CANADA'S NEW PRIME-MINISTER TELLS U.S. "TO BUTT OUT"

Except for a few spelling mistakes and a bit of grammar, it was a beautiful post Chumly

I think Chumly dealt handsomely with the subject - not much else to say.

Yup, I think the 5 paragraphs on the U.S. was most interesting.

Agreed. Most Canadians are just SO interested in America and EVERYTHING it does! Thanks for the newsy post, Chumly.

My, we Canucks just would have no life were it not for the neighbor to the south. Sigh.

The Milky Way resides in Saskatchewan. Who'd have thunk it?

Gritting my teeth I confess to agreeing (in large part) with Setanta.

When the US sent a drone to launch Hell-fire missiles at a gathering within the Pakistani badlands; where the #2 al-Qaeda leader might have been, the Pakistani government squealed like a pig with it's tail on fire.

And yet it's a safe bet that the official umbrage was purely for domestic consumption.

This non-issue with Canada is so transparent in its origins that it is laughable, but what is truly amusing is that it seems to be working! God bless the Canuks for their innocence.

The Liberal knock on Harper was that he would be a lap-dog of America.

What's one of the first official acts of his leadership? Defy the Americans!

If and when this becomes an issue of true importance, what Harper has said in 2006 will not mean much.

You never heard of dairy cows?

I am very sorry my Commonwealth cousin/cousines, but harbouring those guilty of 'crimes against humanity' is not going to win you any friends....



Just hand her over for a fair trial and a fair hangin' and we'll consider your slate cleaned permanently.

finn wrote : "where the #2 al-Qaeda leader might have been, the Pakistani government squealed like a pig with it's tail on fire. "

that's a good one , "might have been " ; he "might have been " just about anywhere. so a/t to finn's reasoning it must be o.k. to kill a group of civilians because a terrorist "might have been" in the area.
i hope a terrorist is not suspected to be anywhere near finn's abode. the u.s. might just decide to fire a rocket and express regret to finn's relatives.

and further : "What's one of the first official acts of his leadership? Defy the Americans! ".
finn must have trouble reading timelines. it was u.s. ambassador wilkins - who no doubt was ordered to do so - , who poked a finger into stephen harper's eye - and into the eyes of all canadians.
he must be a great friend of canada.

i guess finn expected stephen harper to call on the u.s. , to send the marines to canada to protect him from left-wing, red underwear carrying canadians.
seems that the CIA was not quite familiar with canadian sentiments. perhaps we should invite them to spend their vacation in canada. we'll be glad to make them familiar with canadian customs.
in friendship, hbg

i don't think this disagreement is just going to fade away. u.s. ambassador wilkins probably didn't receive much instruction in the fine art of diplomacy.
he would have done well to take a few lessons from henry kissinger before starting his assignment. henry knew how "to talk to the enemy". hbg
----------------------------------------------------------

Envoy tries to cool dispute
Wilkins scolded over Arctic stand Says U.S. position

on waters isn't new
Jan. 28, 2006. 01:00 AM
ANDREW MILLS
OTTAWA BUREAU - TORONTO STAR


OTTAWA?-U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins is attempting to halt a minor diplomatic quarrel with prime minister-designate Stephen Harper before it mushrooms out of control.

Harper made a point in his first post-election news conference Thursday to scold Wilkins for mentioning that Washington and "most other countries" do not recognize Canada's claim to the Northwest Passage.

Talking to reporters yesterday in Quebec City, the U.S. envoy seemed to temper the remarks he made earlier in the week.

"I simply restated a longstanding and well-known position of the United States on the legal status of the Arctic waters," Wilkins said. "Nothing more, nothing less, just restating the position we've had for several decades and the same statement that I have made many, many times."

Harper added fuel to the spat Thursday by pointing out his plans to defend Canada's sovereignty in the North and telling Wilkins to keep his distance.

The Tories' $5.3 billion strategy includes building remote sensors to detect foreign ships and submarines plying the Northwest Passage, building three new icebreakers to carry troops, ramping up aerial surveillance, building a deep-water port in Iqaluit and installing a military training centre in the North.

Pressed yesterday, Wilkins wouldn't comment on the newly elected government's plans for the Arctic. "I took no position on any proposed plan by anyone," Wilkins said. "I simply restated our position on the 12-mile territory limit."

In her first public statements on the Canadian election, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she looked forward to a bilateral tone "befitting good friends and good neighbours" under the new Harper-led Conservative government.

Rice told CBS Radio the Bush administration has had "our differences and our difficulties" with Ottawa, but she praised the outgoing government of Paul Martin for its help in Afghanistan and Sudan, and its financial contribution to rebuilding Iraq.

Conservative MP Jason Kenney told a Washington symposium yesterday his party can strongly disagree with the U.S., but do it in a more mature, diplomatic and sophisticated tone than the previous government.

"We're going to fight U.S. protectionism, we're going to fight to protect our Arctic sovereignty, but we're going to do it in a way that's diplomatic and gets results," he told a forum at the Woodrow Wilson Center.

With files from Tim Harper and Canadian press

Trust me, to the extent that this issue resonates, it does so only in Canada.

Canadians are a fine bunch of folk, but thy spend too much time defining themselves not by what they are, but by what they aren't : Americans.

The Canadian relationship with America approaches that of a group of mice with an elephant. The elephant hardly acknowledges that the mice exist and will from time to time step on one without thinking. The mice muster all sorts of righteous attacks against the elephant but never manage to do more than cutting a cuticle.

Nationalistic pride is, I believe, a good thing (within reason) and if I were Canadian, I probably would have a few choice words to say about America, but Canadians need to develop a national identity that has nothing to do with America.

This issue of who owns the Northwest Passage is meaningless. If it ever becomes a matter of crucial national interest to America, Canada will not be able to thwart the desires of the US. Hopefully such a level of disagreement will never be necessary, but at some point the mice have to realize that there is not a whole lot they can do to direct the elephant.

Funny, I always heard that elephants are afraid of mice.

Only in cartoons. If notice at all is taken of a mouse by an elephant, the mouse's prospects are dim indeed.

Hmmmmm.......I suppose.....although, I have heard if a mouse gets up inside of an elephant's trunk, it can suffocate it. Maybe that is why elephants don't like mice. Gotta watch the little guys. Sometimes they'll get you when you're not watching, you know?

Well, even paranoids can have real enemies - just being crazy is no guarantee nobody's out to get you. On elephants and mice, though, the deal is a myth. Ask any zookeeper or naturalist.

Oh, and elephants don't breath through their trunks - besides, consider that an elephant can spray several gallons of water a good distance in very short order, with great force and fair accuracy; a well placed spray can knock a man down from several yards. Apart from the fact an elphant's trunk is extremely sensitive, well-served by nerves, and has more muscles than the entire human body, its incredibly flexible, and reacts instantaneously to irritation; not even bugs get up there, unless the elephant wants them there, like as a snack of ants or termites snarfled from a mound or nest to be sneezed into the beast's gaping maw.

Wow. I guess us mousy little Canadians had best watch out!

Then- I remember stories like David and Goliath.

Hubris has a way of knocking a nation down faster than an elephant can fart.

Oh, BTW, Cuba has kept America at bay. So can Canada.

Whats with this desperate need to manufacture an issue none of the rest of the world cares about?