How Good of A Friend is Canada to the US?

[BluffTHIS!]

From this link here is an excerpt:

The United States made an unprecedented foray into Canada's election campaign on Tuesday, warning politicians not to bash Washington in their bid to win the January 23 election.

But an unapologetic Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin responded immediately by saying "c'est la vie" -- that's life -- if the United States did not like his remarks, and he would not accept anyone telling him he cannot defend his country.

In a hard-hitting speech in Ottawa, U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins lamented what he called relentless and incessant criticism of his country, which he speculated might begin to sow doubt about the strength of the binational relationship.

"Canada never has to tear the United States down to build itself up," Wilkins said.

"It may be smart election politics to thump your chest and constantly criticize your friend and your No. 1 trading partner. But it's a slippery slope and all of us should hope it doesn't have a long-term impact on our relationship."

Wilkins did not name the prime minister directly, but he specifically targeted a comment made last week at the Montreal climate change conference in which Martin called on the United States to heed a "global conscience" and join efforts to combat global warming.

That remark -- on top of criticism of U.S. policy on lumber, guns, passports and Iraq -- appeared to have riled the White House the most, particularly since Canada has a proportionally worse record than the United States on reining in greenhouse gas emissions.


This kind of thing just reinforces my view that although Canada is certainly a friend and ally, they really aren't nearly as good a friend as the UK. A good friend doesn't just support you when you are 100% right, is willing to watch your back in a fight, and also does not run you down to others, but rather reserving most criticism for private. Even though Canada is more liberal that the US, so is the UK. But regardless of which parties are in power in the US or UK at any time, they always view their friendship with each other as transcending such things.

On the scale of international friends, and not counting Israel, S. Korea and Taiwan who are defense dependents, I would rate the best friends of the US as follows, and a lot of this rating is derived from cooperation/participation in the war on terror and in NATO operations in the Balkans, (although that alone doesn't make a good friend and Canada has given some help in Afghanistan):

UK
Australia
Denmark
Italy
Poland
Philippines
Turkey


But hey, I guess you can say Canada is a better friend of the US than France. But then so is Uzbekistan. And New Zealand used to be on that list, but no longer.

To be fair though, I would imagine that if Canada were to split and not just Quebec left but also some of the eastern provinces, then the remainder consisting of the prarie and western provinces would probably be a good bud of the US and make it on my short list. But unfortunately it seems the francophile bias that drives so much of Canadian politics is the wedge.

So if those countries on that short list come to the US and ask for some help, then I want us to say what do you need and how much and how fast. But when Canada comes calling, I want us to say we'll have to think about it and compare it to our own selfish interests and viewpoints first, and after we have vented our opinion on it to the world. Same as Canada does.

[Il_Mostro]

[ QUOTE ]
A good friend doesn't just support you when you are 100% right, is willing to watch your back in a fight, and also does not run you down to others, but rather reserving most criticism for private.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's not a friend, that's a puppy.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
That's not a friend, that's a puppy.

[/ QUOTE ]

My description describes my close friends. And your comment is indicative of why Sweden doesn't have such friends, although you do like to hobnob with the French and make snide comments about the rest of the world together. Your two countries deserve each other.

[Il_Mostro]

[ QUOTE ]

My description describes my close friends. And your comment is indicative of why Sweden doesn't have such friends

[/ QUOTE ]
No it isn't, it's indicative that you and I value very different things in a friendship

And your comment is indicative of why Sweden doesn't have such friends

Explain.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
And your comment is indicative of why Sweden doesn't have such friends

Explain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he doesn't realize what true friendship on the international scale means. Sweden throughout the cold war refused to join NATO, although it was always "assumed" that in the event of war between NATO and the Warsaw Pact that they would come in under NATO. Thus they sought the protection of NATO in the actual event of a war that might threaten them, but refused to shoulder the financial and strategic responsibilities of membership until then. Only now in order to benefit from full membership in the EU has Sweden anlong with Finland, agreed to join in the EU miltary plan to deploy a number of battle groups by 2007.

Plus if you look to history, Sweden as well as Finalnd was a soft ally of Nazi Germany in WWII like Spain was. So how good of a neighbor were they to their fellow Scandinavian countries who bore the harsh brunt of Nazi occupation?

[Arnfinn Madsen]

Isn't it good that your allies point out that your current way of conducting foreign policy is unsustainable? It is not like i.e. we euros want to invade or bomb your country or something, we are just vocally pointing out that you are making big mistakes that if not corrected will hurt you the most.

[zipo]

>>Isn't it good that your allies point out that your current way of conducting foreign policy is unsustainable? <<

Wow. Our "foreign policy" is unsustainable? I can understand how there might be some disagreement about elements of US foreign policy, but this kind of blanket statement seems absurd.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[ QUOTE ]
>>Isn't it good that your allies point out that your current way of conducting foreign policy is unsustainable? <<

Wow. Our "foreign policy" is unsustainable? I can understand how there might be some disagreement about elements of US foreign policy, but this kind of blanket statement seems absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is unsustainable since the US is not powerful enough in itself to succeed in its agenda, and thus conducting it in a way tht creates anti-US sentiment makes it doomed to fail.

[theweatherman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
>>Isn't it good that your allies point out that your current way of conducting foreign policy is unsustainable? <<

Wow. Our "foreign policy" is unsustainable? I can understand how there might be some disagreement about elements of US foreign policy, but this kind of blanket statement seems absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is unsustainable since the US is not powerful enough in itself to succeed in its agenda, and thus conducting it in a way tht creates anti-US sentiment makes it doomed to fail.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll show you whose powerful enough to do stuff! The US agenda will never "fail" it will simply be modified to a sucessful version. This is obviously failure to most, but politically speaking its not.

And your right, the US hegemony will not last long if we insist on pissing away resources in long winded wars of imperialism.