Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have no problem at all working with the Canadian government, we should remain friends, allies and trade partners. That does not have to include a Military base on our Soil though.
Would Canadians welcome a US military base on their soil with open arms? I have a hard time believing that, so us feeling the same way about a more powerful nation expanding their footprint on our land is understandable.
The Canadian military, like forces of other NATO countries, fought along side the United States in most major conflicts since World War II, including the Korean War, the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, and most recently the war in Afghanistan and Libya.
American defense arrangements with Canada are more extensive than with any other country.
The Permanent Joint Board of Defense, established in 1940, provides policy-level consultation on bilateral defense matters. The United States and Canada share North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) mutual security commitments.
In addition, American and Canadian military forces have cooperated since 1958 on continental air defense within the framework of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD).
There is also an active military exchange program between the two countries under which Canadian Forces personnel have been involved in Iraq. Moreover, interoperability with the American armed forces has been a guiding principle of Canadian military force structuring and doctrine since the end of the Cold War. Canadian navy frigates, for instance, integrate seamlessly into American carrier battle groups.
American defense arrangements with Canada are more extensive and closer than with any other country.
As described in the article they're predominantly going to be small facilities with a runway, storage facility and a few personnel to guard stocks from looters I guess.
Some of that makes sense to me but, have to say it, we've got a reasonably good reputation for remaining objective and impartial. This could risk that substantially if neighbouring countries to these selected areas interpret this as "expansionism". As an example; what if we had chosen badly and negotiated for such a base in Syria?? Where would we be sitting at this time? Impotently on the sidelines while Assad murders his citizens and our facility would have been looted with possibly it's personnel jailed or worse. Nope, Nada, havng anything other than an embassy in any of these other parts of the world is for countires who've got an agenda in mind but not Canada!
Lastly; why do we need them? Rapid deployment of needed resources is still something that a small facility can't possibly foresee in it's inventory of supplies. Our current practice is to wait for requests of aid either through the affected country or the U.N. I don't see that changing.
Military option; are we seriously contemplating becoming a policeman to be called upon whenever one of these regional country's throws a belt? Get serious! We have a population of 30 million and a military to GDP ratio of 2.7 that is all but used up with our current role within NATO and the U.N.
Swanning around the world with a "swagger stick" tucked under our forearm is not and never should be the Canadian military's role.
You really want to help these other countries like Jamaica, for one; build some schools and supply the materials so they can excell at assimilating knowledge.
You really want to help these other countries like Jamaica, for one; build some schools and supply the materials so they can excell at assimilating knowledge.
Canada has BTDT in Jamaica already for decades. I suspect some people, including the OP, may not be fully aware of what Canada's beneficial role and relationship with Jamaica has been since Jamaica was colonized, nor fully familiar with Canada's Development Assistance Programs in Jamaica, or with their Trade Relationships from which Jamaica has derived significant economic benefits. There is a lot of bilateral history between Canada and Jamaica that has all been good for Jamaica.
Just for example, (there are many more examples but I'm not going to go looking for all of them to present here - they're easy to find for anyone who's truly interested) some of Canada's accomplishments with their programs in the Caribbean sector in recent years:
Quote:
Accomplishments 2009-2010
Economic Growth
Made improvements to Jamaica's agricultural productivity, completing 17 commercial greenhouses, rehabilitating three fishing beaches,and training participants
Helped women gain better access to credit through microfinance, representing 66 percent and 73 percent of total borrowers in the Guyana and Jamaica initiatives respectively
Helped agricultural incomes grow by more than the targeted 20 percent in the first year of a project with 1,261 smallholder farming households receiving training, farm tools, and information to increase and diversify agricultural outputs in Guyana
Helped five states upgrade their national emergency operation centres and trained 158 people, through disaster preparedness projects that improved hands-on disaster risk mitigation and risk reduction in Barbados, Suriname, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Dominica
GTOlover: Everyone is aware of the close relationship that is shared between the Canadian and US Military. The point is though, while that is the case the US has no permanent Military bases on Canadian Soil and are always hosted by the Canadian Military.
Zoisite: Are you suggesting that since we are a recipient of Aid and Investment we should welcome your military into our country permanently? I do not see a connection at all there. No other country since the Reagan Administration up until 3rd quarter of last year has been more generous with Aid to Jamaica than the United States (China overtook the US for direct investment end of last year) Should that mean that we should welcome the American Military onto our Soil or the Chinese? Of course not.
Also your research is quite one sided. Canadian dealings with Jamaica have not always been honorable. Please look into the Jamaican Bauxite conflict in the 70's under the Manley Administration. The Canadian government backed the manipulation of the Bauxite-Alumina industry by Canadian corporations and was viewed as the aggressor in the conflict. This forced the Manley Administration to levy a 7.5% tariff on all companies to try and keep the Industry mostly under Jamaican control. The result of this was a crushing blow to our local companies/corporations. This may seem insignificant to you but keep in mind that Bauxite is our most valuable natural resource and we are the 3rd largest producer of it in the world.
As far as the Caribbean is concerned, Canada was at the forefront of the destabilization of the Aristide Government in Haiti. You were viewed as no better than the French and Americans in that conflict.
There are also other examples, but I do not want to make this into a conversation about Canadian foreign policy.
As I mentioned earlier though, I have no issue with Canadian investment and trade. The majority of Jamaicans are in support of the ongoing CARICOM-CANADA Free trade agreement. No one is saying we should not do business together. I just do not see the benefit in allowing Canada to build a base on our soil. Economic and Military interests should be separate.
As described in the article they're predominantly going to be small facilities with a runway, storage facility and a few personnel to guard stocks from looters I guess.
Some of that makes sense to me but, have to say it, we've got a reasonably good reputation for remaining objective and impartial. This could risk that substantially if neighbouring countries to these selected areas interpret this as "expansionism". As an example; what if we had chosen badly and negotiated for such a base in Syria?? Where would we be sitting at this time? Impotently on the sidelines while Assad murders his citizens and our facility would have been looted with possibly it's personnel jailed or worse. Nope, Nada, havng anything other than an embassy in any of these other parts of the world is for countires who've got an agenda in mind but not Canada!
Lastly; why do we need them? Rapid deployment of needed resources is still something that a small facility can't possibly foresee in it's inventory of supplies. Our current practice is to wait for requests of aid either through the affected country or the U.N. I don't see that changing.
Military option; are we seriously contemplating becoming a policeman to be called upon whenever one of these regional country's throws a belt? Get serious! We have a population of 30 million and a military to GDP ratio of 2.7 that is all but used up with our current role within NATO and the U.N.
Swanning around the world with a "swagger stick" tucked under our forearm is not and never should be the Canadian military's role.
You really want to help these other countries like Jamaica, for one; build some schools and supply the materials so they can excell at assimilating knowledge.
Yeah my guess it is incase we need to land after a bad Hurricane or Tsunami in the region..we just do a fast off-load on one of our C-17 Globmaster III's..then we have a place to store and sort all the emegency aid and misc cargo.
GTOlover: Everyone is aware of the close relationship that is shared between the Canadian and US Military. The point is though, while that is the case the US has no permanent Military bases on Canadian Soil and are always hosted by the Canadian Military.
True Edward - but as we share the longest unprotected border in the world, and they already have Alaska (you know, to like attack Russia from ) they don't really need actual real estate in Canada. The WA, MN, NH, ME, IL etc. borders are seemingly close enough. They do have a base(s?) over here in England, and in Germany and I am sure a lot of other spots, where they need a physical launch pad from (I am guessing that is the reason).
Canada, on the other hand . . . . I don't know - this sounds like they are trying to do it for humanitarian reason ""Canada’s response to the Haitian disaster was complicated by the absence of such a long-term arrangement."
but I can't see the Cdn government spending money for that reason and this sounds scary to me: "Canada’s Defence Department has been quietly scouting locations around the world to establish staging bases, small-scale depots that can be quickly expanded to support operations should the need arise."
True Edward - but as we share the longest unprotected border in the world, and they already have Alaska (you know, to like attack Russia from ) they don't really need actual real estate in Canada. The WA, MN, NH, ME, IL etc. borders are seemingly close enough. They do have a base(s?) over here in England, and in Germany and I am sure a lot of other spots, where they need a physical launch pad from (I am guessing that is the reason).
Canada, on the other hand . . . . I don't know - this sounds like they are trying to do it for humanitarian reason ""Canada’s response to the Haitian disaster was complicated by the absence of such a long-term arrangement."
but I can't see the Cdn government spending money for that reason and this sounds scary to me: "Canada’s Defence Department has been quietly scouting locations around the world to establish staging bases, small-scale depots that can be quickly expanded to support operations should the need arise."
Smells like war to me.
There ya go; my point exactly!
We do not need to proliferate our military presence in ANY other country unless it is agreed to, stipulated by, proposed by either U.N. or NATO and in that sense, I see these small bases as nothing more than a way by which we can speed up a response and perhaps circumvent these orgainizations in some way. Nope!
Expanding our influence or presense around the world needs be done by normal diplomatic missions rather than anything that could be construed as military in nature.
True Edward - but as we share the longest unprotected border in the world, and they already have Alaska (you know, to like attack Russia from ) they don't really need actual real estate in Canada. The WA, MN, NH, ME, IL etc. borders are seemingly close enough. They do have a base(s?) over here in England, and in Germany and I am sure a lot of other spots, where they need a physical launch pad from (I am guessing that is the reason).
Agreed, the need is not there. I was more using the US and Canada as an example so people could relate to our situation a little better than before.
The US has quite the overseas empire and many people in the host countries do not appreciate the presence of US forces within their borders.
Quote:
Canada, on the other hand . . . . I don't know - this sounds like they are trying to do it for humanitarian reason ""Canada’s response to the Haitian disaster was complicated by the absence of such a long-term arrangement."
but I can't see the Cdn government spending money for that reason and this sounds scary to me: "Canada’s Defence Department has been quietly scouting locations around the world to establish staging bases, small-scale depots that can be quickly expanded to support operations should the need arise."
Smells like war to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan
There ya go; my point exactly!
We do not need to proliferate our military presence in ANY other country unless it is agreed to, stipulated by, proposed by either U.N. or NATO and in that sense, I see these small bases as nothing more than a way by which we can speed up a response and perhaps circumvent these orgainizations in some way. Nope!
Expanding our influence or presense around the world needs be done by normal diplomatic missions rather than anything that could be construed as military in nature.
My point as well. This could easily be misinterpreted as military (or interpreted correctly, depending on intent) Also keep in mind that countries with a history of colonization are going to be even more suspicious of a more powerful nation setting up shop on their soil.
We in Jamaica have only had 49 years to celebrate our Independence, so it is fresh in the minds of many current residents and members of the diaspora.
Canada has welcomed 1/4 million Jamaicans to become full time residents in Canada to both countries advantage. now Canada wants to build a marginal airstrip in your country a move which is going to probably help you and you are complaining?If it was up to me my tax dollars wouldnt go to such a project and while we are at it how about taking your 1/4 million country men back eh!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) they don't really need actual real estate in Canada. The WA, MN, NH, ME, IL etc. borders are seemingly close enough. They do have a base(s?) over here in England, and in Germany and I am sure a lot of other spots, where they need a physical launch pad from (I am guessing that is the reason).
