Opinion Who are US allies?

[USA!USA!]

Trump imposed tariffs on EU have got nothing to do with EU military spending.

Those were your own words. You want it - maybe they should have been doing it all along? You know, like the US has been asking for them to do?

 

[Andy Capp]

It's the other way around. They exploit the US for economic gain.

LOL

Personal gain? As if poor US was exploited by Canda, UK and EU lol

Also good luck staying relevant on the world stage with only Australia as your allies.

As if, indeed.

• According to the province, Ontario was the top export destination for 17 US states.
• Every day, over $320 million in goods flow across the Ambassador Bridge between Windsor and Detroit.
• Since CUSMA came into effect in 2020, trade in North America has increased by 47%(Opens in a new window).

 

[USA!USA!]

Maybe the us should stop fucking shit up around the world.
Eu takes the hit on the refugees pouring into to Europe.
Will the us start taking its share of refugees?

Why are you asking me? I never said anything about refugees.

I think that the US should take refugees, but I also think its a good idea to be restrictive in who you take in - maybe that's something Europe can improve as well.

 

[Fergelmince]

What would that entail exactly?
How does that apply to Canada? What heavy lifting did US do for Canada?

Canada would be a Russian or Chinese territory if it wasn't next door to the US.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Maybe the us should stop fucking shit up around the world.
Eu takes the hit on the refugees pouring into to Europe.
Will the us start taking its share of refugees?

We have people pouring into this country from all over the world though. I'm not sure you have much of a gripe here.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

What a baby

Trump is stern with our allies and you interpret that as partnership ending. As if it needs to be continuous accommodation.

You probably threatened to run away from home every time your parents grounded you

Stern? What this prick is doing trying to take over Greenland, the Panama Canal, and even renaming the Gulf of Mexico is closer to extortion than standing firm.

 

[Fanu]

Canada would be a Russian or Chinese territory if it wasn't next door to the US.

And if US was in Asia it would be a chinese colony

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Canada would be a Russian or Chinese territory if it wasn't next door to the US.

Not French or British?

 

[LangfordBarrow]

And if US was in Asia it would be a chinese colony

 

[Prutfis]

We have people pouring into this country from all over the world though. I'm not sure you have much of a gripe here.

That´s not really the same as the massive refugee streams that the US have a large part in creating and Europe has to deal with now is it.

 

[oldshadow]

What would that entail exactly?
How does that apply to Canada? What heavy lifting did US do for Canada?

Want to compare the amount of money spent on mutual protection?

Now Canadian is not the worst at this by far.

 

[Fergelmince]

And if US was in Asia it would be a chinese colony

Canada having the luxury of being next door to the US is a reality, not an "IF", and ALL the benefits of that vicinity are a reality.

 

[panamaican]

The ones that are willing to do their share and not expect the US do be the one to do all the heavy lifting physical. and physicaly.

You're making a point that I think underscores the general problem with how people on the right approach these things. I'm not making this about you but your comment is a good place to start.

The burden of leadership is that you do the heavy lifting.

We can look back through all of history and part of the mantle of leadership meant taking on the financial and military burdens of your subordinates. The willingness and ability to do so is what gave someone the right to lead. The king (for lack of a better word) fielded the majority of the army. The king provided food for the homeless. Justice for the harmed. The king defended his vassal states from invasion.

When the king looks at the people and says "I don't want to lead armies to protect you. I don't want to find bread to feed you, etc.", he's done. Pack up go home. Someone else will be king. We have to be very careful here. Because being leader of the free world isn't about getting the most benefits. It also means shouldering the most responsibilities.

Once we start insisting that we don't want that burden, we are ending our run as leaders of the free world. And lots of great dynasties ended when a king came to power who wanted to have the wealth and prestige of being king but didn't want the responsibilities and burdens of being king.

 

[oldshadow]

You're making a point that I think underscores the general problem with how people on the right approach these things. I'm not making this about you but your comment is a good place to start.

The burden of leadership is that you do the heavy lifting.

We can look back through all of history and part of the mantle of leadership meant taking on the financial and military burdens of your subordinates. The willingness and ability to do so is what gave someone the right to lead. The king (for lack of a better word) fielded the majority of the army. The king provided food for the homeless. Justice for the harmed. The king defended his vassal states from invasion.

When the king looks at the people and says "I don't want to lead armies to protect you. I don't want to find bread to feed you, etc.", he's done. Pack up go home. Someone else will be king. We have to be very careful here. Because being leader of the free world isn't about getting the most benefits. It also means shouldering the most responsibilities.

Once we start insisting that we don't want that burden, we are ending our run as leaders of the free world. And lots of great dynasties ended when a king came to power who wanted to have the wealth and prestige of being king but didn't want the responsibilities and burdens of being king.

We are not and we're never meant and never should be considered to be "king" of the world with that responsibility or duty. We are partners and among the leaders. In this we must pull our weight as others should.

 

[Fanu]

Want to compare the amount of money spent on mutual protection?

Now Canadian is not the worst at this by far.

Ok now count all of the military bases US allies allow on their territories and how much weaker US military would be without them.

 

[milliniar]

LOL

As if, indeed.

• According to the province, Ontario was the top export destination for 17 US states.
• Every day, over $320 million in goods flow across the Ambassador Bridge between Windsor and Detroit.
• Since CUSMA came into effect in 2020, trade in North America has increased by 47%(Opens in a new window).

We exploit the US so much if you take away oil, gas, and electricity the US has a Surplus in trade...

And if Canada adds Tariff to the electricity or cuts it off that is bad for the Northeast of the US.

Oil is a world commodity so that one is harder to say what that will really affect, but oil companies never let a reason to raise the prices pass.

 

[panamaican]

We are not and we're never meant and never should be considered to be "king" of the world with that responsibility or duty. We are partners and among the leaders. In this we must pull our weight as others should.

I think that's the wrong approach. Someone will be the leader. There are never really "partners" on the global stage. Someone is dominant and if it's not us, it will be someone else.

The Western world has let us be the leaders because they trust what we will do with that power. But what if China becomes the leader of the world or some other country that doesn't share our values?

There is a mistake in believing that we can give up the leadership role but that no one else will pick it up. As they say "power abhors a vacuum."

 

[oldshadow]

Ok now count all of the military bases US allies allow on their territories and how much weaker US military would be without them.

We should be closing a hell of a lot of them and get out of the shit idea of being the world police. It's stupid and does nothing but bring trouble on us. If the said country wants us there and it's a joint base and it's something they are paying their share of the we should consider it. Otherwise just shit it down and use the money someplace better.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

That´s not really the same as the massive refugee streams that the US have a large part in creating and Europe has to deal with now is it.

Well I guess how much a part is debatable but you do have a point.

 

[oldshadow]

I think that's the wrong approach. Someone will be the leader. There are never really "partners" on the global stage. Someone is dominant and if it's not us, it will be someone else.

The Western world has let us be the leaders because they trust what we will do with that power. But what if China becomes the leader of the world or some other country that doesn't share our values?

There is a mistake in believing that we can give up the leadership role but that no one else will pick it up. As they say "power abhors a vacuum."

We don't need to carry the rest of the world if they want the same things as us then we can be partners in see that happens. I have no trouble being partners just not the world's "sugar daddy ".