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.
........... you said Americans mention the special relation with the UK a lot. I think you've been hanging around City-Data too long, most (as in 90%+) have no clue what 'special relationship' would be referring to, I would imagine they would guess Canada first--only because of proximity. That's a British trope anyways, "Oh the special relationship", yeah the U.K. says that to comfort themselves the Americans never mention it.
Wait .... what?
Are you saying Americans don't know what THE United Kingdom and American "Special Relationship" is? You should see what America's presidents have all said about that:
The Special Relationship is a phrase used to describe the exceptionally close political, diplomatic, cultural, economic, military and historical relations between the United Kingdom and the United States, following its use in a 1946 speech by British statesmanWinston Churchill. Although both the United Kingdom and United States have close relationships with many other nations, the level of cooperation between them in economic activity, trade and commerce, military planning, execution of military operations, nuclear weapons technology, and intelligence sharing has been described as "unparalleled" among major powers.
and to quote your most recent American president:
Quote:
'As I told the prime minister, the United States has no closer friend and ally than the United Kingdom, and I reiterated my deep and personal commitment to the special relationship between our two countries – a bond that has endured for generations and across party lines.'
Frankly, I get tired of the Americans who, on this and other forums, say, "We can take Canada any time we want." You wouldn't, and you know it. Americans would unleash a world of hurt from NATO partners.
This. As if the rest of the world would stand by doing nothing. In terms of power, the US is like Germany in the 1930's. It could (hypothetically) take on most individual countries, including Canada, but it would (hypothetically) lose miserably from a coalition of forces including China, Russia and Europe.
As far as the 'superiority of US weapons'. Not really, unlike most European countries the Netherlands bought American weapons. The helicopters we bought were grounded at one point because firing a missile could blow their own tail off. The Patriot missiles we bought had a miss percentage of over 90%, the JSF plane we bought recently is shaking apart from misery. Americans forces are using European weapons at the moment: never underestimate the incompetence of American engineers.
Are you saying Americans don't know what THE United Kingdom and American "Special Relationship" is? You should see what America's presidents have all said about that:
Yeah, I know, and I'm telling you most Americans don't know what that special relationship is. The Presidents say that to appease the English, but they have no intention of mentioning it in a speech oriented towards American citizens because they've never heard of that. Again its something that British with in inferiority complex say to make themselves feel more relevant than they actually are, the Presidents weren't selling that to the American people. And why would they, America doesn't need to brag that it relies heavily on another country like the UK does.
But seriously, I've heard British mention this relationship and then come to the US and be surprised that nobody knew what they were talking about, except for very, very politically aware people (which is like 6% of the population). Americans are allies with the UK, that's it to Americans, its not 'special relationship', that's a British thing. They do it to reinforce that they're friends with 'the big guys'. Or in this case, 'my son became super big and powerful and I'm a proud dad, you mess with me you're messing with him too!' Meanwhile the son doesn't even know the father is bragging about him.
One of the things that bugs me about Internet debates, is that people tend to pull up Internet blogs as authorititive cites. And if they do not do that, then they look at op-ed pieces from respected and not-so-respected news sites (the Toronto Star, the New York Times, ive_got_an_agenda.com, etc.) as some support.
No. We need to look at respected news and history sources; and in this case, we need to look at hard history, and from there, extrapolate on what might happen in the OP's scenario. Not blogs, not opinions, not "my Dad can beat up your Dad" kind of stuff.
Is the OP's question silly? Yes. Will it ever happen? Unlikely, barring some geopolitical crisis where Canada asks the UN to move foreign troops (including US troops) onto Canadian soil to protect Canadian and American interests.
Frankly, I get tired of the Americans who, on this and other forums, say, "We can take Canada any time we want." You wouldn't, and you know it. Americans would unleash a world of hurt from NATO partners. The American so-called "special relationship" with the UK (that so many of you Americans like to mention, having forgotten the "special relationship" with Canada, who bailed your diplomats out of Iran in 1979 and who took in potentially-deadly aircraft on 9/11 after you closed your airspace) would be broken. Americans would alienate most of Europe, who, under the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949, would side (indeed, are obligated by the terms of the Treaty) to protect Canada. You Americans may think you have a massive military force, but if you attack Canada, you'd be dealing with forces from pretty much all of western Europe, some of eastern Europe, and countries that had nukes (e.g. the UK), besides. Outside of NATO, Russia might like to be involved (Arctic claims, and all that), and China (just for S&G and to see what it could get out of the resulting mess).
Let's face it; it would be WWIII if the US attempted to take Canada.
The US needs Canada: to act as a buffer state, yes; but also to act as a trusted neighbour in continental defense (i.e. NORAD). I might go so far as to suggest that the US regard Canada as a peaceful nation that can advance North American interests that other world nations might disregard blindly if the same arguments were to come from the US. Such arguments might be better-regarded if coming from Canada. That does not mean that Canada is the US's lackey--we've had our differences, to be sure, and we continue to--but Canada is an independent state, and Canada's and the US's goals and objectives are the same: liberty, freedom, and democracy, as we respectively define it. Certainly, neither the US nor Canada wants to become a Stalin-esqe society; we each believe in freedom of speech and the press, democratic multiparty elections, and the like. A Westminster Parliament and an American Congress are not that different, in the end.
'Nuff said for now. Can we go back to comparing beers?
I totally agree with you. My reaction is reserved for the frankly bizarre comments of a couple of posters on here. I think we can all agree that the OP is a nitwit and certainly doesn't represent my country in any way whatsoever.
I don't care if you're 52, you're younger than me by enough to be my child and your alleged age and alleged life experiences don't impress me one bit. But it sure doesn't sound like you've learned moderation and maturity after all this time if you're going to get petulant and impolite like a thwarted child having a temper tantrum because you don't approve of somebody else's related experiences differing from your own.
.
Actually, I'm a rather reasonable person. But when someone decides to indulge in lazy stereotypes and lecture me about about my part of the world based on one or two posters on a prepper message board (Not exactly the sanest bunch in the first place) and a guy he used to know, then excuse me if I get annoyed.
A lie? Dude, I live here. I think I should know. I have never heard that term said in anything but an ironic way.
Did you really use The Dukes of Hazzard as a basis for your argument? Seriously? I mean, heck, why don't I mouth off about Vancouver or Toronto using John Candy's old skits on Second City TV as my source material? Or, criminee, drag out Dudley Do-Right cartoons while I'm at it? Holy moley. Dukes of Hazzard? I'm really embarrassed for you.
What's more, you cite the Southern Poverty Law Center as yet another source. Well, I'm quite familiar with the SPLC, since it's 90 miles from me. Been to their offices dozens and dozens of times. I know quite a few of the guys there. They've helped me with research projects. Interviewed them. Have good relationships with them. Passionate to a person, but I also know that sometimes they get a little zealous in their writing to the point that they cut lots of corners on research. They've been dinged on it quite a bit over the past few years, stretching the facts to make a point.
Then you managed to dredge up some obscure website, aboutnorthgeorgia.com, that was apparently written and edited by a semi-literate. The piece is so riddled with typos, poor grammar, and even worse syntax that one has to wonder about the author's sobriety at the time it was written. It is hardly what I'd call an authoritative glimpse into the mind of the South. Yet you push it forth as evidence?
Again, I'm not sure where you're from in Canada. But if you herd 1,000 Southerners into a room and ask them what they call the conflict that stretched from 1861-1865, I'd bet my last dollar that 99% of them would call it Civil War. Some would call it the War Between The States. And if one person out of that 1,000 called it The War Of Northern Aggression, I would be totally amazed.
I mean, hell's bells. I don't go popping off with half-baked notions about Canada, even though I've been to the country more than thirty times over the past twenty years, sometimes for weeks at a time. And I've found that the very large majority of Canadians are pretty amazing and very cool people. But every time I'm there, there's got to be one sanctimonious and uninformed nitwit with a chip on his shoulder who thinks watching an In The Heat Of The Night marathon on Nick at Nite and makes him a freaking authority on my part of the country. I guess I found him on this thread.
Haaar, poked the proverbial hornets nest did I? I can assure you, I have spent far more time in your neck of the woods than you have in Canada and probably will continue to maintain that differential until no longer able to travel. I love both the country and the people even though I've met a few of those peckerwoods with a chip on their shoulder taking all of their information from the likes of those garbage sites regarding Canada as well.
What about the NRA guy? He represents some obscure backwoods, peckerwood hillbilly club does he?
The links were not provided as authoritative sources on frequency of useage of the term 'war of northern aggression', they were intended to show the term is out there and being used. Laugh all you like about the Dukes of Hazard show but that show was broadcast worldwide.
Look; this chit has gone on for far too long already and while your voice might be one of those showing more restraint and reason it gets lumped in with those other nuts "popping off" with assumptions about Canada and Canadians. Your annoyance is completely understood but it's a two way street. this thread would have died early on had not some provided more than enough annoyance for myself and others through the very same provision that annoys you; nuts talking about Canada as though they know anything intelligent about the country.
I will admit to a great failing in being unable to compartmentalize those posts "popping off" from those that merely provide an alternative opinion. Age related maybe; but I've at least made the attempt by going back over this whole damn thread and re-reading from start to finish.
I concluded:
Had you and Chevyspoons been left to debate this silly topic alone, the whole tenor might have been more conducive to a sensible outcome.
I totally believe you. I never said before that I didn't believe that was your experience. I believe it is your experience and nobody here has said that you are lying nor has anyone made any assumptions about you or your life experiences.
My experience is that I have heard the term war of northern aggression used in a serious manner by southerners. Now if you don't believe that or don't like that well that's your problem, not mine, and I don't care but my experience is no reflection on your own experiences and there's nothing you can say that can change it. And it's no reason for you to get your panties in a defensive wad or for getting unpleasant about other people that you know nothing about just because somebody else's experience is different from yours.
I don't care if you're 52, you're younger than me by enough to be my child and your alleged age and alleged life experiences don't impress me one bit. But it sure doesn't sound like you've learned moderation and maturity after all this time if you're going to get petulant and impolite like a thwarted child having a temper tantrum because you don't approve of somebody else's related experiences differing from your own.
.
With all due respect.... having read your exchanges with cpg35223, I must say that I don't quite agree with your line of thinking. Here you have someone from the South, sharing his experiences and telling you that the civil war is not described as “The War of Northern Aggression”. And you are challenging or at least trying to partly override his experience by pushing something that you read on hunting and survival forums?
It is like me arguing with a person from China about what they mostly eat. And me telling the person that it must be Kung-Pao and General-Tso's Chicken because that has been my experience at Asian restaurants in NA and I read a lot of Asians writing about this kind of food on forums. "There have even been some heated debates on Kung-Pao Chicken"
"I believe you when you say that you don't eat Kung-Pao Chicken all the time, but I know some Asians who do because I have read it on some Asian food forum".
Whoa nelly. Seriously scared; you're chitting with me right? First the deflection was I had called the U.S. an EVIL country which never happened. Now I've once again been referred to as "seriously scared" of an American invasion.
[color="Blue"]Human radiation experiments[edit]
Researchers in the United States have performed thousands of human radiation experiments to determine the effects of atomic radiation and radioactive contamination on the human body, generally on people who were poor, sick, or powerless.[55]
Russia, nor ANY other country has yet to do any of this kind of chit to us! Get it???
What a bunch of narcissistic melonheads that you cannot take criticism of your country's behaviour over the last 100 years. It really limits the art of social intercourse if everyone either has to kiss your freak'n rings or be deemed a heretic.
This and many other such human experiments conducted by countries around the world are shameful events in our (the world's) history. But I fail to understand the purpose of posting articles on Human Experimentation from Wikipedia. What exactly are you trying to prove?
In have been to Churchill, MB and know that in the 1950's the US and Canada performed joint military exercises in that region. There's a famous Fort Churchill rocket launching site and if you walk around the Churchill area, you will find a few empty rocket shells from many many years ago. Even today, the small population up there will tell you about the harmful effects of this army experimentation on the natives (Chipewyan and Cree). Why dont you post links about that as well?
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.
