babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » election 2006   » "Star Wars"

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: "Star Wars"
mkwb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5939

posted 17 June 2004 07:47 PM      Profile for mkwb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Just out of curiosity I would like to get some opinions about the opposition to a missle defence system.

Currently, USA and Canada have a co-operative partnership (and control - though not even) on NORAD and have had it for quite some time.

Now, with the USA wanting to install a new missle defence system, the NORAD program will become obsolete and thus our part of control over it will be meaningless.

In contrast, if we do not sign on to the star wars program we will have no control of this system which then will be run by Americans, and likly on our soil -- which doesnt make me entirly comfortable.

Now, are people that are opposed to the Star Wars also opposed to Norad? Also, wouldnt we want to have some control over a system that is going to be put in place any way?

However, I may be tottally on the wrong side of the spectrum when it comes to this argument. If I am, please fill me in on the divisive issues which create the opposition to this issue.

I for one have mixed feelings on it but I think if its going to be put in place regardless of our opposition, then we should at least support it so we can have some say over it.


From: Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Kinetix
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5296

posted 17 June 2004 07:51 PM      Profile for Kinetix     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The real question is, why do you think that we'll have any say in it after we sign on?
From: Montréal, Québec | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 17 June 2004 08:15 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
NORAD's been obsolete since the cold war was over. What are supposed to be watching for, the Norwegians to come over the pole at us?

Meanwhile, the missile defense thang is about the worst of all possible worlds. Let's see:
1. It will cost mindboggling amounts of money
2. It won't work.
3. US enthusiasts busily convincing each other it can work, because they need to think that to justify all the fat defense contracts and to make plausible in their minds the dream of bullying more of the world, may convince other major powers there's a danger it could work. So an arms race will be created just as if it worked.
4. Increased international tensions. The possibility, if American hawks really persuade themselves it works, that they'll push a nuclear power too far and trigger a war.
5. The worry that the US will use work on "missile defense" as a smokescreen for mounting offensive weaponry in space. This is something they are officially committed to doing, after all.


OK, so that's what's wrong with it. Now from our perspective 1 and 2 don't matter; who cares if the Yanks spend gigabucks on a white elephant? But 3 through 5 are a concern, and 3 is already happening. The Russians have already unveiled weapons designed fairly specifically to counter the capabilities missile defense would have if it worked, and the Chinese are apparently accelerating their aerospace research and space programs with an eye to improved capability in that area in good part due to worries about US Star Wars plans.

Diplomatically, the problem is that most of the world is dead against it. So once again the question--do we park with the US once more, *for free yet*, and reduce our influence in the rest of the world by being seen as a mere cipher of the US? Or do we retain some diplomatic independence? If I were going to be all pragmatic about supporting this lunacy I'd say OK, if we're going to cast our lot with the US against the rest of the world, we should at least get something out of it.

As things stand, Canada's got way less self respect than a decent whore. We don't demand payment, we don't even wait to be asked, we just get down on our knees and start sucking because we're worried that if we don't, The Man might smack us around. He doesn't even have to make the threats, we're so conditioned that we'll get involved in ethically indefensible, idiot-stupid plans on the basis of hypothetical worries that the US might not think we're his best bitch if we don't jump before we're told.

Sickens me.


From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 17 June 2004 08:22 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rufus Polson:
As things stand, Canada's got way less self respect than a decent whore. We don't demand payment, we don't even wait to be asked, we just get down on our knees and start sucking because we're worried that if we don't, The Man might smack us around. He doesn't even have to make the threats, we're so conditioned that we'll get involved in ethically indefensible, idiot-stupid plans on the basis of hypothetical worries that the US might not think we're his best bitch if we don't jump before we're told.

Sickens me.


Me too. I don't think that Diefenbaker ever understood his folly when he cancelled the Arrow. The Americans understood: Canada can be pushed around. The Americans instinctively knew this and we have been under their thumb ever since.


From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 17 June 2004 08:23 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Our country should be no part of the militarization of outer space. The reluctance of countries other than Canada to be part of U.S. imperial entanglements has had a measureable effect on U.S. policy. We should add our tiny weight to the correct side of the scales. Every bit counts.

Besides, Fortress America is no fortress. Or are you forgetting 9-11? Who needs a missile when you can just pick one up over here anyway?


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 17 June 2004 08:51 PM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rufus Polson:
NORAD's been obsolete since the cold war was over. What are supposed to be watching for, the Norwegians to come over the pole at us?

NORAD is not just obsolete; it destrys our ability to protect our sovreingty. (sp)

The only way that we will ever be secure against U.S. hedgemony will be through developing an extensive conventional warhead battery of cruise missles along the border.It would be relatively inexpensive, but would ensure that any thoughts of attack or invasion from the south would carry unacceptable consequences.

We can't develop that so long as we have NORAD generals peering over our shoulders.


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Johan Boyden
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4661

posted 18 June 2004 12:42 PM      Profile for Johan Boyden   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by JamesR:
NORAD is not just obsolete; it destrys our ability to protect our sovreingty. (sp)

Damn rights. And the only party calling for Canada out of NORAD and NATO is the Communist Party.


From: the working class | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 18 June 2004 12:50 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by JamesR:
The only way that we will ever be secure against U.S. hedgemony will be through developing an extensive conventional warhead battery of cruise missles along the border.It would be relatively inexpensive, but would ensure that any thoughts of attack or invasion from the south would carry unacceptable consequences.

We can't develop that so long as we have NORAD generals peering over our shoulders.


The generals are moot, IMO. The Americans have some pretty good satellite-based intelligence gathering abilities. I also doubt they'd let a missle line pointed their way stand.


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 18 June 2004 02:42 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So make mobile platforms like the Russians did with ICBMs (should be easy, mid-range cruises aren't all that heavy), and then once they're developed, *move* them quietly to where we want 'em. And move them around now and then so it's harder to develop targetting. While we were developing them we could lie and say the mission was to help with NATO duties or something.

They could be rail-based, road-based, or blimp-based. Heck, design the launch platform to fit in a standard shipping container (of course to use it you'd have to open the top) and you could easily move it from a ship to a train to a truck.
Potentially someone could design a small cargo zeppelin to take it wherever you wanted, including parts of Canada where there are no convenient railways or roads, and also run other cargoes. Get Bombardier to make them. You'd have something with which to both supply your peacekeepers and project force/use as a deterrent, and Bombardier would have something to sell on the civilian market as well. And if they did want to sell them on the civilian market, they'd have to keep the prices vaguely non-obscene. It'd be cool.


From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 18 June 2004 03:47 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rufus Polson:
So make mobile platforms like the Russians did with ICBMs (should be easy, mid-range cruises aren't all that heavy), and then once they're developed, *move* them quietly to where we want 'em. And move them around now and then so it's harder to develop targetting. While we were developing them we could lie and say the mission was to help with NATO duties or something.

It's not that the Americans would see where they are deployed. It's that might be able to see them being made, and strike early. As you know, they have a habit of striking.


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
King Ralph
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5941

posted 20 June 2004 01:10 AM      Profile for King Ralph   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Its awesome how blatently anti american u people are. Get a grip, what values do u stand for, because if I had to pick between the united states and other potential super powers im picking the united states. None of you people realize that every day american soldiers are dieing hunting down people that want you and I dead. So get a grip on reality and show some respect.
From: Calgary | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 20 June 2004 01:33 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
LOL! You are quite the satirist, King Ralph.
From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
King Ralph
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5941

posted 20 June 2004 01:39 AM      Profile for King Ralph   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
byron explain to me why China, Nazi Germany, or the Soviet Union would be a better choice to align with? Cause the only stance u guys seem to take is the exact opposite of what any democratic state would take. You have no grasp on reality and its sad.
From: Calgary | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 20 June 2004 02:29 AM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Say, King Ralph, your last name isn't Klein, is it? I read your essay about Allende and Pinochet, and it was just as eloquent, logical and masterfully constructed as your brilliant posts here in this thread. Perhaps, like Churchill, you will be revered not only for your politics, but as a brilliant man of letters, and a recipient of the Nobel Prize for Literature.
From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Erik Pool
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6137

posted 20 June 2004 02:38 AM      Profile for Erik Pool     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rufus Polson:

As things stand, Canada's got way less self respect than a decent whore. We don't demand payment, we don't even wait to be asked, we just get down on our knees and start sucking because we're worried that if we don't, The Man might smack us around. He doesn't even have to make the threats, we're so conditioned that we'll get involved in ethically indefensible, idiot-stupid plans on the basis of hypothetical worries that the US might not think we're his best bitch if we don't jump before we're told.

Sickens me.


You make it sound sickening alright. Tell me, is this the official NDP foreign policy viewpoint, as promulgated by the Great Alexa MacDonough, and the equally Great Svend Robinson?

Oh I'm sorry, I forgot! Svend's no longer running in Bill Cunningham's seat!


From: Burnaby, BC | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gearhead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5182

posted 20 June 2004 02:42 AM      Profile for Gearhead        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by King Ralph:
Its awesome how blatently anti american(sic) u(sic) people are. Get a grip, what values do u(sic) stand for, because if I had to pick between the united states(sic) and other potential super powers im(sic) picking the united states(sic). None of you people realize that every day american(sic) soldiers are dieing(sic) hunting down people that want you and I(sic) dead. So get a grip on reality and show some respect.

I respect your creative use of "language."


From: Edmonton | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Erik Pool
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6137

posted 20 June 2004 02:44 AM      Profile for Erik Pool     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by JamesR:

The only way that we will ever be secure against U.S. hedgemony will be through developing an extensive conventional warhead battery of cruise missles along the border.It would be relatively inexpensive, but would ensure that any thoughts of attack or invasion from the south would carry unacceptable consequences.

We can't develop that so long as we have NORAD generals peering over our shoulders.



Hey JamesR, you're some kind of lawyer or paralegalm, aren't you? I mean you're not some GM shop steward or first year social work student, you're a mature professional person, right?

So now tell me this. Is the passage above an accurate reflection of what you really think? Do you think its the official NDP foreign policy or close to it, as developed by Svend Robinson and Alexa MacDonough? Do you think Jack Layton would like to be associated with your 49trh parallel cruise missile plan? Just asking.


From: Burnaby, BC | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
King Ralph
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5941

posted 20 June 2004 03:37 AM      Profile for King Ralph   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Gearhead:

I respect your creative use of "language."


Gearhead go strike, cause unions are still really important in the work place


From: Calgary | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 20 June 2004 03:54 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey, how about those Beaumark missiles that we bought off the Yanks way back when?. I think they had a range of about 300 miles. Perfect!

Duck and cover all over again?. I think the Yanks just want us be a target for nukes with Uncle Sam stamped all over them. A diversion while Dr. Strangelove and General Ripper have time to make it into a bunker.

The Soviets stabbed the military industrial complex in the back when they conceded the cold war. Now they Yanks are running out of enemies and having to turn old friends into foes - Osama bin Laden and his mercenaries.

Let's see, the weather today will be sunny with terror alert elevated to ultra violet. That should keep the working class slobs in a constant state of anxiety and wanting to fork out for militarist-Keynesianism while they shift more of the tax burden onto us economic serfs.

I agree with Rufus and the rest of the peaceniks. The best, most powerful instruments of peace will always be social democracy and wide spread prosperity. If Star wars and nukes are that great, then let Stephen Harper and Paul Martin shove them sideways. A good thing won't hurt them.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Raos
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5702

posted 20 June 2004 03:59 AM      Profile for Raos     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by King Ralph:
byron explain to me why China, Nazi Germany, or the Soviet Union would be a better choice to align with? Cause the only stance u guys seem to take is the exact opposite of what any democratic state would take. You have no grasp on reality and its sad.

Because so many people have said that's exactly what they're going for. Especially since, of the three entities you chose, only one of them still exists. Who's supposed to get a grip on reality?


From: Sweet home Alaberta | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 20 June 2004 04:43 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Funding Hitler and Nazi Germany was a pet project for several American billionaires for ten or so years leading up to late 1942. Roosevelt put a stop to it. Apparently, there was a plot by corporate fascists in the States to overthrow Roosevelt because he was viewed as unfriendly to big business. Henry Ford wrote a book called, The International Jew which Adolf read while doing time for treason. Henry's thoughts inspired Adolf to write mein kampf or 'my struggle', a book of lies. Prescott Bush, of Union Banking Corporation who was diverting funds to Hitler, was later a politician himself and worked for the cause of eugenics in the United States. The voters turned their backs on him. And now, both Stephen Harper and Paul Martin want desperately to lick his grandson's boots, president Dubya.

I don't know about you, but I would trust the Yanks very much at all. It's time to for peace and prosperity, not death and destruction ... again. Conservatives always get it wrong.

forget the editing, I'm spent. night all.

[ 20 June 2004: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gearhead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5182

posted 20 June 2004 10:49 AM      Profile for Gearhead        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by King Ralph:
Gearhead go strike, cause unions are still really important in the work place

The self-employed don't need to. Kind of like Ralph Klein, no?

So the idea that the Liberals want in on a multi-billion dollar space dream created by Ronnie Raygun doesn't make you reconsider? The BMD system that will be "deployed" this year cannot work. They might his missiles when testing it, but only when the target has a homing beacon that tells the destroyer where it needs to go.

This is a bad idea, moreover, Martin should not have awarded David Pratt, the hawk who wanted Canada in Iraq, with the Ministry of Defence. This guy has shown poor judgement on a central responsibility of his ministry: war.


From: Edmonton | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hawkins
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3306

posted 20 June 2004 11:03 AM      Profile for Hawkins     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wont someone one please think of the Children?

Americans need to read history - the bigger the dreadnaught the more likely a war is going to come .


From: Burlington Ont | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 20 June 2004 12:11 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by King Ralph:
byron explain to me why China, Nazi Germany, or the Soviet Union would be a better choice to align with? Cause the only stance u guys seem to take is the exact opposite of what any democratic state would take. You have no grasp on reality and its sad.

The satire just gets better Ralph. You have a genius for this sort of thing.


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 20 June 2004 11:22 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's amusing to note that, as is usually the case with our more trollish right-wingers, they never actually engaged a single point made. Lots of cliches, though--we could play bingo.
From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca