Did Bush question Canada's need for defense?

  • News
  • Thread starter fourier jr
  • Start date
In summary, during a conversation about Canada possibly signing onto the U.S. missile defence plan, President Bush expressed confusion over the need for Canada to be defended and questioned why they would not accept it as necessary. Some believe this statement adds more ammunition for anti-Bush sentiments in Canada. Others argue that Canada is capable of defending itself and the U.S. is not doing them any favors. There is also speculation that the missile defence system may already be complete but not publicly declared. Some see this as a way for the U.S. to boost their economy through the defence sector.
  • #1
fourier jr
765
13
"(Bush) leaned across the table and said: 'I'm not taking this position, but some future president is going to say, Why are we paying to defend Canada?' " the official was quoted as saying.

"Most of our side was trying to explain the politics, how it was difficult to do," he said.

But Bush "waved his hands and remarked: 'I don't understand this. Are you saying that if you got up and said this is necessary for the defence of Canada, it wouldn't be accepted?' "

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/050123/w012336.html

more ammo for the anti-bush forces in Canada (& maybe elsewhere) i guess...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think that would be great. Canadians are so superiror to Americans, they could easily defend themselves, along with all the other countires that the US protects. I personally think that the US should not waste any money protecting other countries, especially with all this talk about how the US is in debt.

cbc.ca (same as first post) said:
Paul Cellucci, America's ambassador to Canada, said earlier this month that the U.S. is optimistic Canada will sign on to the missile defence plan before the end of March.
Good to see that Canada will sign on, and that Bush's threat may have worked.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
you americans always seem to think you "defend" others but from whom? who is going to attack Canada? (if not the US itself)
 
  • #4
Just because the odds of Canada getting attacked is slim, does not mean that protecting it is a bad idea. And it seems as though your Prime Minister would agree.
 
  • #5
god, America has been getting more and more staunchy with it's claims, when did this "America protecting Canada" rhetoric start? You're not protecting anyone, NORAD was set up during the cold war to protect America AND Canada from the possibility against Russian Bombers and Missiles, you barely have any military bases in Canada, mainly radar stations and it would be a small step for Canada to be able to defend it's self against anyone who does want to invade them and has the naval logistics capability to do so.

So don't start thinking your doing us any favors, there are a good number of people in Canada who want NORAD disbanded and the Americans kicked out, especially after Iraq. What nerve.
 
  • #6
In fact, last I heard you guys were trying to bully us into expanding NORAD into a missile defence system, allying with you is making us even more vulernable than if we hadn't signed on NORAD in the first place.
 
  • #7
bloody hate you stupid neocons [/rant]
 
  • #8
Smurf said:
bloody hate you stupid neocons [/rant]
neocons? Are you reffering to your PM or some Canadian official? I thought your PM was a liberal. Personally, and this is coming from an someone who lives in the US, I do not think we are protecting Canada. And if we are, I think we should stop. Why waste money on Canadians when we need it here.

Also, this is the first time I had ever heard of the US protecting Canada.
 
  • #9
neocons being the term referring to ultra right-wing hawkish politicians usually involved in some way with PNAC such as bush, wolfowitz, cheney, ect.

and our PM is indeed a member of the Liberal party, wether or not they're 'liberal' is open to debate. In comparison to the US our Conservatives are 'liberal' but in comparison to Europe our "socialists" (NDP Party) are conservative
 
  • #10
Are you guys talking about that missile defense system which doesn't even leave the silo during a test ?
Read the ironic news reports on "what's new" from the university of Maryland :smile:

http://www.aps.org/WN/WN05/wn011405.cfm
 
  • #11
*chuckle chuckle*
 
  • #12
I'm not much for conspiracy theory, but this is an interesting statement:
"They say they may never publicly declare when the shield is fully ready."

I've often wondered if certain programs, like the ABMS, are already complete, and this all a front.
 
  • #13
Building missile defence will certainly boost the economy in the defence sector! Net flow of $ : Canada -> US.

Gruman stocks anyone?

Oh that's right, freedom is what Bush is concerned about, sorry about that.
 

Related to Did Bush question Canada's need for defense?

1. What is the context of "What bush said to martin"?

The phrase "What bush said to martin" is often used as a way to refer to a specific conversation or interaction between two individuals named "bush" and "martin". It could also be used as a general expression for discussing communication or dialogue between two people.

2. Who are "bush" and "martin" in this context?

In most cases, "bush" and "martin" are not specific individuals, but rather placeholders for any two people engaged in a conversation. However, some may use these names to refer to historical figures or well-known individuals, such as former US President George W. Bush and civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.

3. What is the significance of this conversation between "bush" and "martin"?

The significance of this conversation could vary greatly depending on the context and individuals involved. It could be a simple exchange of pleasantries, a serious discussion about important issues, or anything in between.

4. Is there a specific meaning or message behind "What bush said to martin"?

As previously mentioned, the phrase is often used as a general expression and does not have a specific meaning or message. However, in certain contexts, it may refer to a specific quote or statement made by one of the individuals.

5. How does "What bush said to martin" relate to science?

In the realm of science, "What bush said to martin" could be used as a research topic or a prompt for a study on communication, language, or dialogue. It could also be used as an analogy for the exchange of ideas and information among scientists and researchers.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
64
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
3
Replies
85
Views
7K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top