12-03-2008, 09:49 AM
|
#161
|
In the Sin Bin
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan
The rest of those seem to be the exceptions that prove the rule. Thanks!
|
Translation: "Oh crap! My argument just got shredded all to hell. I'll just dismiss it. They'll never see through that! I'm so smrt. he he."
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 09:51 AM
|
#162
|
 Posted the 6 millionth post!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
The US protects us NOW.
|
The U.S. protects Canada now.
I'm shocked as to how many people here just expect U.S. military protection.
Alberta would have one of the longest inland national borders in the world. Any suggestion of having no military presence is ridiculous. Even if it is just a national guard type force, they would need to be armed in the event of something happening.
Absolutely ludicrious to suggest otherwise.
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 09:53 AM
|
#163
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the Sin Bin
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
Translation: "Oh crap! My argument just got shredded all to hell. I'll just dismiss it. They'll never see through that! I'm so smrt. he he."
|
So comparing two obscure island nations, one former U.S. protectorate and Central American country proves that you don't need a military?
Present that analysis to a decision maker and see how far you get.
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 09:55 AM
|
#164
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan
Well Switzerland has an army so that point is just flat out false.
The rest of those seem to be the exceptions that prove the rule. Thanks!
|
It sure does and and 2 years of military service is compulsory for male citizens.... the "active" number of soldiers is one of the highest among European countries.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to redforever For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-03-2008, 09:55 AM
|
#165
|
 Posted the 6 millionth post!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
Translation: "Oh crap! My argument just got shredded all to hell. I'll just dismiss it. They'll never see through that! I'm so smrt. he he."
|
So four countries have no military, while the other 200+ countries do?
Yes, Alberta should lead by Grenada's example!
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Ozy_Flame For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-03-2008, 09:55 AM
|
#166
|
In the Sin Bin
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan
So comparing two obscure island nations, one former U.S. protectorate and Central American country proves that you don't need a military?
Present that analysis to a decision maker and see how far you get.
|
They aren't sovereign states?
You did say "ANY" sovereign state, afterall.
Maybe next time you should spend more time presenting a proper argument, and less basking in your own glory.
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 09:56 AM
|
#167
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the Sin Bin
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
They aren't sovereign states?
You did say "ANY" sovereign state, afterall.
Maybe next time you should spend more time presenting a proper argument, and less basking in your own glory.
|
Exceptions proving the rule is a proper argument. You have yet to refute it.
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 09:57 AM
|
#168
|
Dances with Wolves
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Section 304
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by FanIn80
I say we bomb Quebec and take their Maple Syrup. Then move on to Ontario and take their... smog... then Manitoba's irrelevancy... the Maritime's fish... Saskatchewan's wheat and BC's dope... seals from the Territories...
Holy crap. Are we the only province in this country that has anything work stealing?
|
I believe in certain circles that's called a contradiction
But in all seriousness the day Alberta separates is the day I weld a flag pole to the bumper of my car, throw up a Canadian flag and drive the hell out of this province. I'm a proud Canadian. I really like Calgary and I love the rockies, but beyond that I'm not sure how proud of an Albertan I am.
I also think a lot of you are also missing one important thing:
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 09:58 AM
|
#169
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
Wouldn't bother me one iota if Alberta was it's own country. We have been virtually all along anyway. We are at best ignored and often abused. Against that I see a "increasingly vague sense of Canadian identity"(is that what I feel when I join with the rest in never bothering to sing the anthem?) and we might have some trade challenges. Trade challenges for a province that is known for it's hard working entrepreneurial spirit.(whoopee ding).
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 09:59 AM
|
#170
|
In the Sin Bin
|
Actually, I already have.
You have yet to explain why we need any kind of significant military presence given that 1) Canada couldnt stand up to the US now, and 2) nobody else in the world is going to invade a country that shares a border with the US.
A force that can respond to internal emergencies is one thing, a force that could be a presence in the world is not possible. It's barely possible for Canada.
There are plrenty of reasons to argue why Alberta couldn't work as an independent country. You and Ozy seem to be tied up in one of the weakest arguments out there.
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 10:04 AM
|
#171
|
 Posted the 6 millionth post!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
Actually, I already have.
A force that can respond to internal emergencies is one thing, a force that could be a presence in the world is not possible. It's barely possible for Canada.
|
Who said anything about Alberta having a military force as a presence in the world? We weren't arguing that at all - you're only choosing what you want to hear from this.
The original point was that the nation of Alberta will need some sort of military force to call upon in the time of need. They need to be fully equipped and ready to defend against foreign invaders, whomever that might be.
No one hear said Alberta has to match the U.S. Army. That's your own delusional spin on this argument.
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 10:09 AM
|
#172
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the Sin Bin
|
Quote:
You have yet to explain why we need any kind of significant military presence given that 1) Canada couldnt stand up to the US now, and 2) nobody else in the world is going to invade a country that shares a border with the US.
|
Following this logic, Canada does not need a military. Do you agree with this statement?
Quote:
There are plrenty of reasons to argue why Alberta couldn't work as an independent country. You and Ozy seem to be tied up in one of the weakest arguments out there.
|
And I've presented some other reasons in this thread. Feel free to educate yourself on them.
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 10:09 AM
|
#173
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auckland, NZ
|
Here's a question, that I don't really know the answer in anyway for: Does the U.S. protect Mexico? If Mexico were to be attacked, would the U.S. militarily defend Mexico?
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 10:09 AM
|
#174
|
Fearmongerer
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
|
Quote:
The original point was that the nation of Alberta will need some sort of military force to call upon in the time of need. They need to be fully equipped and ready to defend against foreign invaders, whomever that might be.
|
No they wouldn't...that's what the US does as a neighbor, always has and always will.
What would change just because Alberta was no longer part of a Confederation?
Especially when Alberta could be a massive source of energy for them as well as a trade partner?
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 10:11 AM
|
#175
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the Sin Bin
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
No they wouldn't...that's what the US does as a neighbor, always has and always will.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan
Following this logic, Canada does not need a military. Do you agree with this statement?
|
10char
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 10:11 AM
|
#176
|
Fearmongerer
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan
Following this logic, Canada does not need a military. Do you agree with this statement?
.
|
Only if they want to reneg on their NATO obligations as well as any peace keeping missions worldwide.
Does ANYONE here believe that Canada's military, as it stands today, would be able to hold off any significant threat from another country without the help of the USA?
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 10:12 AM
|
#177
|
Fearmongerer
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan
10char
|
What the hell does this mean?
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 10:13 AM
|
#178
|
In the Sin Bin
|
No, Canada does not *need* a military at this point. Not as a world force.
That it chooses to maintain one is commendable, and I fully support our involvement in Afghanistan.
Alberta alone would be in a far different situation.
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 10:14 AM
|
#179
|
Franchise Player
|
A basic question to answer would be "Under what circumstances would the United States recognize either Alberta or Quebec as its own country?"
|
|
|
12-03-2008, 10:15 AM
|
#180
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auckland, NZ
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
No they wouldn't...that's what the US does as a neighbor, always has and always will.
What would change just because Alberta was no longer part of a Confederation?
Especially when Alberta could be a massive source of energy for them as well as a trade partner?
|
You do know, that without an Albertan military, the United States could just waltz up anytime and invade with not just relative ease, but complete ease if they wanted to... right? If that ever happened, what would have been the point of a free and independent Alberta?
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:49 PM.
|
|