ChannMahi chanda, Why don't you ask your American officials to stop appearing on Canadian news shows, pleading for the Canadian government to provide more assistance in regions where the US has lost its interest (i.e., Afghanistan)?
And if everyone thinks that Canada's military and navy suck so bad, then it's quite simple - you don't need our help, right, so don't complain when the Canadian government refuses to go along in a war that's not sanctioned by the United Nations. What are you guys complaining about - that we have adopted an independent stance, or that the US is becoming more and more isolated from the international arena each day?
How is US getting more isolated. Majority of the EU countries have backed US. US has allies in the Gulf. In Asia, China has it;s head buried in the sand. RUssia will come around. Canada, is of little consequence. They need to start giving more aid around the world if they are not going to engage in policing. At least help in financing.
Thousands of Canadians have given their lives in the name of freedom and justice. The relationship between the U.S. and Canada is a special one and the barbs passed back and forth are much like ones between two close siblings.
HAHAHA
Nadia, It is very clear who is really pissed off here.
You need to come down from your high horse once in a while and reciprocate humour with humour not links to some out dated argument.
As for the issue on hand, nothing is black and white. America is not the most evil country on earth and France and Canada are not the greatest angels. You agree with them wholeheartedly because they seem to echo what you nurture in your heart and mind....pure and simple hatred against America. This convergence of interests is momentary and you will find it out eventually..so will they.
Nadia, I don't think anyone on this board is complaining. We are merely pointing out how little impact (strategic or tactical) this move has on things to come. -Stu
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Stu: *
Nadia, I don't think anyone on this board is complaining. We are merely pointing out how little impact (strategic or tactical) this move has on things to come.
[/QUOTE]
Any time any government of any country vocalizes the slightest bit of opposition against any US foreign policy, particularly vis-a-vis Iraq, it is taken as either stemming from resentment, jealousy, bitterness (at not being as militarily superior as the US), or a mixed combination of all three. Funny how no one bothers to analyze the reasons behind their statements. If it has little strategic or tactical impact, then it's a win-win situation for both the US as well as Canada - the latter chooses not to participate without Security Council authorization, and your government doesn't need that type of meagre assistance anyways. Kinda works out well for both countries, doesn't it?
"Any time any government of any country vocalizes the slightest bit of opposition against any US foreign policy, particularly vis-a-vis Iraq, it is taken as either stemming from resentment, jealousy, bitterness (at not being as militarily superior as the US), or a mixed combination of all three."
I'm sure Chretien's decision is based on what polls tell him his citizens/voters want. If you think the feelings you mention (resentment, jealousy etc...), don't play a part in those individuals minds, in addition to disagreement with the US administration's policy on Iraq, I think that's naive.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Stu: *
If you think the feelings you mention (resentment, jealousy etc...), don't play a part in those individuals minds, in addition to disagreement with the US administration's policy on Iraq, I think that's naive.
[/QUOTE]
:D Jealousy? Why? At being one of the most hated countries in the world?
(NO offence to anyone, *just kidding*).
Whatwith all these countries lining up against any aggression towards Iraq, it is slightly more naive for the US government to continue deluding itself that the world is convinced of their arguments regarding the "threat" posed by Iraq. Apart from the UK, no country is willing to give unconditional support to the US. If Chretien made this decision subsequent to gauging the public mood, there is nothing amiss in that - afterall, he's the Prime Minister of a democratic country; we expect him to go by the desires of the citizens who elected him.
all leaders of the democratic countries should listen the voice of their electorate... after all if they are going agains the stance of the people who elected them.. then is that really democracy?
if the public in Canada does not want to go to war.. then Canada should not. If the majority of public in US wants to go to war.. then US may..
from the same token as the countries are part a world community, if majority of the countries in the world are against war.. then based on the norms of democracy war should not be waged..
the purveyors of democracy cannot just disregard the voice of the world and still claim to be fighting for "democratic principles".
In a democracy authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Foreign policy is not based on Gallup polls.
There is reason it isc alled representative democracy. Thank God freign policy and decisions like war are not made throuhg gallop polls. It would be stupid to make decisions that are going to impact for decades to come based on how average joes felt this morning.