This may not be the right forum, and the first person to call me an *** kisser can meet me out back, but I got through reading the local rag today here in beautiful Vancouver British Columbia and felt a little embarrassed over my country's Prime Miniter's comments to the American people about the war in Iraq. The headlines read "Too Little Too Late", in reference to comments from Prime Minister Chretian apparently now supporting what he so vehemently opposed a few short weeks ago. PM Chretian was very wrong. We should have supported but we did not. The majority of Canadians did not agree with Chretians position, but that was not publicized. Now the PM turns face to save face in mounting political backlash. How embarrassing for the Canadian people. I can only plead senility when trying to explain his actions. Now in light of this I find myself in the awkward position of having to apologize to the American people for the short sighted vision of our leader(s). On a lighter note, given our governments poor funding of equipment for our Armed forces, (ie: helicopters that fly...sort of), we may have spared needless loss of life that would never have been taken in armed conflict.

 

Canada is the best place to live in, Now, but not later, stupid of the Canadians.

 

I may be one of the minority that you speak of that does support what our Prime Minister said. I haven't read the "local rag" that your talking about, and I'm not calling you an *** either. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
I for one do support the fact that Saddam HAS TO GO, and as far as everyone knows is gone, BUT what I didn't support, and what I, as well as the PM, do not support is the fact that they basically saidd screw you to the world and to the UN and said we will do what ever we want to do. And I will agree with the fact that the UN was a little slow, etc. However, nobody, and that includes us and the US are perfect. What this does is open the doors for people like Saddam, N. Korea, etc, to say " Hey the US has openly said they don't like us, and they have weapons of mass destruction, so they are a threat to us. If they can tell the UN to screw off so can we, so we are going to war against them"
THAT SCARES THE CRAP OUT OF ME!!!!! The US does follow protocol, but some nations don't show restraint when they want to use wepons of mass destruction. that is scary.
I for one WILL NOT apologize to the US for not "being there" for them. Most people forget that, when it comes to supporting the US and we don't, everyone gets all riled up and calls us losers and chickens. But when Canada wants to work something out with them (ie Fisheries, Softwood Lumber, etc) the US says screw you we are looking out for us and us only. And that is why people dislike the US. They are only in it for themselves. Their foreign policy needs to be revamped.

I understand where you are coing from, and I hope you can understand my point of view. There is so much to say about this topic but, I don't have the time. I feel so sorry for the people that lost their lives on 9/11 and during other terroist attacks, not only in the USA but all over the world.

And finally, I support why they went to war but not the method they used. I wish that they're troops come back safe and sound and that casualties are limited.
GOD BLESS THE WORLD.

Just my 2cents.

 

Wow, I looked at this first thinking it was going to be a US bashing thread (there some dipwads in the forum who have done it before) which is fine because of a little thing called freedom of speech

I was in Australia when all this went down and it is interesting the different views in another country (which were supportive for the most part)

I feel countries like France and Russia should be supportive no matter what with what we have done in the past. opps had to edit this, I dont' mean NO MATTER WHAT, I mean France agreed and Russia agreed about the problem and a solution and then later backed out and did not want to negotiate. They should have stuck by it.... I guess what pisses me off is countries complain about US getting into everyones business but then has there hand out for the tax payers money in assistance. Or how bout France wanting us to keep an 200,000 armed forces in middle east as a threat to Saddam???????? What the hell is that ?? if they feel it is working get your own 200,000 down there ....oh sorry 200,000 french forces isn't really a threat is it?

For the record I'm neither for or against the war or past war there is too much propaganda thrown around to make an educuated decision IMHO. But a decision was made by the people that were voted for and our Forces were sent in at that point the debate is over and my Country has my full support. My Uncle was in Nam and got spit on when he got back I don't think any American ( and because of history France there would not be France except for ally forces) should dispute a war once its started. Just learn from it for the next time and hopefully it isn't a costly lesson.


But dude you shouldn't be apologizing for the actions of your government you should just use your power to vote and voice your opinion, something people in Iraq have never known!

OK I'll get off my soapbox

 

I agree with SBains 100%

I also know that almost everyone I know feels the same way. We are glad we stayed out of the US/British war on Iraq

And Canada will always be one of the best places to live in...

jeff

 

I also agree with SBAINSTA!! I am on the wall in this subject matter... 50% against, 50% for...

I tottaly agreed that Saddam had to go, but I disagreed with the exact same thing SBANSTA allready nicely typed out

The united states is for eliminitating all free standing nations, in order to gain access to them and control them. Clear and simple, a great example is Bosnia ever since their hand touched that country there has been no development, what-so-ever, country's economy has been sitting idle for the past 10 years, and there are STILL US troops positioned there... PROVE AN EX-CITIZEN (1989) OF THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA WRONG BOSNIA HAS BEEN A STRIVING COUNTRY EVER SINCE THE USA "HELPED THEM"

If was a super power, of course i'd want to control al my neighbors, and employees so I have YES men doing things the way I want them done..

Congrats to the USA for removing the regime, and being unable to prove their theory that they had weapons of mass destruction.

 

This of course is a VERY delicate and emotional issue. Both Sandeep and Bill make very compelling arguments and I have wrestled with them in my own mind.

I should say that I have an extremely personal dislike for our PM. As far as I'm concerned he is a bold faced liar, arrogant and runs the cabinett as a dictator. The sooner he is gone the better.

It is not just that we chose NOT to support the US with our ship and our tank (the helicopter was broken......again) it is the MANNER with which we deferred from joining the "coalition of the willing". When Cretian stood up to announce his - note, I said HIS - position, and all the Liberal members stood up and cheered I just about barfed. This was a serious and solem annoucement. There should have been quiet contemplation on the annoucement of this decision not the "clapping seal at the circus" display we witnessed.

It is a compelling argument to suggest that the UN SHOULD exist to prevent JUST this situation, and that if we do not respect that then what is the point of the UN. However, the position of the French, Russian and German governments made it untenable. THEY painted the US into the box of acting unilaterally rather then the UN taking a stronger hand in forcing Saddam to 'fess up.

It is said that if we do not learn from history, then we are doomed to repeat it. The similarity to Germany of the 20's and 30's and the endless compromising of the League of Nations (UN of its day) enabled Hitler more and more time to build himself to a point where he was able to be the aggressor and the battle to remove him was all the more costly.

The US is saying, "Saddam maybe a headache today, but without removing him, he could be an impossible problem tomorrow".

Is the US a bully? I do not believe so, but don't pick a fight with them. Should they become the policeman of the world? Rather them then anyone else I know - except perhaps the British - but then I'm biased in that regard.

Based on the oppression witnessed in Iraq by Hussien it seems to me that most Iraqies are elated at the opportunity to build a democracy. I think the people of Aghanistan feel the same way.

The US now has to pour money in to those countries and provide the security to allow those countries to develop their own democratic systems. They should rebuild fences by allowing the UN to have a great influence from here on in. I do not feel that GENERALLY the US is out to "take" anything from any country. They never "pick" a fight. They are never the instigator.

On balance, I feel that we in Canada should have supported the USA. The USA, Britain and Australia are some of our oldest and most significant allies. We should have announced that though we were perhaps holding our nose, we were with the USA.

I'm personally regularly embarrassed by our PM.

Silicuda: I have to confess that i became a little lost with your comments BUT I will definately concede that Europe, the UN AND the US should all be ashamed of their actions with regard to the former Yugoslavia. Their inaction was a complete shame on the civilized world. Indeed, Canada did a VERY fine job in that conflict and has every reason to be proud.

 

SBains, I do respect your point of view and your right to voice it, which is more than we would enjoy were we citizens of Iraq. 4 door Sadam, has been thumbing his nose at the UN and it's weapons inspectors for years now. The UN continued to give extension after extension to his previous deadlines for compliance. In a world where terrorism has become too commonplace to accept any longer, I believe the reactive approach followed by the UN must be replaced by a proactive one.

 

Point taken Wicked. Our problem is similar to your's. Biggest chunk of votes comes from east of the Red River, making western voters wishers at the polls. Luckily this issue is not east-west. PM Chretian is not seeking another term (not that he could get in anyway) but his party may need to perform some damage control to run a chance of re-election.

 

Yeah we have the same problems here with California and the midwest bible belt being strong on the electoral votes (nothing wrong with the bible belt just US was founded on seperation of religeon and state never understood the "God Bless America thing" Agree with "God bless the world" in that regard. but that is a WHOLE other subject!

97TA WS6 THANK YOU!!!!!! I studied world war II (and I) in college as much as I could with electives. The paralell to those is incredible and you almost NEVER hear about it. That is the real reason for the French comments. Had nothing against France but when is the country going to learn its lesson? It was desemated twice because of Isolation policies in the world.

Also as a US citizen I can say the last thing most "citizens" want is US being a police of the world. It is too costly with lives (my bro is in the armed forces and it scares the hell out of me!) and money, we have enough problems internally. But the last time the allied forces "stayed out of everyones business" look what happened. And it is right to say the UN power players did not give the US much of a choice either go on there own or look like lying idiots what good would that do if the worlds superpower was a lying idiot (not that it hasn't been in the past)

US was wonderful when it had a balancing power during the cold war and if they didn't do things they were bastards now that they are the only real one then they are bullys and if they do something they are bastards.

All that said I totally respect Canadian view point of being against the war and not joining it. I do not respect France or Russia for the lack of action or negotiation. and if Canada had a Veto and used it the same way I'd feel the same way about it. You have to give an ulitmatum to a guy like Saddam they gave him chances for 12 YEARS.

Also this is all just opinion and it is all based on my personal morals and media information I do not mean to offend anyone and although I am patriotic and love my country it isn't perfect but I feel it tries to be the best it can be and that makes me proud too.

Plus I'm getting into this because I was out of the country on business and it was generally not a good Idea to talk about it

 

I initally felt more time a tripple the inspectors may have been a better route to go, possibly getting the full UN support on side. But as Shaun points out if left as is Saddam could turn into a serious problem, imagine him with a full nuclear arsonal!! The US will pay for this in huge tax dollars to maintain control and stability there, in international trade and safety for its people travelling abroad, but you have to give a thumbs up for being proactive, who knows who Saddam would would have attacked or support next.

Lets hope N.Korea stays in line, THAT is the real threat.

 

France's position was just outright anti-Americanism.

1. They are embarrassed about the fact they all love Jerry Lewis.
2. They have a long history in the Arab world and have enjoyed some influence as a result.
3. They probably have embarrassing business deals with Iraq AND/OR they WANT deals with Iraq
4. Politics of envy.
5. They have a left wing leader.
6. They hate the fact that the US has the economic and political power that it does.
7. they want to be seen to the rest of the world as the leader with regard to political opposition to the US on the world stage.

In my opinion, screw 'um. The US saved their a$$ 60 years ago - and argueably Britains as well. It is not that France and the other countries do not have the right and the responsability to be "the devils advocate" but they seemed to adopt the position of "I VETO IT. Sorry, what was it you wanted to say?". Who is the enemy here? Its simple, if France convinced Saddam to just 'fess up then the US would have no vindication to go in there and remove him. He would still be in power. It may be argued by some that he did not have any weapons. Fine, in that case Saddam, let ALL the inspectors wander all around the country freely asking any and all questions so that there is NO SHADOW of a doubt that you have made EVERY effort to negate the US's claims. Having spy planes video taping 40 trucks hurried being packed up and driven off and hour before the inspectors arrive is not going to help Saddam's credability.

Wicked: I'm originally from Britain and European history from 1900 on was my academic specialty. Couldn't get enough of it.

 

Hear, Hear

 

Its not what we have done in the past its what they have done.
Both France & Russia have been suppling wepons to iraq, yes I know so did we in the 80s against Iran. But I am not talking from the 80s & 90s I am talking through as early as this year. But it was mainly Russian wepons they found on the iraq men.

France is just a child nation they dont want to fight. They hate war. heck if it wasnt for counties like the US, France wouldnt be France anymore.

 

You can't down what chretian chose to do. We support the UN. And if it's not agreed upon by the UN then why should we go and fight.
I do understand the US stand on this issue. Iraq is a threat to the US and after 9/11 many things have got to change.

From an economic stand point it would of been good for Chretian to agree to fight, but money runs out, and hate lasts forever.