NAFTA dead?

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
so now the US should just make agreements with no intention of honouring them... i see... RM and CoW up to their usual BS.

I haven't even mentioned anything about agreements here. 3chordcharlie and Stunt up to their usual BS.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
so now the US should just make agreements with no intention of honouring them... i see... RM and CoW up to their usual BS.

Ah, the Canadian super patriots are out in full force. Read the thread before you show your super patriotism. It really makes you look ridiculous.

 

[MisterCornell]

Canada should invade Detroit! Send the tank down the Ambassador Bridge! Terrorize the ghetto hellions!

 

[Whaspe]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Whaspe
If they wish to be negligent, then they should be prepared to face the devastating consequences that could come with such behavior.

Are you referring to the US or Canada?

Tell me how Canada's security is worse off then the U.S?

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
It's selfish because all you care about is yourself. What other thread are you refering to?

The monarchy thread.
you were an active participant, no need for off topic discussion

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
It's selfish because all you care about is yourself. What other thread are you refering to?

The monarchy thread.
you were an active participant, no need for off topic discussion

Are you talking about that thread from like 6 months ago?

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: MisterCornell
Canada should invade Detroit! Send the tank down the Ambassador Bridge! Terrorize the ghetto hellions!

They can have Detroit for free! No need for an invasion.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Are you talking about that thread from like 6 months ago?

Yes. if you want something more recent, post a new topic relevant to the queen.
Has no business in this thread. As you have shown already, totally irrelevant.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: MisterCornell
Canada should invade Detroit! Send the tank down the Ambassador Bridge! Terrorize the ghetto hellions!

They can have Detroit for free! No need for an invasion.

Sweet, a decent basketball and hockey team!!

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Whaspe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Whaspe
If they wish to be negligent, then they should be prepared to face the devastating consequences that could come with such behavior.

Are you referring to the US or Canada?

Tell me how Canada's security is worse off then the U.S?

I think you messed up the quote system, but I'm not saying that Canada's security is worse or better off than anyone else's. Why always the need to compare to the US anyways?

I'm saying that if you are referring to security issues from Canada that will impact the US, then that will end up with even more problems for Canada itself with the slowing down of the US-Canada border.

What exactly were you trying to refer to?

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Are you talking about that thread from like 6 months ago?

Yes. if you want something more recent, post a new topic relevant to the queen.
Has no business in this thread. As you have shown already, totally irrelevant.

It has business in a thread if we're talking about funny government positions! As you have shown already, it's totally relevant

God bless the Queen, and nobody else.

 

[Whaspe]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Whaspe
The point is that Canada has already lost billions and the U.S. buries itself in red tape. If the U.S. was more open in its trade dealings maybe they would be met with more acceptance when it comes to security issues and missile programs.

Canada would face even more trade problems with the US if it did not adequately provide to the 'security issues'. If they wish to be negligent, then they should be prepared to face the devastating consequences that could come with such behavior.

I'm just asking what security issues these are that you make reference to. My initial point is that if the US didn't try to screw us over with trade disputes then maybe we would pay more attention to the things the US seem to feel important.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
God bless the Queen, and nobody else.

Why are you blessing the queen, i sure as hell don't.
Gov't positions was a small stab at cornell for his lame comment on the forestry minister.
not something intended to start discussion ...if you want to talk queen, new thread please...not going to ask again.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Whaspe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Whaspe
The point is that Canada has already lost billions and the U.S. buries itself in red tape. If the U.S. was more open in its trade dealings maybe they would be met with more acceptance when it comes to security issues and missile programs.

Canada would face even more trade problems with the US if it did not adequately provide to the 'security issues'. If they wish to be negligent, then they should be prepared to face the devastating consequences that could come with such behavior.

I'm just asking what security issues these are that you make reference to. My initial point is that if the US didn't try to screw us over with trade disputes then maybe we would pay more attention to the things the US seem to feel important.

Well you brought up the 'security issues'. I was assuming that you were talking about Canada using its resources to try to keep the border secure and not allow people to infiltrate the US-Canada border. This would be an important issue for both the US and Canada where the burden heavily lies on Canada. This is very important for trade for Canada.

I then asked what exactly were you referring to?

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
worse or better off than anyone else's. Why always the need to compare to the US anyways?

I relate to the US as they are the world leader in almost everything. It only makes sense to strive for the same or better. Also, canadians are used to the canadian system and to understand US positions, we must compare. Same for americans on this forum. I don't think it is intended to be a better than you discussion...just a comparison of two first world nations, with very similar societal aspects on the same continent.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
worse or better off than anyone else's. Why always the need to compare to the US anyways?

I relate to the US as they are the world leader in almost everything. It only makes sense to strive for the same or better. Also, canadians are used to the canadian system and to understand US positions, we must compare. Same for americans on this forum. I don't think it is intended to be a better than you discussion...just a comparison of two first world nations, with very similar societal aspects on the same continent.

I just think it's fairly strange to compare almost everything in your life to another country. Honestly I don't really compare much at all in the US to Canada. I suppose this is the behavior to be expected given the types of countries that these two are. I wonder if other areas of the world have similar relationships or if Canada takes it to an extreme since it only has a single neighbor that happens to be very important.

 

[sandorski]

Crap, all the wankers showed up.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Crap, all the wankers showed up.

Yeah, I hate it when that happens

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
so now the US should just make agreements with no intention of honouring them... i see... RM and CoW up to their usual BS.

Ah, the Canadian super patriots are out in full force. Read the thread before you show your super patriotism. It really makes you look ridiculous.

I did read the thread - your suggestion is that rather than Canada pursuing a resolution according to the agreements in place, they should bend over, take it, and be happy about it.

Sorry, but that's not the best way to pursue international trade disputes covered under agreements signed in good faith. I don't think the BC minister is quite correct in pronouncing the death of NAFTA, but somewhere along the line, the 'good faith' on the part of the US, at least with respect to lumber, has gone AWOL.

I'm afraid you're the one who looks ridiculous here.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: sandorski
Crap, all the wankers showed up.

Yeah, I hate it when that happens

When you show up or realize I'm talking about you too?

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I just think it's fairly strange to compare almost everything in your life to another country. Honestly I don't really compare much at all in the US to Canada. I suppose this is the behavior to be expected given the types of countries that these two are. I wonder if other areas of the world have similar relationships or if Canada takes it to an extreme since it only has a single neighbor that happens to be very important.

I wouldnt compare everything. Although most can be compared, relatively of course. I mean we are limited by our population, but who would mock a country for population reasons, might as well have newyorkers make fun of ppl from new hampshire. does that make new hampshires interests less important?...hardly.

I image Brits compare themselves to France and visa versa. Many regions of the world can and should be compared. Comparing Canada to Iraq makes little sense, just as comparing the US to China. I think we should be able to compare US to canada fairly easily, 1/10 the population, 1/11 the gdp...etc. It's a moot point in this thread though. Just pointing out my reasoning. I think you've been fairly accepting of my points, and it's appreciated.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I did read the thread - your suggestion is that rather than Canada pursuing a resolution according to the agreements in place, they should bend over, take it, and be happy about it.

No, I said that Canada ideally should try to do something, but in reality it probably won't do much at all.

Nice job.

Sorry, but that's not the best way to pursue international trade disputes covered under agreements signed in good faith. I don't think the BC minister is quite correct in pronouncing the death of NAFTA, but somewhere along the line, the 'good faith' on the part of the US, at least with respect to lumber, has gone AWOL.

I'm afraid you're the one who looks ridiculous here.

No, you have just shown that you did not read the thread. Congrats. Perhaps you should actually read the thread, spend five minutes away from the computer to calm down your super patriot hormones, and then return.

 

[Stunt]

oh man...this is not looking like a productive discussion...im going clubbing, half done as is...so i'll comment tomorrow, if i see some logical, intellectual discussion. And Sandorski, quit taunting... ...COW you too (u and the damn queen )

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I did read the thread - your suggestion is that rather than Canada pursuing a resolution according to the agreements in place, they should bend over, take it, and be happy about it.

No, I said that Canada ideally should try to do something, but in reality it probably won't do much at all.

Nice job.

Sorry, but that's not the best way to pursue international trade disputes covered under agreements signed in good faith. I don't think the BC minister is quite correct in pronouncing the death of NAFTA, but somewhere along the line, the 'good faith' on the part of the US, at least with respect to lumber, has gone AWOL.

I'm afraid you're the one who looks ridiculous here.

No, you have just shown that you did not read the thread. Congrats. Perhaps you should actually read the thread, spend five minutes away from the computer to calm down your super patriot hormones, and then return.

Uh, yeah I did read the thread, and it doesn't make you look any more well-reasoned than it usually does.

As far as super-patriot goes, you have the wrong person.

I'm afraid my interpretation of your posts is more reasonable based on what you wrote than your own - now when you rephrased it, you're probably more correct than previously - I can't see Canada pursuing retaliatory sanctions or anything of the sort, so I see this dispute dragging on 20 more years if anything.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Uh, yeah I did read the thread, and it doesn't make you look any more well-reasoned than it usually does.

Apparently you did not read it correctly. Here you go:

Canadians should try to do something in an ideal sense, but in the end they can't really do much.

As far as super-patriot goes, you have the wrong person.

Possibly.

I'm afraid my interpretation of your posts is more reasonable based on what you wrote than your own - now when you rephrased it, you're probably more correct than previously - I can't see Canada pursuing retaliatory sanctions or anything of the sort, so I see this dispute dragging on 20 more years if anything.

Not really. Your interpretation is strange. I'm not sure how else you can interpret:

Canadians should try to do something in an ideal sense, but in the end they can't really do much.

without saying that Canada should ideally do something, but really cannot do that much. Massive retaliation is not possible for Canada. We seem to agree.