Canada, U.S. agree to share troops in civil emergencies

[Azure]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

This response doesn't make sense...Maybe that's my fault for not stating how I feel about it.

I personally don't have a problem with US aid if a situation ever arose where we couldn't help ourselves. That's the basic purpose of allies...

I'm simply stating that it's another move in a long list of efforts aimed at bringing out nations closer together. Is that a horrible thing? No. Am I worried about what it may eventually lead to? Yes.

Exactly.

You worried about it eventually leading to the US helping us in a time of emergency.

Strange.

The US is never going to invade Canada. Nor are they going to take over. And the NAU is someones pipedream.

Geez.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Azure

Exactly.

You worried about it eventually leading to the US helping us in a time of emergency.

Strange.

The US is never going to invade Canada. Nor are they going to take over. And the NAU is someones pipedream.

Geez.

Your ability to see the future is amazing!

I wonder what makes you so sure of yourself given the facts, but there's no point reopening this debate. Time will tell.

[Gugstanley]

The two country's militaries already work together all of the time. So I don't know why this is such a big deal.

I've lived in Canada and the United States and to me both countries have a lot of great people. I find it hard to understand why working together would worry anyone.

Maybe I had better go watch Canadian bacon again

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Gugstanley

The two country's militaries already work together all of the time. So I don't know why this is such a big deal.

I've lived in Canada and the United States and to me both countries have a lot of great people. I find it hard to understand why working together would worry anyone.

Maybe I had better go watch Canadian bacon again

Its not so much working together......because we do....but that people see a conspiracy in everything.

Instead of looking at this agreement as a mutual pact between two allies to help each other out....it ALWAYS has to be something more.

ALWAYS.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by worth

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/can...html?id=327869

Opinions?

I don't like it. The thought of having foreign troops on Canadian soil doesn't sit well with me no matter what the situation. I know this is kind of "preliminary", however I don't really want to think about the day I see American troops walking down the street.

Non-story story here.

Umm this already happens. Canadian troops have helped in the US many times when disaster struck. US troops have helped in Canada.

As for foreign troops on our soil. Guess we should tell NATO to take a hike? Damn, Germans, Italians, Brits!!!!

Nevermind the Japanese, Australians, Indian etc that occasionally come here.

[J pold]

Ha Ha you North American Union Honks

Keep it too youtube user comments please

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by worth

We should be able to sustain a force in which Canadian troops are the ones carrying children away from a disaster I guess is what i'm saying.

Anyway, I guess i'd hate the day I see any troops dispatched for civil duty. Rather have the police handle things if at all possible.

I guess you don't remember the Red River Flood in the 90s. I was living in Manitoba at the time and we didn't mind seeing the army there.

[chris lindberg]

http://www.canadianactionparty.ca/home.html

[CaptainCrunch]

I have no trouble with this at all. Its nice to have the additional manpower in terms of civil emergencies. Even with the purchase of the C130J's and one C141 (I think), we still don't have the aviation lift capability to respond to major catastrophes, especially if more then one occurs at the same time.

Our armed forces in a lot of ways are integrated in terms of tactics, equipment and communications protocol, we also share logistics and staging planning with the Americans. this just clears the legalities if its ever required. As it stands at any one time we have plenty of foreign troops on our soil for training, we also have American troops billeted her due to out Norad integration.

I don't see how this is going to lead to a North American Union, where we have a shared Military under the Command of a common command structure dominated by American's. The voters wouldn't allow it.

As far as I'm concerned this is nothing but good proactive planning.

I have no problem with the American's assist Canada by deploying transport troops, search and rescue and their excellent engineers. And the U.S. if they ever need it, wouldn't mind the same.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Non-story story here.

Umm this already happens. Canadian troops have helped in the US many times when disaster struck. US troops have helped in Canada.

As for foreign troops on our soil. Guess we should tell NATO to take a hike? Damn, Germans, Italians, Brits!!!!

Nevermind the Japanese, Australians, Indian etc that occasionally come here.

I don't see why is this necessary then? You are correct, this happens plenty already, so what exactly does this change?

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

I don't see why is this necessary then? You are correct, this happens plenty already, so what exactly does this change?

I am not sure to what you are refering. The article or the agreement? My comment?

The article is just a information space filler. The agreement is just something done so that everyone knows what to do, etc, etc....

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by HOZ

I am not sure to what you are refering. The article or the agreement? My comment?

I was refering to the agreement. I don't see why it's necessary, because as you stated, we already go onto each others soil when needed.

I see no point to this agreement.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Gugstanley

The two country's militaries already work together all of the time. So I don't know why this is such a big deal.

Exactly. When I worked for DND, we had alot of USA troops trained here. We also had lots from Belgium, England, etc too.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

I was refering to the agreement. I don't see why it's necessary, because as you stated, we already go onto each others soil when needed.

I see no point to this agreement.

When it comes to sovereignty you need agreements. Just so everyone knows what to do, allowed, acceptable, etc.....when things happen.

Bureaucracy....
Who is in charge where and when
What can be done.
When things go wrong what to do...
Who gets to be on TV when things are going right and conversely who HAS to be on TV when it is going wrong.

Lots of piddley things so no one gets their feather ruffled