Bush Speaks to Canadians

Sirian · Post by **Sirian** » Wed Dec 01, 2004 1:37 pm

Those of you from Canada, did you see the American President's speech today in Halifax? I'm interested in hearing your reactions to the speech, but chiefly from those who actually heard or witnessed the speech in its entirety (as opposed to reactions to soundbites).

- Sirian

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:01 pm

Listened to the speech in Halifax on the CBC website. Mr. Bush was very gracious in his thanks to the Canadian people for their support both during the crisis in 2001 and throughout our history together but if I had to put a word to the speech it would be "Scarey"
He only really hit his stride while speaking on military matters. It was battle and glory the whole way. It was only when he talked of fighting and enforcing that there was any passion in his voice. It is clear the U.S. is on a war footing.
I would love to get a word count on "Freedom" it was in constant use. How convienietly he skips over the U.S. support for Pakistan's murderous dictator General Mushareef who holds power by military force and justifies it with a fraudulent referendum. Instead it is the freedom of the Afghani people (except those ruled by the warlords in the south) and that gets top billing. It is the middle east that will get freedom not the suffering people of Zimbabwe and the rest of Africa.
He calls for a multilateral organization that will enforce it's censure of states. Would he like the UN to enforce it's resloutions that Israel withdraw to it's pre '67 boundaries? Or does he only want resolutions he favors to be enforced?
Scarey.

Sirian · Post by **Sirian** » Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:35 pm

Ford wrote:It was only when he talked of fighting and enforcing that there was any passion in his voice.

Were we listening to the same speech? I heard passion in his thanks to Canadians for their kindness to stranded Americans in the wake of 9-11. He cited an American who claimed that his Canadian guests taught him the meaning of friendship with their generous and selfless assistance. Sounded passionate to me. I thought his joke about Hockey was passionate, too. I was caught off guard by it, he was speaking so intently.

Anyway, thank you for responding. I wanted to know if Canadians were at all warmed or encouraged by the speech, and so far we're 0 for 1.

If it is news to you that America is on a war path, then I don't know what to say. You think we've been joking about the War on Terror? You think we're talking metaphorically, as we have too often in the past by abusing the word "war": the war on drugs, the war on poverty, the war on pollution, etc. No, this is very serious business to us, and if that frightens you more than do the terrorists, then I dare say that something is out of whack in your culture, and THAT is as scary to us as this speech was for you.

Canadians find America scary these days? It's a sorry state of affairs for sure. Perhaps 9-11 was more successful in driving a stake through the heart of the West than anybody yet realizes. Divided we fall.

- Sirian

Sirian · Post by **Sirian** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:07 am

Canadian Broadcasting has provided the full audio version of the speech. Anyone who missed it can hear it in its entirety, runs 28 minutes.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national ... 41201.html

Check for the audio link on the right.

(Thanks to a friend from Canada for providing the link!)

- Sirian

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:30 am

Sirian wrote:Perhaps 9-11 was more successful in driving a stake through the heart of the West than anybody yet realizes. Divided we fall.

- Sirian

Sirian, do you think the proper way to mend fences is to say "I know some of you didn't agree with me before, and the only way for this fence to mend is for you to agree with me now because I'm not changing anything I'm doing, I'm not listening to anyone, I'm the big badass from Texas"...Does Bush need to hurt US security by giving into demands, no. Ok, so France, Germany, Russia and all those had those back door deals in Iraq, but what did Canada have? What is the reason we seem to be hated so much now? Dont' give me that 30 plus country coalition crap, it's like 7 countries that are actually helping out. When 1254 other coalition of the willing soldiers die, then I'll think about it.

Flabby Chick · Post by **Flabby Chick** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:36 am

http://icasualties.org/oif/

Flabby Chick · Post by **Flabby Chick** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:42 am

Sirian · Post by **Sirian** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:50 am

Zuruck wrote:Sirian, do you think the proper way to mend fences is to say "I know some of you didn't agree with me before, and the only way for this fence to mend is for you to agree with me now because I'm not changing anything I'm doing, I'm not listening to anyone, I'm the big badass from Texas"

Since President Bush said nothing of the sort, you would seem to be ranting incoherently.

Prime Minister Paul Martin of Canada is the one who said (on his visit to Washington) that while Canada disagreed with the decision to invade, there is no disagreement on what should be done from where things now stand.

The Iraqis must be given the chance to govern themselves, including aid in the forms of security assistance and financial contributions, rebuilding efforts, and so forth. Free Elections in Iraq, and then American and Coalition forces stay or leave according to the will of elected Iraqi officials.

Now, if you care to make responsible comments, I'll respond to details. If all you care to do is slap your own spin onto events and distort them, you can rant away without any help from me.

- Sirian

Zuruck · Post by **Zuruck** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:06 pm

i didn't quote bush on my post sirian. but that is the position that the white house has taken on their "mending Europe and Canada and whoever else disagreed with them". You cannot disagree that the US has taken the pedestal of righteousness and that nothing we are doing / did / will do has been wrong. Do you think Bush has any plans of meeting anybody half way? On any issue at all? No, it's going to be his way or no way at all. Remember, you're either with us or against us...that is what he said. Hopefully, that's not an incoherent rant for you. But the clouded minds of partisan followers don't see it that way..

CDN_Merlin · Post by **CDN_Merlin** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:52 pm

Zuruck wrote:i didn't quote bush on my post sirian. but that is the position that the white house has taken on their "mending Europe and Canada and whoever else disagreed with them". You cannot disagree that the US has taken the pedestal of righteousness and that nothing we are doing / did / will do has been wrong. Do you think Bush has any plans of meeting anybody half way? On any issue at all? No, it's going to be his way or no way at all. Remember, you're either with us or against us...that is what he said. Hopefully, that's not an incoherent rant for you. But the clouded minds of partisan followers don't see it that way..

This is how I view Bush. I don't get any other type of feeling from him. If you don't like what he wants to do, stay out of his way.

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 9:58 pm

I wonder Sirian if you agree with me that President Bush seems to be indicating that the end is near for the United Nations. He calls for a multilateral organization that will act and not just talk and compares the UN with the failed League of Nations.
Since the UN as structured can never actually take action to enforce it's resolutions (although member states can act with the UN's blessing) it seems doomed never to meet this administration's objectives. Imagine a UN with an independant military arm. Not a pretty picture.
This speech has been billed as a rehearsal for his major policy adress set for some place in Europe soon. (sorry I don't have better details) do you think that he will up the ante and start the process that will eventually end up in a withdrawl?
I know prediction is not a science I am just curious if you read into the speech the same things I do.

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 11:16 am

Looks like no one else is willing to lose half an hour of their life listening to the U.S. President.

Too bad. As Sirian says the "return of NHL hockey" joke was delivered very well (the Jean Poutine joke bombed on a couple of levels).
I wanted another opinion on Pres. Bush's reading of the name of Canada's wartiime Prime Minister. The man's name was William Lyon MacKenzie King, usualy refered to by his last two names as though they were hyphinated. Pres. Bush gave me the impression he thought he was reading the Given and Family names.

Sirian · Post by **Sirian** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 12:23 am

He did read it like it was the man's whole name, I'll grant you that. However, Bush is frequently clumsy with the language, to a point that American media embrace as caricature that he is a stupid man. He's not. In fact, his pronunciation of "nuclear" is so dilligently wrong, at this point it has to be due to sheer stubborn defiance in refusal to correct it.

"Nuke-ular."

Now is that stupid, or is it dumb like a fox? Foes underestimate him. Friends find it human and even normal or folksy. I happen to think some of it is contrived, but contrived not in terms of "making it up" but in terms of sticking with it for sheer political gain. "This is where I came from and I'm not going to change that for anybody, not even my mother."

As for the UN... I'll have to get back to you.

- Sirian

MehYam · Post by **MehYam** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:19 am

yadda yadda yadda shut up you drunkyam wannabe

-drunkyam

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 4:35 pm

Erm... Thanks for sharing MehYam.

Phoenix Red · Post by **Phoenix Red** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:39 am

Well I've been avoiding this topic until I had some time to listen to the speech before I reply, but as it turns out, realplayer hates me and I won't be listening to the speech at all. That being said:

Missile defense is a very hot topic in Canada. For the life of me I don't understand why. The way cruise missiles and antimissile fire works, if we DON'T join the defense program, nukes coming from russia get blown up at 300ft in the air over canadian soil... that's prime burst height if the internal conventional charge (which jams together the pieces of plutonium so that you get critical mass and starts teh chain reaction) is set off by the attack (either directly or through the missile's responce to behing attacked). I'd rather a 300 megaton detonation aimed at NYC didn't get set off over London, Ontario.

I'm pro-war, but the liberal gov't is pro-UN. As has been said, we didn't (officially) send troops because the UN told us not to, now that troops are there there isn't an arguement.

I assumed this was mostly a Bush/Martin business-personal meeting, I am not aware of anything in the address that I should be interested in and don't already know Bush thinks.

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:15 am

Well it appears that Pres. Bush blindsided Canada on the missle defense issue. The build up to the speech indicated there would be no mention of the issue since Canada had made an offer of some changes to NORAD that were much the same as what was wanted on the new defense shield. But during the speech Pres. Bush called for Canada to join the U.S. in the shield. Diplomatically this is important though it seems small to the casual observer.
I believe that it doesn't matter if Canada is in or out of the shield. The air bursts will always be over Canadian territory so there is not a lot of advantage to be gained by ceding sovereignty of our airspace to the U.S. and participating in the militarization of space. Putting weapons in space is something Canada has always opposed until the U.S. has started to apply the big hammer.
To add to the insult the U.S. military sent Canada the European briefing notes plumping the benifits of the missile shield. I guess we get lumped in with France from now on in the eyes of the U.S.