BallaFaseke
(120 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:19 AM
Original message |
We need a Canadian-type military |
|
One that is good for only responding to civil disasters and helping the UN on peacekeeping missions.
Our military is built for world domination and aggression. Plus we still have nuclear weapons for whatever reason.
I think people like Kucinich have it right with a smaller military complex.
|
LastKnight
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:21 AM
Response to Original message |
1. the reason canada can afford that |
|
they live under the american umbrella of 'protection' or terror and domination, more accuratley, but yes we need to scale down the millitary, not go as small as canada, but still, why are we having things this big?
-LK
|
Maple
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
who...exactly...is the US 'protecting' us from?
Who has the US ever protected us from?
The only country that has ever invaded Canada...is the US.
|
prolesunited
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
invade Canada!
Sorry about that.
|
BallaFaseke
(120 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:32 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
Maple
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
wouldn't get very far invading Canada. :D
|
BallaFaseke
(120 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
You think you can stop our tanks rolling in from North Dakota?
|
Maple
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
|
Edited on Mon Nov-03-03 01:49 AM by Maple
You'd be in southern Manitoba. Not a lot to conquer there, and thousands of miles from anywhere else. Canada is bigger than the US...you couldn't roll too far.
Tanks also don't operate too well in the weather here. :D
|
BallaFaseke
(120 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:51 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
16. Neither in Alaska too |
|
but we got a few up there.
|
Maple
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
|
in cold weather betcha.
The cold in the north can crack the blade on a snow plow. Freeze a camera solid. Explode trees.
Make toys out of tanks.
|
Forkboy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:53 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
17. We will kill all your moose |
|
and steal your hockey rinks :D
|
Maple
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
|
well stealing all the hockey rinks...and there are thousands...would be easier than killing all the moose.
Just don't threaten the donuts eh?
Some things are sacred ya know.
|
Forkboy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 02:04 AM
Response to Reply #21 |
23. Best thing I've seen in my life |
|
went to Bouctouche (sp?) and they had a hockey rink right in back of the church....a true holy site :)
Donuts are protected under the Geneva Accords....especially the jelly ones!
|
jafap
(654 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
10. too bad you did not keep Detroit too |
|
For our sake I mean.
Also, the British and the French invaded Canada if you look at it from a Native American perspective.
Theoretically, Canada could have been treated like China by the Japanese, or like Argentina or Africa by the Nazis. If not for America how would Canada have fared against the USSR or the Chinese?
Of course the Oceans and the cold are your best defense.
|
Maple
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:45 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
|
D'etroit. Well...we were nice about it. Hey...we're polite.
The British and French moved in, and made treaties with the First Nations for living space. And they had no idea how big Canada would be at the time. We are talking very small areas for them.
We were never in any danger from the USSR or China...and in any case the Americans could never have helped us.
It's not so much the oceans or cold...it's the sheer size of Canada that protects us.
Altho certainly 60°C below in the northern regions would have helped. ;-)
|
SahaleArm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
18. Acting under the Queen... |
Maple
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
|
acts under the queen. Nice lady, weird family tho..... lives in a different country. ;-)
|
Wapsie B
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
The short answer is that there are too many in this country that can't stand peace. They don't have a clue as what to do. They need an evil empire to rally against, to justify rampant defense spending. Scale down the military-industrial complex in this country and you've damaged the economic viability of more than a few areas in the U.S., and I'm not just talking the South. Omaha, for example, was boosted greatly by the presence of SAC.
|
minto grubb
(106 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 02:34 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
24. Bush needs a big military structure, we don't... |
|
If you read Elain Morgan, she makes the point that, in a troop of baboons, the dominant male comes into his own when the group is threatened by a leopard. the Alpha male bares his fangs and all his buddies rally round the big boy to drive the leopard away. when the leopard goes, however, the other baboons wil get restless, bicker among themselves and may even consider challenging him. Bush, being a bit smarter than the average babboon, will try to make sure that his followers will always see a leopard somewhere. If it ain't in Afghanistan, look at Iraq. The point has ben raise "What does the USA protect us from? The Russians? Would we not be better off spending money on eradicating Poverty in the 3rd world, rather than hi-tech missiles? Britain had nuclear weapons in the 80's, and still had to fight Argentina for the Falklands. We need to think about global solutions, not national ones.
|
Holly
(306 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
but pursuing foreign policy that respects sovereign nations and promoting human rights doesn't usually lead to attacks.Having U.S. soldiers trained in peacekeeping may have made a difference in Iraq.
|
devilgrrl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:21 AM
Response to Original message |
2. We need more Canadians in general... |
Maple
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 02:03 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
22. The world needs more Canada |
|
We've always said that! :D
|
onebigbadwulf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:21 AM
Response to Original message |
|
what would happen if we
1. stopped funding israel 2. pulled all our troops around the entire world home immediately 3. destroyed all our nuclear weapons
|
BallaFaseke
(120 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. I don't know if we should pull out of Kosovo |
|
that is a peacekeeping mission.
But everywhere else, sure.
|
leftofthedial
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 01:40 AM
Response to Original message |
12. well, Molson is alot cheaper than depleted uranium |
|
We could cut the military budget by two-thirds and not notice a difference except that politics would be cleaner.
|
Screaming Lord Byron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 09:30 AM
Response to Original message |
25. We need more soldiers, actually... |
|
We go on and on about how we're so good at peacekeeping, but we hardly have any soldiers to do it. There's a lot of peace to keep out there.
|
Spazito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #25 |
26. I don't disagree with you on that one... |
|
we do need more peacekeeping troops, we are fully extended now. I also would like to see us improve the lives of those who are serving but do NOT want us to turn from a peacekeeping nation to one of agression.
|
Screaming Lord Byron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-03-03 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #26 |
27. No to aggression, yes to peace. |
|
Edited on Mon Nov-03-03 09:54 AM by Screaming Lord Byron
With you on that one, bud. The more we can do, the better. We're not a warlike nation, but that should not allow us to ignore the military.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 08:34 AM
Response to Original message |