digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at waronyou.blogspot.com

Canada, U.S. agree to use each troops in civil emergencies

waronyou.blogspot.com — Canada, U.S. agree to use each other's troops in civil emergencies Canada and the U.S. have signed an agreement that paves the way for the militaries from either nation to send troops across each other's borders during an emergency, but some are questioning why the Harper government has kept silent on the deal.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • ladybroadoak, on 03/23/2008, -15/+8CENTCOM and Central Canada Command merged on Valentine's Day - the same day that the satellite was shot down. Funny how we hear nothing about what happened with the satellite debris, isn't it?? A toxic load of hydrazine (and don't let them fool you it is dangerous) was let out. What was it doing it that satellite? And meanwhile, Canada was signed away .. sovereignty and human rights totally gone.
    POOF! All must be in place for the Vancouver Olympics - Big Brother is prepared.
    • theaceoffire, on 03/23/2008, -5/+2o.o ummm...
      Your pants are on too tight.
    • noahhoward, on 03/23/2008, -0/+3"What was it doing it that satellite?"
      It was FUELING the bloody thing!
  • GrandmaSheila, on 03/23/2008, -7/+21Big Brother has been here since the coup d'etat of 2000. The continental lockdown is now underway
    • deadowl, on 03/23/2008, -2/+5We'd probably be doing the same thing with health care if we had a single-payer system.
    • Jimbob200, on 03/23/2008, -2/+4No kidding.

      FTA:

      "a civil emergency."

      a. civil. emergency.

      I kinda want to cry right now.
    • mikemil828, on 03/23/2008, -3/+1We must defeat the La-Li-Lu-Le-Lo!
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1This contrasts nicely with the American-Mexican relationship.
  • rapincandy, on 03/23/2008, -24/+0DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.
    • theaceoffire, on 03/23/2008, -0/+2Oh noes, I be messing with trademark!
  • Waiting2awake, on 03/23/2008, -4/+11It really doesn't matter. I have spoken to many people here in Toronto on this, and the SPP meeting in Quebec where the provincial police got caught trying to instigate a riot dressed as rioters. Alas, no one seems to care. It is like they see this item(the signing of the deal) to be the final thing and that the government won't push further - just as they thought with the QPP fiasco.

    Trouble is, that while probably millions of people over North America see it coming, they are spread across some 350 million Americans and Canadians(Soon to be neither) and therefor have no way of organizing a unified front. Add to that the propagad...errrr.....news media marginalizing any descending viewpoint as whatever the new phrase of the time is(Leftist, commie, anarchist, anti-American, etc, etc, etc) so that any discussion is not the discussion that matters.
  • bstory, on 03/23/2008, -11/+4Can Canadians say Annex?
    • Waiting2awake, on 03/23/2008, -9/+4 Nah that would be too overt. They will keep the current names - but the functioning of government and the accountability to their respective people will have been eliminated.

      I just don't see a way that it can be stopped. It will appear, at least politically, that people are "not against" the idea because no one seems aware of it.

    • vault, on 03/23/2008, -5/+2Probably, but those mongoloids would mispronounce it.
    • j1ggy, on 03/23/2008, -3/+2Can you say war?
  • lhbaker, on 03/23/2008, -5/+23I'd like to be the first to welcome our Canadian comrades to the New World Order.
    • Bilabrin, on 03/23/2008, -0/+4Sharing is caring.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1This already happens in some form or another.
      California wild fires, hurricanes, Katrina, 911, NORAD, NATO.
  • purelithium, on 03/23/2008, -7/+4=(
  • vault, on 03/23/2008, -14/+8Military cooperation is a bad thing. On digg, that is.
    • theaceoffire, on 03/23/2008, -4/+4Depends... I know it is an extremely unlikely scenario, but if we had protests and riots (lets say because of an invasion of another country like Iran), Canada just got the go ahead to help stop us.
      • onetimer, on 03/23/2008, -3/+4Wait, are you saying it would be a *bad* thing for the canadians to help quell violent riots (in otherwords, a protest that has escalated into violence and vandalism) if the national guard became overwhelmed? You know what a riot is, right? This isn't "v-for-vendetta" folks, and I'm sure if you were ever caught up in the middle of a riot, you'd be hoping that it would end as soon as possible.
        • theaceoffire, on 03/23/2008, -4/+3I would much rather people here stand up for themselves than lay back and take it again.

          They lie to us, betray us, and get away with it.
          They use us, they hurt us, and get rewarded.
          And soon, they will leave with money, power, and smiles with no real legal action even considered.

          If the day ever comes when Canada is used to stop American Citizens from protesting the actions of our Government, that is the day that we become ruled by tyrants.
        • onetimer, on 03/23/2008, -2/+5You clearly said "rioting" in your original post. Do you know what rioting entails? It entails vandalism of innocent businesses in an area (and don't tell me that wouldn't happen because it almost always does), and chaos. You ever read about the 1992 LA riots? If you were even driving in that area during the time, chances are you'd be shot at, car-jacked, and most certainly mugged. Protesting is one thing, but violent riots accomplish nothing.

          I see what you're doing. You are in this "the governments are tyrants/nazis trying to control/imprison us we need to have a new revolution" mindset, which has swept digg in the last year. But you need to think reasonably. You're trying to justify your stance against this with some far-fetched unprecedented scenario (went from slippery slope fallacy straight to strawman), when in fact it is NOT unprecedented for US and Canadian troops to work together. The first time an out of control RIOT is quelled (and lives are saved) with the help of canadian forces, this thing has already paid off.

          Turn off V-for-Vendetta and look at the history of rioting in the United states.
          • theaceoffire, on 03/24/2008, -1/+2*sigh* it is true honestly that I have little faith in our country. I have probably lost perspective.

            The idea that Canada can use their troops at the behest of our government (Whom I no longer trust, sadly) scares the crap out of me.

            Sorry if I sounded too nutsy.
  • Y3T1, on 03/23/2008, -2/+9Where's Chretien when we need him :(
  • stonebear, on 03/23/2008, -8/+4I was hoping to flee to Canada, but lately I have come to see how naive I have been. It would be like a 1930s era German seeking refuge from the Nazis in Austria.
  • acrodev, on 03/23/2008, -7/+4Want an occupation, eh?
  • ploke, on 03/23/2008, -6/+6oh *****.
  • onetimer, on 03/23/2008, -12/+16Wow, looks like all the "new world order/imminent police-state" nutjobs got to this thread before anybody else.
    • ssn697, on 03/23/2008, -10/+14It is like Sunday church for them...
  • MatCon5, on 03/23/2008, -10/+2I hate this planet.
  • EmitStop, on 03/23/2008, -2/+7What a horrible site layout.
  • Chaoticfist, on 03/23/2008, -7/+7Ok seriously. There is not going to be a North American Union. For one Canadians wouldn't let it happen. Also Harper has been one of the strongest pushers of Canadian sovereignty expecilly with regards to the North West Passage, as well as the American ambassador butting into Canadian Politics. It does not seem to be some big secret either, both nations are admiting it. Also its not like the Americans can just march in, there has to be agreement from local officials as well as the federal goverment and the armed forces.
  • GhostyBoy, on 03/23/2008, -2/+11The Canadian people had zero knowledge or input on this matter. Most have no idea.
  • Rapter09, on 03/23/2008, -4/+12I'm alright with this, as a Canadian.
    I mean, I never heard anything about this, so I'm kinda thinking "thanks, Harper, you useless douche. Can't wait to elect your sorry ass out of Parliament." But, I still see it as good. Regardless of the opinions of you NAU nutjobs, we *are* very close allies. We share most of the same culture, and we share the longest undefended border in the world. I would be proud and happy to have our Canadian troops on the border crossing over to help our southern neighbors with some sort of emergency. That's what allies and close friends like our two nations are for. Don't spit in the face of that just because you're too paranoid about this phantom Union to do anything remotely humanitarian.

    But, the government's transparency - or lack thereof - is a point of concern.
    • herkimer65, on 03/23/2008, -7/+7"I would be proud and happy to have our Canadian troops on the border crossing over to help our southern neighbors with some sort of emergency."

      We'll see how proud and happy you are when a US platoon is in your town barking orders at you.
      • onetimer, on 03/23/2008, -3/+5I take it you didn't read the article.

        Knee-jerk-reaction FTL.
  • dksupremacy, on 03/23/2008, -2/+11That's right! We Canadians are well known around the world as "muscle". If you need us we can probably send you both of our soldiers and our helicopter. It would be great if you could provide a couple of rifles as both of ours are being used by our navy until next summer.

    Thanks for thinking of us.
  • ordig, on 03/23/2008, -5/+8Well this is a one sided deal. American emergency services suck. During Katrina, for example Canadian search and rescue were first on the scene in many places, showing up 11 hours after the storm, in Mississippi at least. It took the american national guard like three days to get off their ass and help people in their own country. How do you think they would preform in Canada?
    • noahhoward, on 03/23/2008, -3/+4You're full of *****. FEMA was first on the scene despite all their bungling. And I guarantee the Coast Guard was there already.
    • elipabst, on 03/23/2008, -3/+4That's really a moronic statement to try and compare those 2 things. The national guard requires all kinds of bureaucratic ***** in order to be mobilized. An emergency search-and-rescue group could deploy immediately to anywhere in the world in hours. In fact the US sends all kinds of advanced search-and-rescue teams all over the world. We sent them to Indonesia and Iran during the tsunami and earthquakes. In fact we deployed an entire hospital ship and its support group to region. As widespread as the Katrina disaster was, you could have deployed search-and-rescue teams weeks after the hurricane and they would have been the 1st on the scene. Don't get me wrong, we appreciate all the help that we get from Canada (including in Afghanistan), but we're not some kind of 3rd world nation that can't wipe it's own ass without Canada's help.
  • Axeman2063, on 03/23/2008, -2/+4My skeptical side is screaming questions of why, if it's a good thing and no big deal, nobody's even heard of the agrrement being discussed or signed. I DID rtfa and noticed the bit at the bottom saying they weren't going to discuss it a lot until both countries agreed, but it's still troubling.

    Another concern is the simple fact that we already help each other from time to time as its needed, and it seemed to work just fine...why put it in writing? I'm inclined to agree with Ordig...American emergency response sucks balls as demonstrated in the post-katrina dustup. If they can't even help out and get ***** done on their own soil, how effective would they truly be on this side of the border?
    This will work fine until some trigger-happy SOB from the invited forces kills a civvy. Just wait.
  • wreckosaurus, on 03/23/2008, -4/+5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Aerosp ...
    Relax, this isn't the first time nor will it be the last time that two allied nations form some sort of military pact. This isn't a big deal, at all. Also, shut up about the NWO.
  • Jameo, on 03/23/2008, -5/+4Hmm, American soldiers in my Canada? I guess my escape plan to Sweden isn't as silly as it first seemed.
  • Harboggles, on 03/23/2008, -7/+4I don't like this...
  • herkimer65, on 03/23/2008, -8/+3Canada has troops?
    • j1ggy, on 03/23/2008, -2/+6They fight and die on the front lines in Afghanistan to protect your lazy ass.
    • holzp, on 03/23/2008, -2/+1Yes they are based in Montreal and call themselves the "Canadians".
  • j1ggy, on 03/23/2008, -3/+3Next comes the Amero and before we know it, we're all one country. I don't like the way things are heading. There will be a huge uproar in Canada over this.
    • onetimer, on 03/23/2008, -4/+3Slippery Slope fallacy for the loss...
  • spyd3rweb, on 03/23/2008, -4/+5Is this just in case the US troops refuse to carry out illegal and unconstitutional orders against US citizens?
    • CotP_DoM, on 03/23/2008, -3/+3And you think the Canadian Army would be more willing to?
  • zephyear, on 03/23/2008, -6/+5this isn't a new thing to be alarmed about, the US and Canada have always been this close with troops and whatnot.

    stop being silly conspiracy theorists with your "NWO" stuff.
  • eric2006, on 03/23/2008, -5/+1Canada has a military?
  • weztex, on 03/23/2008, -5/+2this story is months old...I posted it long ago ...diggers are dumb as fox or cnn fans
  • scotishstriker, on 03/23/2008, -1/+4poor Canada.
  • dantana, on 03/23/2008, -5/+4Gee, and here I thought Harper couldn't get his tongue any farther up Bush's a$$...
  • 4d669, on 03/23/2008, -7/+2I for one will sit back and enjoy the North American Union.
  • Jovensdesciple, on 03/23/2008, -6/+2***** Canada and their flappy heads, we don't need them for *****. Terrance, Phillip and hockey are cool, but everything else Canadian sucks.
  • priestess355, on 03/23/2008, -4/+2Oh waa waa waa... The US Military isn't evil! (neither are the Canadian forces) US troops have no desire to go around trampling on Canada, and I'm sure the same vice versa.

    Its two extremely similar nations, that live side by side, with broadly similar militaries (albeit with enormous size difference) agreeing to help each other out when needed.
    • cheesehead, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2Yeah to quell civil unrest. We couldn't allow democracy to take root again.
    • TrevaLVF, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1You forgot to defend Blackwater and the CIA, Priestess355. You also forgot to tell us that politicians aren't evil and that you trust them not to abuse their positions by using deals like this for purposes contradictory to the claims they made for making these deals.
  • DangerCollie, on 03/23/2008, -0/+3I'm feeling an emergency coming on! They got any women up there that would make it worth invading? We invaded one country for oil, only we didn't get much. Since Canada is our number one oil supplier, maybe we could do better this time. And the bonus is we could steal their beer and women besides their oil! Wo-ho! Beer, oil and pale women. Sounds like Saturday night in Nebraska to me! Oh, yeah. The invasion is so on, eh.
  • HaloZero, on 03/23/2008, -2/+2Old news, http://digg.com/world_news/US_Canadian_Forces_Join ...
  • cheesehead, on 03/23/2008, -0/+4We don't need American troops to quell civil disobedience in Canada. But Bush and Harper and all who pull their strings could use a way to take over our country, without all out war, and destruction of the infrastructure.
    Justification will be the usual *****. Terrorists, pornographers, illegal downloaders and drug dealers are hiding in our midst and under our beds.
    Note the lack of coverage in the corporate media. Most Canadians have no idea of the depth of Harper's treachery.
    • HypeMan, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3Yeah they can claim civil unrest in either country and invade with the other, odds are on America attacking Canada because of some false flag op.
  • comewhatmay, on 03/23/2008, -0/+4why has our relationship improved during the countries(US) worst 8 year run in history?
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3Canadian Conservatives + American Neo-Conservatives.
  • cheesehead, on 03/24/2008, -1/+2Wow I see this disappeared off the main page in record time.
    For those still with the thread some Canadians took it to Harper on this issue. He fled.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-O8GaeMHihI
  • HypeMan, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3OVER 500 Canadian's showed up to my blog for this. We have to unite against Nwo.
    Im Starting a .com please donate $1
    http://widget.chipin.com/widget/id/68e6f4e93992be1 ...
  • TrevaLVF, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Looks to me like the anti- NWO citizens in the USA and Canada need to get together to make some agreements in the event of a militarized effort to stamp out necessary public dissent.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.