Tuesday, November 23, 2004

Wait! There's more (soon)

In the midst of college applications, I'm afraid I may have been a little negligent in blogging. This does not mean that you should all run away. I will have a new story published on the Monday after Thanksgiving (and it will be good).
See you then,
Republican Dan


At 12:35 AM, Blogger Warner Family Views said...

Hi Republican Dan: Here's something to post while you're still working on that next "good" story. President Bush visits Canada this week, but he's unlikely to get the warm reception that American presidents normally get. Perhaps you can spare a few minutes from your crusade to rid the U.S. of liberals, socialists, democrats, peaceniks et al to find out why . . .

Staff Writer, Cranbrook Daily Townsman
Nov. 19th, 2004
Bush invades Canada!
So President George Bush is making a state visit to Canada Nov. 30.
Well, please forgive me if I don't break out into a chorus of Hail to the Chief.
Don't get me wrong. I respect the office Bush represents and I
respect his country and I sincerely hope MP Carolyn Parish
does nothing to embarrass us during the President's visit. But like
Ms. Parish, I treasure the fact that I live in a democracy and I take seriously that freedom of speech is probably the brightest jewel in the democratic crown.
So if I could be a fly on the wall when the President addresses
Parliament, these would be a few of the thoughts going through my
Mr. President, you held yourself out as a free-trader during the
election campaign and you accused your Democrat opponents of being
protectionist. And you know something, you were right about that. One of those protectionist Democrats, Senator Max Baucus of Montana, has just introduced a bill in the Senate to seize $3.6 billion in duties paid by Canadian lumber companies and distribute them to American lumber producers who seem to have difficulty competing in a free market.
I'm sure you're aware Mr. President that recent court decisions by
NAFTA and the WTO have ruled the Canadian forest industry is not
subsidized and American producers not injured by Canadian lumber
exports. This means the duties were wrongly collected and should be
returned to the companies that have been paying them these many years.
Now I know you're a God-fearing man that lives by the Bible and one
of the Ten Commandments in the Good Book is: "Thou shalt not steal." Well Mr. President, the forests minister of B.C. has already called the proposed Senate bill "legislated theft." I therefore trust Mr. President that you will use your massive influence to squelch the bill by that nefarious Democrat as quickly as possible. And being the moral individual you always hold yourself out to be, I expect that you'll order the duty money returned to the rightful owners. And while you're at it, could you open the border to Canadian beef again. You know in your heart that Canadian beef is every bit as good as American and cattle producers here, who tend to be on the same political wave length as you, will be forever grateful for your overdue act of fair play.
Then there's Iraq. Be grateful Mr. President that Svend Robinson is
no longer in Parliament. On second thought, we won't even go there. But I have to tell you that most Canadians adamantly oppose the war you started against Iraq and that's the main reason they overcame their qualms about the protectionist Democrats and supported John Kerry for president. So I'd advise you to cool the sabre-rattling about how you're winning the "War on Terror" because frankly not many of us in the Great White North believe it. We get our reports from sources other than your fan club at Fox News and they tell us that the insurgents are still firing back in Fulljah and that similar insurgencies are breaking out all over the country. And the very notion that you can fire-bomb a people in a foreign land to suddenly embrace Western democracy, strikes us as irrational at best if not downright malevolent.
Then I noticed a story two weeks ago -- one that no doubt got little play on Fox News -- that one of your brigades refused to leave the Green Zone on patrol because they felt it was too dangerous and they didn't have the right equipment. This is sounding more like Vietnam every day.
And there was the story last week -- I don't think Fox covered it --that thousands of members of the Ready Reserve are refusing or
evading their country's call to return to active duty in order to
kill for democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the past few months,
more than 4,000 former soldiers have received notice they must return to active duty, but more than 1,800 of them -- almost half --have requested exemptions or delays. And of the 2,500 that were supposed to arrive at bases for refresher training Nov. 7, some 733 failed to show up.
Perhaps Rush Limbaugh can be sent over to fight for them.
And many in Canada are wondering what your second term will be like
without the moderating voice of Colin Powell in the cabinet. Now
there will be no one to say no when Rumsfield and Cheney bay for
blood. As for the new Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, she's
already on record in advocating "proactive war" to defend America's
interests. Not much help -- or hope -- there.
But don't underestimate us as fighters, Mr. President. Canada was in World War I and World War II long before any American GI's showed up. Our boys' heroics at Vimy Ridge, Dieppe and the Italian Campaign are second to none. But there's a big difference between the Canadian and American approach to war.
We fight wars in aid of our allies. But we don't start them.
-- 30 --

At 6:49 AM, Blogger Republican Dan said...

In replying to that I'll just go right to the foriegn policy. You close your argument by saying "we fight wars...but we don't start them." Neither does the United States. The world's terrorists hate America as a beacon of Democracy and have vowed to detroy it -- they declared war on us. You may say that invading Iraq was a diversion from the war, but Hussein was in violation of all of UN resolutions dealing with his weapons programs. If he didn't have the weapons and wasn't pursuing them, he could have simply produced evidence of the weapons missing since the first Gulf War that he was unable to acount for. Saddam was not an iminent threat, and the President has never said that he was. He was a gathering threat, and any president would have been irresponsible to allow it to develop further.

I know that Canada has fought bravely in the past -- their capture of Juno beach on D-Day, or their courageous attempted raid at Dieppe that you mentioned. Fighting in the past, however, doesn't necessarily reflect current abilities or comittment; the French were considered good fighters up until World War Two. Just be careful not to let that French influence up there get to you.

You said that this war is sounding like Vietnam. Happily, this is not the case. In Vietnam we controlled only a small part of the country. As general Abizaid recently said about Iraq, we could hold elections safely in 14 of the 18 provinces today. In Vietnam we were fighting an enemy hundreds of thousands strong. In Iraq, there are perhaps a few thousand. Even if Iraq were like Vietnam though, the lesson we should have learned in that first war is not that it's a bad idea to go in and rescue a country -- but that it is wrong to pull out before the job is finished. I suggest you read the article entitled "Bush's Greatness" that I link to on the sidebar.


Post a Comment

<< Home