[dgthe3]

CANADA:

C anadians
A nd
N ot
A mericans,
D umb-
A ss

That is what Canada stands for.

[Scape]

Rising Powers: The Changing Geopolitical Landscape

We don't have 100 years we have 10.

[Mustang1]

If they covet our natural resources why would China nuke (we are talking missile shield so don’t respond with “they might use conventional weapons”) them? Wouldn’t that be somewhat problematic?

[AdamNF]

Ok well the one thing i didnt want was this to be a debate on the missile shield, but about the state of Canada in general. But since we are here i guess i can add my view.

The missile shield is dangerous, irresponsible and illegal. The missile shield makes the world a far more dangerous place especially in Asia and for what? China and North Korea sure as hell wont like the idea of the USA making significant technology advances in missile technology, it will cause them to strengthen there Nuclear and ICBM arsenal. Iran is trying to build an economy and Russia won’t let Iran be so drastic as to attack the US or US personnel directly. But the real answer to the pro missile-shield crowed is simple. Someone makes a missile shield, and someone else will just make a better missile. It will through the world into another arms race it’s not ready for and the ramifications of which we cannot yet comprehend.

China is becoming ever more powerful, not just militarily. The USA is threatened by the economic growth of China. This is the first time in 50 years a country has been able to challenge the USA economically. China will be a modern democratic country before the end my life to be sure and this is the last thing the USA wants.

[AdamNF]

$1:

Telling me that nations will begin to start building weapons because of the BMD system is the same as telling me that burglars will now target my house because I installed an alarm system.

Your analogy sounds good and all but it is false. The missile shield is missiles shooting down missiles. The USA will be making major steps forward in missile technology and this will lead more research by countries like China. Therefore an arms is easily the result.

[Scape]

Godz46 Godz46:

So why don't you think there shoudl be some kind of defense mechanism in place?

I didn't say that. I said the BMD is not the right one. Everyone will be taking a serious look at resources, we are in America's back yard, by default they get 1st dibs and nothing will change that. We can use that to encourage certain behavior with the nations that do trade with us to promote stable relations with the world community.

BMD is upping the ante of the arms race and as such it is a gamble that hopefully no one will call their bluff. The higher the stakes and a more unstable world market. Have you looked at Chinese banking system? There is so much graft in it that it makes the Russian banking system look stable and China owns over 2.2 trillion of the US debt in T-bills! BMD is adding weight to a system that is inherently unstable and is reckless by design.

Canada's role should be in promoting STABLE and sustainable policies that in the interests of the world communities best long term interests as a whole. If that means we must sacrifice some lateral control of policy (IE Kyoto) then so be it. Our standard of living will be far superior over what we would have if the entire system collapses from either an economic or military meltdown.

[Scape]

Godz46 Godz46:

IN the early 1900's Reaserch and Development for the United States Air Force cost a fortune. It literally sucked the entire US Defense Budget. Now the US air force has technologically progressed, becoming more advanced, more powerfull and more efficent. It was essential in World War 2. Its now a necessity for the secuirty of the skies. And is capable of shooting any other foriegn-made airjet. What's funny about the whole thing is, your arguments are exactly the same that Theodore Roosevelt had to face when he aksed congress to certify the US Air Force. It costs too much, it won't work, we'll be in more danger, it will spark up an race of destruction between them and the Europeans. 90 years later...you tell me...what's a nation's army without an air force nowadays?

Such an argument has potential. Example the Dragon Eye or the Global Hawk but it is another game all to together when your escalating the global nuclear arms race.

[dgthe3]

An arms race occurs mainly occurs because of fear that the other side will be at an advantage over you and you can afford to build up your forces. This could happen with China and the US. I would be affraid if it did. However, i do not think that it will occur because of the US building a missile defence, it may cause China to build one of it's own, but the idea is that an attack would be futile. In reality that would stull be true because the US would still nuke anyones ass if they got hit themselves.

[Scape]

The problem is with such brinkmanship is we don't know when we have gone past the point of no return. Right now every major nuclear superpower has the potential to destroy the planet by themselves. All they have to do is attack themselves with their arsenal and the disruption to the global ecosystem would be so catastrophic that it would trigger a nuclear winter. No missile defence can defend vs that.

What BMD does is negate the potential of a strike but it also would allow the US to strike with impunity. IE: they could hit 1st by knocking out a countries defence without them being able to react. Such a system of total spectrum dominance in not currently in place but that is the eventual plan. In the process of developing such a plan, in full view of anyone not on the plan, would precipitate a strike.

[dgthe3]

$1:

"The Art of War"...you take out and pund the powerfull economic and military strongholds (Cities), eliminating and weakning any resistance then you grab what you want.

Where on earth did you read that? In the art of war, the following statements are made

In III Attack by Stratagem:

$1:

1. Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good

4. The rule is, not to besiege walled cities if it can possibly be avoided

I would like to know what it was that you were reading when you made that interpretation of yours

[GreatBriton]

Scape Scape:

What if we decided to sign on with the EU?

I'd advise you not to. The Anglo-Saxon economies are performing much better than the Continental European countries. The UK is the fastest-growing large economy in Europe, with growth of about 3.2%, compared to the sluggish growth of the major Continental powers. Germany's economic growth this year is expected to be around 0.9%! And it's economy, along with Italy's, SHRANK in size last year.

Anglo-Saxon countries also have much lower unemployment levels. Britain's unemployment rate is only about 3%, which is the third LOWEST unemployment rate in the Western World after Ireland and Luxembourg. By contrast, Germany has an unemployment of 11% and France has 10%.

The reason why the Continental EU countries are performing badly compared to booming Britain is because they have the Euro, and those countries do NOT control their own currencies and even their own economies (I suppose you can't even call them countries anymore) and are therefore not able to set interest rates to their own advantage. Instead, the European Central Bank controls the interest rates of all the countries that have adopted the Euro, but because all the different countries need to have different interest rates then some countries must suffer and have interest rates that are bad for them. There will be situations when Ireland needs higher interest rates but Germany needs lower interest rates, so the ECB decides to lower the interest rates, and Ireland suffers.

Britain still has the pound, and is therefore able to control interest rates always to her own advantage, and that is why our economy is booming, with high growth and low unemployment.

So, if you want Canada to experience high unemployment, low economic growth, loss of sovereignty, then join the EU and the Euro.

You may also eventually lose the superior Anglo-Saxon code of justice, and adopt the Continental, Napoleonic system, where (unlike in the UK, US and Canada) you are guilty until you are proven innocent, have no trial by jury, lose the right where you can NOT be tried for the same crime twice etc etc. All of those are practised in the Continental EU countries.