Daoust

So a judge in Montana has temporarily suspended the exporting of Canadian beef to the United States. The border was to reopen on Monday, after 20 some months of closure. I know this has a lot of farmers in the West rattled, while here in the East it hardly causes a ruffle. But it should. What's happening out West with cattle is what was happening here with potatoes. There should be nation wide sympathy for our Western neighbours.

But does anyone care? Do you think the border will eventually open up? Do you think the Americans are still pissed because we didn't sign up for their Missile Space Shield thing? Is there any chance that Canadians will look elsewhere for beef buyers, hoping to make up for the 70% of beef exports that currently go South?

__________________
I have faith in a few things - divinity and grace
But even when I'm on my knees I know the devil preys

Lucifer

I don't know the answers to these questions, but the whole thing leaves me hoping that someday, we'll be in a position to screw them over....
As for the Missile Defence Shield thingy, experts have been saying for years that the whole thing is un-workable, un-predictable, and a plain old bad idea. It's about time that we got a PM that has the balls to stand up to the USA and just say, "NO!"

__________________
I am a brother to dragons, and a companion to owls.
- Job 30:29

1123, 6536, 5321

Daoust

We actually had a Foreign Affairs minister say it, so I guess that puts into question the size of Mr. Martins cohones...

__________________
I have faith in a few things - divinity and grace
But even when I'm on my knees I know the devil preys

Charlatan

We need to find other markets for our beef.

We also need overhaul the testing standards... they should be better than everyone else's.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

silent_jay

I'm hoping we can find other markets for Canadian beef, I still think this decision has something to do with the missle defence shield. If we had said yes, the border would have reopened as usual, but as we made up our own minds and the US has huge problems with a country who makes its own decision they chose to keep the border closed. I'm really getting sick and tired of the US trying to force everything they believe in down peoples throats, I hope the day comes when the US gets put in thier place by someone or some country. Fuck that will be a great day.

If the US doesn't get what they want they become the child that takes thier ball home when they begin to lose.

I hope thge border will reopen someday to Canadian beef, but I don't hold my breath.

__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder

Charlatan

This is not related to missle defense... The administration was just as taken aback by the decision as we were...

It was a US Beef lobby the brought up the court case, claiming it would be harmful to their livelihood. The judgement was brought about by an independant judge.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

silent_jay

Cool, thanks for clearing that up Charlatan, I'm glad it had nothing to do with missle defence.

__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder

Janey

or does it? WE can start a thread in tilted paranoia. there's an inter-departmental agency which is used to put pressure on 'countries and entities which need persuading ' . Not unreasonable, and maybe a little more subtle than Al Capone, but just as feasible.

When I first heard that the HoC voted against the missile thingy, I thought 'Yay' common sense prevailed. then I thought, 'Oh No... there goes the beef...' and sho 'nuff.... there went the beef.

so it may not be related, but then again, i have a feeling it is. Part of the interconnectedness of all things. Their administration may have been taken aback, but they had a contingency, and we don't. there's no other economically feasible market for our beef. But I bet it could bring the prices of beef in japan....

retsuki03

Welcome to the world of foreign policy. Countries exercise pressure on other countries in accordance with their national interests. You appear to have a hard time accepting the fact that the United States will act in the best interest of the US, not Canada.

I like your "take their ball and go home" analogy. If Canada is an ally of the US, why do they frequently attempt to thwart our foreign policy? Or call our leaders morons? The US may very well be taking their ball and going home, but not because they are losing. They are going home because they don't want/need to play with you anymore.

The one acting like a child is you. You think Canada can act however it likes and the US will still give them whatever they want. It is like a kid calling his mom a bitch and then asking for his allowance. If Canada wants things from the US, they have to act a certain way. Just like if the US wants things from Canada, the US has to act a certain way.

Charlatan

Did someone say something...

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Daoust

"Where's retsuki03 from?

Sir, TEXAS, Sir!

Texas? Only _______ and _______ come from Texas and you don't look much like a _____ so I guess that kind of narrows it down..."


lol. Just a little poke at Texans there. Which I think should be allowed in the Canada thread, also because he was a little out of line there with his "kid calling his mom a bitch and then asking for his allowance" crack.

HEY! Billy Joe Bobby or whatever your name is... You ain't nobody's momma. Technically Britain is our mother country... but I suppose that's beside the point, ain't it, cowboy?

__________________
I have faith in a few things - divinity and grace
But even when I'm on my knees I know the devil preys

silent_jay

Nope not having a hard time accepting the US will do what is in it's best interest, just having a hard time with the way the US thinks everyone should follow them into everything like a lost little puppy.

The US doesn't want to play with Canada, oh darn, who does the US want to play with besides the Brits? The US will soon be having a great time playing with themselves, because no one will be left.

Thwart US foreign policy? Oh you must mean because we make our own decisions, and don't follow behind like a good little puppet, maybe if we were more like Blair and had a nose placed up Bush's ass things would be better. If making up your own mind is considered thwarting the US's foreign policy then I guess Canada is guilty of that.

Canada is acting like a child? Thats the funniest thing I've read all day. How is Canada acting however they want? They made a decision as a soverign nation, they did nothing wrong, just made a decision, but I guess a country making up its own mind isn't something the US enjoys.

__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder

Janey

well, aside from the mean tone of his post, I have to agree with retsuki03 on this. follows my sentiments exactly, except the part about us trying to Thwart your foreign policy.

I REALLY don't think this is the case. It's more like we are trying to implement OUR own foreign policy (which I do really feel is more progressive - but we also don't have the burden of being the world's BMC) without being bullied by the current gov't in the US. And especially the very vocal media pundits which tend to sway the thoughts of the less strong thinking populace with hyperbole (Bill O'Reilly anybody? - can somebody check the paranoia thread to see if he is on the whitehouse payroll?).

I for one am getting very tired of all the anti-Canadian sentiment out there (did anybody watch the West Wing last night?) and they wonder why there has been a surge in anti americanism in this country.

And to harken to Daoust's point, we went through the exact same bullying tactics in this country to establish our own foreign policy separate from mother Britain. We have a long and strong tradition in this country of trying to stand for ourselves, the Lord Kitcheners, the Churchills, the Roosevelts, and Lynden Johnsons notwithstanding, we have on the whole managed to establish an identity, and wish to retain it.

As close allies, we should be agreeing to cooperate (I for one would have been happy to throw in with the missile thingy as a bit of foreigh policy 'give' especially since it would mean R&D dollars and little chance of success - and our NORAD contribution does extend beyond tracking Santa annually!) and agreeing to disagree (the entire Iraq thing was a good move on our part - there was VERY little that we could have contributed, other than good feel, plus I think that Chretien was crafty-smart in that decision, because Quebec was in elections, and joining the US may have impacted them in a bad way, so national unity was also in the works here) without behaving like bickering children.

end of my semi - rant/stream of consciousness post...

silent_jay

What was the West Wing about last night Janey? I'm guessing more Canadian bad mouthing.

__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder

Janey

I couldn't watch the drivel, and had to turn it to the amazing race. but it was cross border sniping. something about the Royal canadians mounting an offensive... I don't know maybe they were refereing to the RCMP, but the Canadian minister on tv was a bad representation of french canadian parody...

Yakk

As evidenced by the opinion of our neighbours to the south, it is time for Canada to build up a punative deterrant towards America.

Canada is the US's largest supplier of energy. We should leverage this. If we have to, threaten to pull out of NAFTA -- it has a 1 year sunset clause, but really we could just cut off all exports unilaterally.

Speaking of NAFTA, lets start abusing the 'tantamount to expropriation clause'. I heard in the media that Toronto was having problems exporting garbage to Michigen. The change in laws should qualify as 'tantamount to expropriation'. Repeat ad nausium.

Thirdly, a nuclear deterrant may be called for. The USA seems to be hung up on a nation's ability to harm them more than anything else, and as noted realpolitik doesn't admit the concepts of 'contract' and 'fairness' -- power flows from the barrel of a gun under that world view.

Of course, there are benefits to living next to another nation in a peaceful, friendly, non-coersive relationship. However, if our neighbour to the south doesn't want a friendly, peaceful, non-coersive relationship, it doesn't work if it is only one way.

And yes, the above statements are about as stupid as "well, the US could invade Canada, what would they do?! So shut up and take it little country!" (no, I'm not saying anyone said that, I'm just parodying my own statements above). Playing the game of realpolitik is dangerous, and pushing on comprimises leads to people no longer being willing to comprimise with you. The USA is pushing. If it keeps it up, Canada will have to start pushing back, or just bend over and take it.

The current US administration considers international agreements to be worth less than the paper they are written on, only to be followed if it suits their short term goals. If the most powerful nation in the world continues along this line, the rest of the world will either have to oppose it militarially, bend over and take it, isolate and punish it economically, or follow suit. This is a medium to long range problem, not a short term one - a single administration probably can't reverse 50 years of increasing international cooperation.

However, it is a large potential problem. International civil relations, just like civil society, rely upon nations following the rules, and being punished (socially, economically and physically) if they break them.

I don't want another cold war (or worse), but appeasement isn't safe either.

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

retsuki03

So what your saying is that the US thinks they are right and that other countries should agree with them or cooperate. Is that really an international sin? I am surprised more Canadians aren't up in arms.

Can we turn this around?

Canada thinks it are right and wants other countries to argee with it and cooperate. Well I say the US is standing up as a "sovereign nation" "making up its own mind" and has "done nothing wrong."

If that is what you think will happen, fine. What do you care? The US will be alienated in world affairs, but that doesn't matter if you are Canadian right? So what difference would it make to you?

I fully respect Canada's right to make up their own mind. In fact, I applaud it. However, you can't have your cake and eat it too. This is how foreign policy works. It is the freedom of choice, but the suffering of consequences. Your arguement is like saying Iraq as a sovereign nation decided to hamper weapons inspections, but they shouldn't have to suffer international sanctions. The fact is, there are consequences for actions in foreign policy on a global scale.

What you really seem to be objecting to is the (apparent) asymetrical force that the US can sometimes bring to the table of foreign policy.

From the US perspective, we see the derogatory way many (by no means all) Canadians (even officials) talk about the US and our elected officials. The fact is- that does not make Canadian cattle popular in the US (even if you think thats not fair). If Canada wants to maximize their efficacy in relations with the United States, they should consider that their actions have consequences. This is not to say that Canadians should or have to act a certain way, but calling the leader of the US a moron is a flawed foreign policy. The reverse would also be true if it was the US trying to get Canada to do something.

A case in point. Leading up the the war, Austrailian wine sales went up while French wine sales declined. Shocking right?

Janey

well, that's my point, politics, or rather geo-politics isn't a game played well by amateurs. Carolyn Parish and Co. may have made the stupid comments, and it was amateurish. And belive me as a Canadian I was appalled and mortified at the lack of manners. They are by no means geopoliticians. Again there are American Senators who utilized comparable vitriol (Canukistan anybody?).

If we're going to play the geopolitical game, we better become less Bush-league. Note to self: run for office.

By the way, I find the Australians to be heartier and cheaper. I particularly prefer the Wolf Blass cabernet to anything from France...

IC3

__________________
"To win any battle, you must fight as if you were already dead" -Musashi

retsuki03

Spoken like a true ally of the US rather than an antagonist. You know the Canadian economy is largely dependent on the American economy. We buy 85% of your exports. Canada could hurt the US economically, but would probably hurt itself more in the process.
I am not quite sure what you are suggesting here. You think Canada should threaten the US with nuclear weapons? You really think this is a good idea? I hope that is sarcasm.
So, the US doesn't allow Canadian beef in and that means we don't want a friendly, peaceful, non-coersive relationship? Do you really think the US is the root of all evil or something? Disputes happen and they get worked out (usually without nuclear weapons involved). Have you ever had an arguement with a friend? Americans want a friendly relationship with Canada, it is in both our interests.
Or Canada and the US will come to compromise (and take it).I am really not sure what agreements your talking about so it would be unfair for me to comment on them. Regardless, you seem to have a view that conservatives are usually stereotyped with- an inability to see the grey area. You have this "fight them, or get fucked by them attitude." I don't see it that way at all. Many accuse the current American administration of lacking dipomacy, I think your charictarization of the situation also shows a surprising lack in that department.I don't want another cold war either. And you are right, appeasement isn't safe.


I don't mind people poking fun of Texas or Texans. I think we have a pretty good sense of humor down here, but we are fiercely proud. And I am curious what Canadians think of Texas and Texans.

The kid/mom analogy is perhaps a bad analogy. It was just an example, not an actual metaphor. It was not meant to be an insult. Perhaps I could have better characterized it as a despute with two friends, and one of them insulting the other. Then the insulted one is expected to still be friendly to the insulter despite being insulted. I guess it was just easier to use the mom/kid thing.

PS. If you think Texas is full of rednecks, you should probably do a little research. Texas is quite urban. You might be surprised to hear that:

Demeter

Doncha ya'll act lack t'folks on King Of The Hill?
I don't really have any preconceived notions of Texans except maybe an accent. Oil & beef there, right? A lot like our market here locally. I would imagine the people are much the same.
Actually, with the exception of religious or political devouts I think people are the same everywhere. Anything else is propigated by the media.

Yakk

I have been on the side of the USA, and I have disagreed with the USA, on many issues.

Am I a 'true ally' of the US? Well, I do believe in people free from oppression. I believe that markets are extremely useful, but they are not god. I believe that intelligent life is valueable. I believe in truth.

However, insofar as the US's acts are defined and determined by realpolitik, I'm at best an ally of convienience, and at worst a sworn enemy.

People and nation's whose ideology is summed up by "look out for #1" are not my allies, nor are they my friends. They are dangerous sociopaths who should be locked up for everyone's protection.

The neat thing about exports is they are excess goods. Stopping all imports hurts your standard of living in and of itself: stopping all exports doesn't.

Exports provide currency to buy imports or other goods.

Second of all, as the MAD docterine demonstrated so nicely during the cold war, being willing to burn the house down on a point of principle is sometimes a useful and nessicary tool. Otherwise you become hostage to anyone who owns a match.

It's realpolitik. Canada's bargaining position with the USA would be higher if we could destroy most large US cities. The implicit escalation at the end of a trade dispute would then exist.

Note the part of my post where I disclaimed all previous content in it as stupid. The nuclear bomb statement was a bit of 'idiot theatre'.

Personally, I prefer the rule of law (even internationally) and international institutions that mediate disputes.

The USA deciding that international trade agreements are less important than political points back home means they are breaking faith.

Softwood lumber, steel, beef, the annexation of soverienty over Canadian airspace...

The USA is not the source of all evil. At the same time, they are currently the only expansionist imperial military power on the planet.

Possibly there are two other powers which are only non-expansionistic/non-powers because of the US's dominance: China and the proto-Caliphate.

I have come to the conclusion that the party in control of the USA views comprimise, negotiation, and diplomacy as weakness. Look at their political appointees, look at their foriegn policy, look at their rhetoric.

You can't be diplomatic with people who ignore diplomacy. The alternative to diplomacy is force. In the event this keeps up, the world will either bend knee to America, or oppose it.

I don't want this to happen. And, like I said, it's one administration. Possibly the American people will change their mind, and the long term problem I'm speculating about won't happen. Possibly they won't. Possibly economic realities will make the point moot.

It doesn't mean I'm not worried.

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

JJRousseau

Wow. A far ranging discussion considering that there is only one American stirring us up. Hello retsuki, welcome to our little slice of Canada. First off, as I'm sure you know, our sentiment has nothing to do with "Americans" (Montana cattle farmers aside), I have a ton of good friends in the US, even some in Texas. I often disagree with their views but were are still friends,

Countries are different. As de Gaulle said "Countries don't have friends, only interests" And that's the point, just be cause I like Americans doesn't mean I think our country's interests and your country's interests have to align. Currently they don't. So we play a little power game. I don't take it personally.

__________________
Take from the philosopher the pleasure of being heard and his desire for knowledge ceases.

Temporary_User

WOW!!!!

I always have mixed opinions on all of these matters....
As some of you might know from my other posts in the Canada Forum, Im American-Canadian (born in the US, but now live in Canada and EVERYONE else in my family is Canadian born. think Mexican-American)
Anyways, this thread is about beef!
I live in Calgary, so when the first case of mad cow was discovered there was a huge cry for everyone to buy alberta beef. I did, why not, it was cheap and Im a starving college student. When mad cow was discovered in the US, I was @ a co-workers house watching the news and they cheered (literaly like they won the lottery) then they thought I might be upset by their sort of anti-american cheers so they tried to explain their selves I didnt care,Im a minority so Im used to it and see both sides (my ignorant american self likes to think i see both sides)
the thing is when Canadian beef was banned in the states, US cattle ranches hit the gold mine, (think reebok shoes all of the sudden hearing nike cant sell shoes anymore) and then when mad cow was found down there no-one would buy US cattle.
so when the border was to reopen it, of course they don't want it to happen, so they lobbied (on behalf of health safety) to stop it. some might say mad cow is bullshit, others dont....
they got ONE judge to support them and I suppose it will delay things for a while.
Ive read that Bush wants trading of beef to resume, so I assume that beef should be flowing sometime soon.
I highly doubt this has anything to do w/ missle defense, I think of that subject as buying a new house and wanting to put up a fence alonside with your neighbo(u)r. you both get benefits of privacy from the fence so it's only fair that you see if you want to go in on a fence and split the cost. (thats my opinion on it)