MyMp3Board.com Forum Index
 
http://forum.mymp3board.com MyMp3Board.com   FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 

The Annexation of Canada (I can't believe this is happening)
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    MyMp3Board.com Forum Index -> WARZONE-ARCHIVES
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
russky joe



Joined: 16 Nov 2004
Posts: 271

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 5:28 pm    Post subject: yeah Reply with quote

"The World is at the crossroads of the most serious crisis in modern history. The US has launched a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity."



'Nuff said. What I've suspected for a long time.



I'm a footloose kinda guy, I got an in-demand trade and I'm only half-American. Screw this, I'm gonna try to get a permanent job in Europe and apply for citizenship, and if that don't work out I'll try Australia or New Zealand.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitwhys



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 5:43 pm    Post subject: The Annexation of Canada (I can't believe this is happening) Reply with quote

This is getting serious. More serious than I realized. I was aware of the Ballistic Missile initiative and the Smart Borders pact had me rolling my eyes, but I've never seen the whole nine yards spelled out like this before.



Stay the hell out my country, America:rant



Quote:
The creation of NORTHCOM announced in April 2002, constitutes a blatant violation of both Canadian and Mexican territorial sovereignty. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced unilaterally that US Northern Command would have jurisdiction over the entire North American region. Canada and Mexico were presented with a fait accompli. US Northern Command's jurisdiction as outlined by the US DoD includes, in addition to the continental US, all of Canada, Mexico, as well as portions of the Caribbean, contiguous waters in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans up to 500 miles off the Mexican, US and Canadian coastlines as well as the Canadian Arctic.




Is the Annexation of Canada part of Bush's Military Agenda? - by Michel Chossudovsky



The word is getting out slowly. Its my sincere hope the protests in Ottawa next week turn DEADLY serious.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Master68



Joined: 04 Nov 2004
Posts: 442

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 9:41 pm    Post subject: Re: yeah Reply with quote

If this is happening, why isn't it all over the news?



This is the 1st thing I have heard about it...

--------------

When you argue with a fool, be sure he isn't similarly occupied...

--------------

Music - Organismo Cibernetico (Cybernetic Organism)

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DreamTone7



Joined: 20 Sep 2002
Posts: 2571

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:36 pm    Post subject: re Reply with quote

A lot of lame knee-jerk assumptions in the article bitwhys posted. What it actually sounds like is a type of "NATO", and is subject to Parliament approval. NATO countries were never taken over by the United States in the fashion implied in that article. I'd like to see the actually proposal as opposed to the personal assumptions made by someone who is obvisously highly reactionary. But I can understand why it might be a concern for Canadians. Once what's at stake is understood clearly, let your voices be heard.

Melody and Instruments for the soul...

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitwhys



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:05 pm    Post subject: Re: re Reply with quote

Quote:
A lot of lame knee-jerk assumptions in the article bitwhys posted




such as?

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DreamTone7



Joined: 20 Sep 2002
Posts: 2571

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:16 pm    Post subject: re Reply with quote

"The creation of NORTHCOM announced in April 2002, constitutes a blatant violation of both Canadian and Mexican territorial sovereignty."



Oh, really? I wasn't aware that anyone's sovereignty had been violated.



"US has launched a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity. It has formulated the contours of an imperial project of World domination. Canada is contiguous to "the center of the empire". Territorial control over Canada is part of the US geopolitical and military agenda."



:rollin :rollin :rollin



"The Liberals as well as the opposition Conservative party have endorsed embraced the US war agenda."



:aua "war agenda"! :aua



...nah...the guy who wrote this is looking to stir up reaction to further (or fodder) his cause. I'll wait for the actual proposal, first...thank you very much.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitwhys



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:27 pm    Post subject: Re: re Reply with quote

from the first link



Quote:
The new command was given responsibility for the continental United States, Canada, Mexico, portions of the Caribbean and the contiguous waters in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans up to 500 miles off the North American coastline. NorthCom's mandate is to "provide a necessary focus for [continental] aerospace, land and sea defenses, and critical support for [the] nation’s civil authorities in times of national need."



Rumsfeld boasted that the introduction of NorthCom – with all of North America as its geographic command – "is part of the greatest transformation of the Unified Command Plan since its inception in 1947."



NorthCom is a wholly American command. Inescapably, however, its presence will profoundly influence those other states included within its geographic area of responsibility. Canadian military and political leaders, mindful of historic and continuing military ties to the United States, have engaged in an increasing number of debates regarding the significance of this singular UCP revision. The formation of NorthCom has revived familiar disputes regarding the need to cooperate with the US in continental defence, weighed against the likely impact of such cooperation on our nation's sovereignty.








well, as a Canadian "whether you like it or not" isn't something I'm willing to accept out of hand.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitwhys



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:30 pm    Post subject: Re: re Reply with quote

war agenda?



right.



Bush is the peace president.



and his handlers want to sell roses.



PNAC

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitwhys



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:42 pm    Post subject: Re: re Reply with quote

oh yeah



Quote:
subject to Parliament approval




wrong again

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DreamTone7



Joined: 20 Sep 2002
Posts: 2571

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:46 pm    Post subject: re Reply with quote

All that you quoted may or may not be part of a proposal (as in, not something that has happened yet)...we'll see exactly what the proposal is when it comes out, I hope. It would not be the first time I've seen an article that put these kind of words into the mouth of Rumsfeld or somebody else, only to find out later that it was a load of rubbish.



I am not so fast to swollow everything I see on the internet just because it is a written piece of work.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitwhys



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:51 pm    Post subject: Re: re Reply with quote

check the map on the NORTHCOM site. remember its American. look at it real hard and get back to me when you see where the borders are drawn.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DreamTone7



Joined: 20 Sep 2002
Posts: 2571

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:59 am    Post subject: re Reply with quote

This is just a change in the way that US forces are structured. Prior to this, we had PACCOM (Pacific Command) and LANTCOM (Atlantic Command). Following your line of thought (or that of the author who wrote that article), the orginal formation of these two commands would have meant that the US intended to invade both Europe and Asia! Nuts. It's the nature of the threat that requires this type of restructure. The existance of PACCOM does not, nor did it ever, mean that the US was going to take over islands in the Pacific Ocean. Australia, Japan, The Phillipines, etc. all remain sovereign countries. These are what is known, in military terms (since I am ex-Navy) as spheres of operation...not spheres of conquest! Again, let's wait and see the proposal for what actual changes, if any, are being proposed to the way business is now done.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Master68



Joined: 04 Nov 2004
Posts: 442

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 1:09 am    Post subject: Re: re Reply with quote

Yeah, if we were taking over Canada & Mexico, I would have heard about it somewhere besides a message board.



That's big-time news..

--------------

When you argue with a fool, be sure he isn't similarly occupied...

--------------

Music - Organismo Cibernetico (Cybernetic Organism)

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitwhys



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 1:10 am    Post subject: Re: re Reply with quote

now who's jumping to conclusions

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitwhys



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 649

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 1:36 am    Post subject: Re: re Reply with quote

ok ok. so the thread topic is a little overdramatic but Bush's crew has already shown total disdain for the intent of agreements. with us (Canada), he even openly ignores the letter of the law.



Quote:
The purpose of this detailed report is to encourage discussion and debate in Canada and Quebec, as well as in the US.




what is going on with NORTHCOM, the Smart Borders Declaration, and the BGP is not something that can be allowed to quietly slip throught the cracks.



quite frankly, IMO the less Canada is associated with the US military machine the better.



I want to see Ottawa agree to what's really needed and not one inch more. That includes telling Bush to put those new missiles of his in Jesusland where they belong.



there always has been cooperation. what is frightening is the entire thing is being renegotiated and the majority of people are totally unaware of it.



if we "wait and see" without knowing what to watch for, when this thing surfaces at the time of their choosing it could very easily be too late.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    MyMp3Board.com Forum Index -> WARZONE-ARCHIVES All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Template designed by Darkmonkey Designs

Anti Bot Question MOD - phpBB MOD against Spam Bots
Blocked registrations / posts: 152159 / 0