The Porn Dude

Ann Coulter with her pants down!

BillyC

New member
Feb 8, 2004
172
0
0
All about
Canada vs US

Let's face it, the US has become an egotistical monster! That said, it DOESNT mean Canada would't do the same thing if it were in the US's shoes. That would presume that Canadians somehow have a higher level of conciousness than Americans... which I would disagree with.

As a dual citizen who grew up in both places from time to time... here is a decidedly "anti-Canadian" observation:

Many Canadians get their very {international} identity by NOT being American. Almost as if it is there job to disagree with things America does. Now, let's face it, nowadays that's pretty damn smart!! But is it really? Canadians have been saying the same for decades on all sorts of issues, many of which were simply not that important... or they were actually wrong about.
One Example: Ever since I can remember my news addicted Canadian family spewed newpaper accounts about how aweful it was that America had so many poor, living in such bad conditions {precurser to todays droning about lack of healthcare}. It wasn't till I got to college that I started realizing that the US is really partly a third world nation with the poor of the world flooding over it's boarders {comparitively speaking}... and all those statistics that pompous Canadian policital critics with nothing better to do would spew were completely stupid. You heard the same stuff from the German politicians till they slowly {under tremendous political pressure to override their anti-foreigner feelings} started to "bring" in foreign workers {because the NEEDED them, not because of the nobel laws of the land that AMerica has!!} to do the dirty work. Now they realize the real truth... in a free world with movable people, all this business that Germany {or Canada} was somehow smarter or better due to their standard of living, healthcare, etc... was simply statistical crap and averages based on the fact that the poor of the world were kept out.



BillyC
 

Swguy

Single White Member
Apr 26, 2003
1,341
0
36
Diagon Alley
www.freeones.ca
Ok.. I have a few things to say.
greenvalley said:
Coulture is at it again
This the same Coulter bashing Canada vid that's been curculating for months and in about 3 or 4 other threads here. Yes, she's annoying. Yes, she's talking out of her ass. Yes, she makes me laugh, too. No, she DOES NOT represent what ALL Americans think about Canada. Ok? Good. GET OVER IT.
greenvalley said:
For those that believe the US is all powerfull. Take a look at this:
Got to go pick up some of those nice Russin Missles.
etc... etc... etc...
Here is the article I got it from: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7147.htm
Ok.. I'd buy the fact that the Sunburn could be devastating to the US navy IF the US Navy's surface fleet consisted of single ships floating around by themselves. News flash... they don't. Well, ok, very rarely and almost never in a combat zone. The statements in the article you quote sound like they assume 1 missile against 1 ship. A Carrier Group, for example, consists of many ships. I don't know the exact number, but you will never see a carrier by itself unless its in port. Even then its unlikely. There are usually Destroyers and Frigates and other support and escort vessels in the group. They'd all be on the look out for any incoming missiles and when found, any ship in range would have their defences aimed right at them. Sure, the Sunfire may be able to avoid being shot down by one Phalanx, but its doubtful it would get past 3 or 4 or 8. Most ships also have more than one Phalanx installation. No, the Phalanx isn't perfect. No defence system is. But with several guns hurling 30mm hunks of depleted uranium at 3000 rounds/minute, at least ONE round is bound to hit the target. And at a closing speed of what? Mach 3? Mach 4? one round is all it would take to knock out most targets smaller than say an F-18.

Here's a quote from a discussion group I found that goes int a bit more detail...

http://206.131.241.61/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=007210
Actually, the article is wrong on an important point. The missile is supposed to travel at Mach 2.1, which is about 1500 mph, or 25 miles a minute. That means that once the missile breaches the 200-mile secure detection zone around a carrier group (as Phalanx can be integrated with it), Phalanx will have 8 minutes to respond, not "a few seconds". And even supposing the missile was not detected by the normal system and Phalanx caught it all by itself at only a few miles from the ship, Phalanx also has its own autonomous detection-and-targeting function, which means it wouldn't need "a few seconds" to plot a firing solution; the solution would be nearly instantaneous. Several destroyers in the carrier group means several Phalanxes capable of targeting and firing at the same missile, so I'm fairly certain that the russian missile is not -quite- as big a threat as the article claims. And the Navy's newer system, RAM (Rolling Airframe Missile, not Rolling Action Missile) is designed for such threats, and is installed or being installed on carriers, destroyers, cruisers, and even frigates. Once again, plenty of redundant protection. Of course, any weapon has the opportunity to bust through and do some damage. Closing off the Gulf and "trapping injured and dying" American sailors inside? Not incredibly likely.
Nice scary article though. I like the way it starts off like a Popular Science article, devolves into an 'Israel must be stopped' rant, and then ends like a Public Service Announcement.
A little info on the RAM system:

http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfile/missiles/wep-ram.html
Features: The RIM-116 RAM is designed as an all-weather, high-firepower, low-cost, self-defense system against anti-ship cruise missiles and other asymmetric threats. Its original Block 0 design was based on the infrared seeker of the Stinger missile, and the warhead, rocket motor, and fuse from the Sidewinder missile. The Block 0 configuration uses Radio Frequency (RF) for midcourse guidance and transitions to Infrared (IR) guidance for terminal engagement. There is no shipboard support required (i.e. no illuminators) after missile launch. While retaining Block 0 guidance modes, Block 1 incorporates the added capability of autonomous IR-all-the-way guidance, thus countering advanced anti-ship missiles that do not employ onboard radar seekers. RIM-116 has been installed or is planned on the following ship classes: CV/CVN, DD-963, FFG, LHA, LHD, LSD, and LPD-17. The Navy expects to procure approximately 2,000 Block 1 missiles.
Any ship that carried both the Phalanx and RAM defences would be very well protected, imo.
greenvalley said:
The US can bomb us, but then again we can shut off their power. And you know what happens down there when the lights go out. A little thing like the LA riots could be in their future. And if they can't hold a barren small country like Iraq who would say they would be more successful here. Its absurd to think we somehow need the protection of the US. After all the only country that has invaded us is the US. Fact is no one really needs the US's "help" except maybe Israel.
Yep.. the US certainly could bomb us. All it would take would be a medium or large nuke on the following cities:

Vancouver
Ottawa
Toronto
Montreal

and that's roughly 10 million dead Canadians (give or take a few). Throw in Calgary, Edmonton and Winnipeg (just so they don't feel left out) and you've now removed over ONE THIRD of this country's population. And all it took was what? $100 Million USD of missiles (I really have no idea what the cost would be) and Bingo... Then all the US would have to do is roll on in, head over to our Hydro-electric generators and other power plants, flip the switch back to "ON" and then they can go back home and realx with a cold Bud in their air-conditions homes. All it would take is about a week, more or less... maybe two

Don't get me wrong. I don't agree with the above scenario, nor do I think it would ever actually happen. Canada might be able to put up a bit of a fight. Our guys are some of the best trained soldiers and pilots in the world (my favourite story about Canadian pilots is when they US invited us to send a few pilots down for a weekend competition against some of their TOP GUN pilots and others from other countries. Canada could only send a few of our best trainees and our guys walked all over the US pilots... but I digress) but we have such limited numbers that there's no way they could hold out for long if the US decided we needed "Liberating".

There's no denying that the US is a military superpower capable of overwhelming - when used correctly - almost any opposition it came up against. But that's what you get when you spend a quarter trillion dollars (again... guessing at the number) on your military. Seems they go by the following two creedo's:

"The one with the most toys at the end wins"

"Walk softly and carry a big stick... ok.. forget the walking softly crap... gimme the biggest stick"...


SWG :cool:
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,935
0
0
kanak said:
Herb and Maury,


Burton provides an eye opening counterpoint to the American centric history taught to the south. I never really appreciated that if it were not for American expansionist policy in taking the west (now considered the "midwest") from the Indians, and the Brits cynical and duplicitous use of the Indians in the War, there might not have been a Canada as the inhabitants (and Habitants) were drifting towards their neighbor to the south. Instead, US agression became a defining event in Canadian history. Burton seems to imply that ironically, if the US had not invaded Canada, you might all be Americans today.
don't forget that out west it was even more prevalent! the rallying cry of '54-40' or bust was in reference to having the the western half of Canada become part of the 'west coast' of America.

the really scary or ironic thing to ponder is that the American Constitution includes a clause that states that if Canada ever decided to become a colony of the United States it would be accepted without reservation! In other words, if we REALLY wanted to be Americans we could join anytime and they could not Constitutionally turn us down.
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,935
0
0

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,935
0
0
Grendleaxe said:
The articles of confederation were superceded by the constitution down south just like the BNA act was superceded and replaced by the repatriated constitution of 1982 here in Canada.

It makes for a cute trivia question, but little more than that.

.

but still more than an urban legend.
 

Swguy

Single White Member
Apr 26, 2003
1,341
0
36
Diagon Alley
www.freeones.ca
Catalynn said:
did not feel the need to call him a idiot for choosing to do so.....
Understandable to a degree, but not marrying you...?... Grade A USDA Inspected IDIOT.. ;)


SWG :rolleyes:
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,935
0
0
westwoody said:
The Articles of Confederation were superceded in 1783 when the Constitution came into effect.Mistaking the law of the land for a document that has been obsolete for 222 years is quite a stretch. Oh well.
being an ignorant american ... no stretch at all!
 

dittman

New member
Jan 22, 2003
730
0
0
75
seattle
the difference between americans and canadiens, most americans know what it means to be american, however most canadiens dont have a clue what it means to be canadien, you all still havent figured out if you have your own culture.
 

BillyC

New member
Feb 8, 2004
172
0
0
All about
Say What?

Ditman,

Not for nuttin, but there are dozens of cultures in America [the US]... that's exactly the point. When you say: most americans know what it means to be american" you may be right... but it's completely different for many goups... you point is 100% backwards.

That said, when Canadians talk about "American Culture" they too are making a grave mistake.... confusing what they see sitting on their asses watching "Fox News" with "America".

There isn't an "American Culture"... there are many.

BillyC
 

rick hunter

New member
Jul 6, 2004
362
0
0
Vancouver
dittman said:
the difference between americans and canadiens, most americans know what it means to be american, however most canadiens dont have a clue what it means to be canadien, you all still havent figured out if you have your own culture.

So dittman can you tell me please what it means to be an American? If its for one to spend about 18% of ones budget on the military (which doesn't even include the cost for the operations in Iraq or Afghanistan) then I think I'll pass. And when you have politicans who are more worried about the correct size of the flag in school then having enough supplies, then that's a pretty sad fact. Or is it that you can claim that your building more jails than anyplace else on the planet. Do you really think you are the envy of the world? Where do you think the term "Ugly American" comes from? Most of the world looks upon the US with contempt and disdain not admiration. I hope I live long enough to see your empire collapse.
 

YuckFou

Banned
Jan 11, 2005
20
0
0
chuck1561 said:
shows how much you know about Canadian Troops..and having been one I know that they are some of the worlds best trained..yes under equiped and not enough man power..but every time we have gone up against the states in any type of Military copetition..guess what..we've come out on top..so LD you should stop talking out the top of your hat about what we are capable of..you are insulting men and women who do put their lives on the line many times over..wether you want to see it or not :rolleyes:
darn straight!!! the Canuckians outperformed the vaunted 10th Mountain Division in Afghanistan!!!
 

Maury Beniowski

Blastocyst
Mar 31, 2004
1,869
1
0
In a nice wet pussy!
Here dittman, I've done a little bit of research for you; no need to thank me...

dittman said:
the difference between americans and canadiens, most americans know what it means to be american, however most canadiens dont have a clue what it means to be canadien, you all still havent figured out if you have your own culture.
You're right, we don't have a clue, but a lot of Americans seem to know what being Canadian is all about. I guess we spend so much time exporting our culture to the US, we often overlook what ours is all about. Where shall we begin: John Candy, Michael J. Fox, Jim Carrey, Avril Lavigne, Shania Twain, Ann Murray, Mary Pickford, Lorne Michaels... You get the idea!

If you'd like to do some research on your own, then start with this website. It is published by the University of California (Davis), of all places. We're too busy defining American culture, and trying to figure out what being Canadian is all about, darn it!
 

BillyC

New member
Feb 8, 2004
172
0
0
All about
"culture"

<Where shall we begin: John Candy, Michael J. Fox, Jim Carrey, Avril Lavigne, Shania Twain, Ann Murray, Mary Pickford, Lorne Michaels... You get the idea!>

Yep... The "American culture" {as if there is one} the world detests, is full of Canadian's {and of course other nationalities}... and Canadians are damn proud at how many Canadian "shill" newsscasters are from Canada as well as how many Canadians are acting around Hollywood, playing sports in the US, etc etc etc... ain't it amazin? They race like rats to the free cheese!! LOL!

BillyC
 

Herb_The_Perb

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2005
2,011
1
0
Far South of the Border
Maury Beniowski said:
I guess we spend so much time exporting our culture to the US, we often overlook what ours is all about. Where shall we begin: John Candy, Michael J. Fox, Jim Carrey, Avril Lavigne, Shania Twain, Ann Murray, Mary Pickford, Lorne Michaels... You get the idea!
And don't forget William Shatner, Celine Dion, Art Linkletter, and Giselle McKenzie.

Oh, I forgot, we're talking about culture.
How about Glenn Gould, Mordecai Richler and Marshall McLuhan, then?
Better at what they did than anyone else in the world.

Yep, that's a lot more like it.
 

dittman

New member
Jan 22, 2003
730
0
0
75
seattle
jeez you have named all of what 5 people out of a country of 280 million, jeez thats an awful lot, but they come down here where the money is, theyd do all right up north but not like they do down here, besides and this is the scart part brittney spears influences our culture more then the people you named do, hell she influenences your so called culture more then anyone you can name.
 

kanak

New member
Dec 23, 2004
47
1
0
YVR
Herb_The_Perb said:
And don't forget William Shatner, Celine Dion, Art Linkletter, and Giselle McKenzie.

Giselle McKenzie, now that is a flash from the past! Is she still alive? I remember watching her on black and white TV in the '50's.
I would like to forget Celine.
 

Maury Beniowski

Blastocyst
Mar 31, 2004
1,869
1
0
In a nice wet pussy!
dittman said:
yeah but they come down here where we have an idenity and you all dont. lol
Really dittman, if that's your best comeback, then you truly are in need of some culture...

That's OK, we still love you just the way you are!
 

ApolloDB

New member
May 9, 2004
8
0
0
Victoria, B.C.
Seems pretty obvious ....

Bull's depiction of what this woman has to offer is appropriate. What do you think she might be doing for the power brokers? (not much imagination required)
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts