matter if they are statements about the US. Should any statement, made in a thread be open for correction/debate/discussion?

It seems unfair that no matter what the thread topic if any forum member saw something said that was not correct, it should be open game for debate.

If I am out of line, or I am the person you are referring to, please PM me, I can take it......

 

[Angela Harlem]

Canada has nice ppl sure but Canada is has such a large void of intelleual stimuli, so for ppl thinking their social policies have superiorty over the USA's makes one giggle.

Canada reminds me of a beauitifully large,dependent dysfunctional child.

Oh Canada we love you so.

As far as topics segwaying into other topics, I dont see that as one person hijacking a thread.
Sure protocol dictates one should stick to a topic however as conversations evolve.. sometimes so do threads...

DB9

Diamond this is one of your best yet. Fair dinkum dude. The first half is more blatant than you are usually putting out here, so if anything I guess the arrogant honesty can be applauded perhaps. But then, not really. Diamond next time someone starts bashing the good old US of A, re-read your post here and you will find your answer why.
Honestly.

But on a cheerier note, the second half of your post here is great. Summed up perfectly.

 

[Elvis]

Im going to tackle a few replies....

Diamond: Canada has nice ppl sure but Canada is has such a large void of intelleual stimuli, so for ppl thinking their social policies have superiorty over the USA's makes one giggle.

Canada reminds me of a beauitifully large,dependent dysfunctional child.

a) Have you even been to Canada?

b) Oddly, most (read that: majority) of the people I've met from Canada are far more intellectual than those in the states. I've met all sorts, from pig farmers, to students, to factory workers, to people in the medical fields..... they've all been far more intellectual than people in the states, by a comparison of percentage of intellectuals vs ignorants.

c) As far as dependence, in my opinion Canada is incredibly smart. What they seem to do...is NOT spend resources where they aren't needed. They are much like the youngest child in a family - they've watched how the 2 older sibilings have screwed up, and have had successes.... the youngest child has benefitted from watching... and has learned how to play their cards, and when to play them... they know how to take advantage (milk) a good situation, and avoid bad ones.

As far as being dysfunctional, while every country has problems (including the US), Canada for the most part does seem to have it's shit together - they deal with social issues, crime, and diplomacy quite well. Personally, I think the largest problem with Canada it the fact that the US is next door. US economics and politics are corrupting both their govt and private sector, and slowly scratching at their social and cultural differences.

Blacksword: Void of intellectual stimuli? Right....

These posts of yours Diamond don't get any funnier with repetition.

The only thing I see void of intellectual stimuli are Diamonds un-funny repetititve posts which never stray from being overly patriotic, ethno-centric, and pro-republican.

I can find faults in any political party, govt, religion, etc., but for some reason that ability to be intellectually independent seems to be defunct for Diamond, as well as others. An unfortunate truth, but not everyone is an intellectual, nor able to approach topics in an intellectual manner.

Dreadsox: You make excellent points. I do have a question.

Are we supposed to IGNORE blatantly incorrect statements thrown into threads? It does not matter if they are statements about the US. Should any statement, made in a thread be open for correction/debate/discussion?

It seems unfair that no matter what the thread topic if any forum member saw something said that was not correct, it should be open game for debate.

If I am out of line, or I am the person you are referring to, please PM me, I can take it......

a) Thanks, it was my intention

b) Why does everything have to be 100% or 0%? All the way or no way? There is a middle ground you know...
Have you ever thought of responding to something you believe to be incorrect, and using restraint to stay on topic, keeping your tangent limited to one reply? For instance, in another thread (about Reagan) I had mentioned about the US giving weapons to IRAQ (with Reagans involvement), and you pursued the tangent within that thread. Notice... I never replied to your questions following my post on that tangent. I used restraint in an attempt to keep the thread on topic. Now... if you really wish to continue the tangent, why not start a new thread? I mean, that's what threads are for

c) I wasn't specifically talking about one person, but a frequent group of posters here in FYM. It is not my intention to single anyone out, except Diamond of course which has been previously put on hiatus from FYM for the same antics, over and over and over and over and over and over and over... you get my point.


And as far as what Angela just posted.... she's right: It's posts/comments like Diamonds that make others in the world find Americans to be terribly ignorant, closed minded, and egotistical.

Heck, I'm American and I'm disgusted by how ignorant our general populace is.

P.S. I'm also disgusted by how ignorant the planet's general populace is.

 

[verte76]

This American thinks Canada and Canadians are awfully damn cool. I'd seriously consider moving there if it weren't for the weather. Cold weather is pure murder on my joints, so health-wise I am better off in a semi-tropical climate.
Oops, I hope I didn't start a controversy about weather.

 

[Elvis]

This American thinks Canada and Canadians are awfully damn cool. I'd seriously consider moving there if it weren't for the weather. Cold weather is pure murder on my joints, so health-wise I am better off in a semi-tropical climate.
Oops, I hope I didn't start a controversy about weather.

I would too. And not just because my gf is Canadian....
although I will say, when/if we have children.. somehow we'll make sure they have dual citizenship.

 

[verte76]

Elvis, I did want to say that I think the reason we end up discussing war matters in various threads is because it's getting hard to talk about the Bush Administration without talking about war. They've been in two wars in one Presidential term, and made war a key issue. It's intertwined with a bunch of other issues, i.e, feminism, because the Taliban was so viciously anti-feminist, and these terrorists are horrifically anti-feminist, and Arabic/Moslem liberals don't like these people, etc, etc. Jean Sasson's feminist friend from Saudi Arabia, Sultana, a princess in the house of Al-Saud, regularly called the U.S. for war news.

 

[Elvis]

Elvis, I did want to say that I think the reason we end up discussing war matters in various threads is because it's getting hard to talk about the Bush Administration without talking about war. They've been in two wars in one Presidential term, and made war a key issue. It's intertwined with a bunch of other issues, i.e, feminism, because the Taliban was so viciously anti-feminist, and these terrorists are horrifically anti-feminist, and Arabic/Moslem liberals don't like these people, etc, etc. Jean Sasson's feminist friend from Saudi Arabia, Sultana, a princess in the house of Al-Saud, regularly called the U.S. for war news.

Whats this got to do with the Social differences between the US and Canada?

President Bush and his warmongering attitude do not represent the entire social view of US Citizens... which is an entirely different topic. Start a new thread on it if you wish

 

[verte76]

Whats this got to do with the Social differences between the US and Canada?

President Bush and his warmongering attitude do not represent the entire social view of US Citizens... which is an entirely different topic. Start a new thread on it if you wish

I wasn't trying to steal the thread or whatever, I was just answering a question. I don't have anything to say about war right now.

 

[Blacksword]

I'm confused now, Elvis were you taking me as being onside with with Diamond?

 

[U2Bama]

Here are some things which make Canada such a great country:
? We have the 'Smarties' candy unlike Americans (Very important, isn't it?)

This is an inaccurate statement. we do have "Smarties" candy here, although the main time I see it is around Halloween when it appears in variety bags of cheap trick-or-treat candy.

And I will introduce the opinion that Americans have better organizations than Canadians.

~U2Alabama

 

[sue4u2]

I don't know what to say
*eats smarties while re reading this thread*