Does CANADA deserve to be whipped by US?

I thought eveybody kissed and made up.

 

It was a joke, Dennis. As Bill gave Bill the same response he gave me... Oh geez, never mind

 

You are assuming that I actually read and was following the exchanges - Not.

 

Re: Orson

YUP.

Wars with Canada" Hmmm. Let us count the ways!!!

I searched "wars with Canada" using the yahoo.com search engine. There were 16 hits.
What were the contents? "fish wars with Canada," "tariff wars with Canada," "grain wars with Canada," and "trade wars with Canada." Then it repeats.

Tell me--is there some conspiracy to hide the animus generated through these alleged "5 invasions" of Canada by the evil citizens of the US?

Seriously, if I recall my US diplomatic history correctly, didn't all of these "invasions" come in response to fears that the colonies of Canada would be a back door threat for invading Brits, or else the hope of converting wayward Canucks into rebels of the Mother country?

And weren't these invasions mostly, if not always, conducted by local militias or irregualars?--and didn't they all come before Canada recieved her (nominal) independence ("Confederation" of 1867), and thus became, legally, more like the US than an mere appendage of Britian?

SO much for your "war theory" of US-Canadian relations.

And since we are talking about real war, not these metaphores of war that peaceful nations employ when they haggle over bona fide differences of real economic seriouness--not military wars--perhaps you'll care to discuss the "war resolutions" involved and ennumerate the loss of life from these wars? (If there are any such "numbers," I'm sure the deaths from these economic conflicts of peacetime will outnumber them--and I'm sure not letting you count the Reil's Rebellion here!)

A University of Calgary history site states:
"The American threat to Canada was considered quite real [in the West] but Britain provided security for Canada. [Uh oh! Britian: I can see a problem here, considering the many many lives lost in America's War for Independence from Britian--who paid a price Canucks NEVER had to pay! Ya INGRAQTE!!! ]Canada’s security problems were internal. The real need was for the maintenance of law and order....

SO you're gonna count these threatened "invasions" as more impoprtant than your own uppity Canucks? I guess you'll just have to take up your point with the authorities at Calgary first!
http://www.stratnet.ucalgary.ca/elearning/module3/readings/canmilwest.htm

[/i]

America's creation is based on violence, war and hostile aggression. Did America take California and Texas as territories by peaceful means?[/QUOTE]

In reality, the ugliness you deride was a function of western settlement. In the 1840s, over a hundred thousand whites passd through Indian lands to the westcoast with less than a dozen native American deaths. (My authoritative reference books are not handy enough for me to be precise.)

PRACTICALLY all the "violence" and "war" you allude to took place either during or after the Civil War. What was the releveant factor there? Armies, mostly in peacetime, stationed on the frontier became enbroigled in conflicts that could then be settled with force, that under different conditions were settled by peaceful means! (Source? Study by economist Terry Anderson, Journal of Law and Economics, 1980s--republished by the author in book form in the 90s.)

The lesson? The founders were right to distrust standing Armies--a lesson that Britain made possible, and that Canada has benefited mightily by!! (AND one which the US is yet to re-learn, I know.)

[/i]


Let's explore some more historical reality...Explain "Manifest Destiny" to me...SHOOT!!!

[SNIP!]
[/QUOTE]

THE one unanswered exception to the last section of my reply (above) was the War with Mexico, 1846 (and of course the War with Spain, 1898, which marks the US real start with Imperialism--c.f., "our" colony, the Phillipines). And this was where and when "manifest destiny" by a journalist was promoted and did result in a war of aggression, despite a lack of standing armies. In this case (as well as Spain in 1898), I can only agree: the US was wrong! Morally wrongl Here you are right to tweak my American nose. (But how does this relate to the claim of the US being "the greatest threat to world peace" today...?)

Yet what were the (admittedly) unjustifiable pragmatic consequences? In fact, when the US got much of the West between 1847 and California's independence from Mexico, the popular result was more welcoming than resistance!
(SOURCE: Professor Bradley Birzer, Dept. of history, at either Ashland University, Ohio, or Hillsdale College, Michigan.)

AND so, as it was in the 19th century West, and as it was in Afghanistan in 2002 (when 2 million civil war refugees returned after the US contribution to world peace there, achievements hailed by UN and other relief workers that have gone unheard thoughout the recent debate)--DO YOU DOUBT that a liberated Iraq will be recieved any differently by Iraqis?

(HERE's my money--where's yours?)

--Orson

 

Re: Orson

And while we're learning form history, I do recall who did even worse to abuse innocent peoples than the US own, post-Pearl Harbor bombing, forcible internment of Japanese-Americans....Canada!!!

AND Canada wasn't even attacked!!!!

No, to be sure, the one time democracy is even messier than normal is during war-time.

If Kane will agree to this truth, I will cease my defense, and dispense with the uglier details.

--Orson

 

Orson, Orson, Orson

There were at least 5 American invasions of Canada, if you add up the incursions during the American Revolution and the War of 1812 which were definitely under US Army orders plus the Fenien raids shortly after the Civil War, which were disgruntled (any other kind?) Irish.

Canadian militia were responsible for the early victories of the War of 1812 and were part of later victories attached to British regulars.

Ontario was settled by refugees from the brutality of the American Revolution and the citizens were decidedly more motivated than the state militias facing death a long way from home.

The date July 1, 1867 is usually put forth, by ourselves, as Canada's independence day, when in fact it was only the date of unification of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick into Canada.

Before 1867 Canada was an internally self governing democracy and until 1931 was still subject to British foreign policy. It wasn't as if there was ever a British boot on our chests. In fact, during times of peace, the British garrison was minimal.

To a large degree throughout history, Canada has defined itself as not being American.

Our history has been one of transition rather than revolution. We had rebellions in 1837 in Ontario and Quebec and in 1870 in Saskatchewan but these were put down, mostly by militia, at the cost of maybe 200 lives in total for all three. A history of America, is, by contrast, a history of war.