mead berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Trump vs. Trudeau
In the Anglosphere, Diversity Is Strength
Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • Moira Moore

    I like how you ignore America attacking what would become Canada in the War of 1812.

  • TPAJAX

    FM Freeland’s remarks are a perfect example that people of modest intellect find themselves in positions of great power – in the US and the world over. Protectionism? Bahahaha okie doke. Been following Canadian politics for many years. It’s attempt to shift itself from being a middle power to a model power has definitive limitations, and has by and large failed.

    • Unelected Leader

      Absolutely! And let’s look at another old FM’s quote. Jorge Castañeda wrote a very good book called The Mexican Shock. Understanding that NAFTA was not a deal between competing national interests, he says, It was “an agreement for the rich and powerful in the United States, Mexico and Canada, an agreement effectively excluding ordinary people in all three societies.”

  • QET

    The Canadian Foreign Minister’s remarks are necessarily an admission that Canada is and has been a client state and not truly a sovereign nation.

    As for its new “sovereign course,” I’ll believe that when I see its new aircraft carrier task force and strategic bomber squadron in operation.

  • rheddles

    The last time one English-speaking country tried to impose its views on another was when the British tried to squelch the American Revolution.

    Funny, I thought it was when the Americans tried to impose their views on impressment of Americans by the British.

  • Dale Fayda

    Trudeau wants Canada to carry its own weight militarily and to take up more of the burden of policing the world? Yay! When can they start?

    • Isaiah6020

      No silly. Canadian Leftists will just posture a bit. When it comes time to actually do anything, they will still be counting on Uncle Sugar.

      • Dale Fayda

        Awwww, bummer…

  • Mark1971

    Everybody is criticizing Trump for not explicitly endorsing NATO Article V, but that is apparently what it took to prod some of these people into carrying more of their own weight militarily.

  • Angel Martin

    In less than four months, Trump has got Germany, Canada, etc. to increase their defence spending . Something that Obama in eight years of his “masterful” diplomacy could not achieve.

  • Beauceron

    “citing concerns about America’s growing protectionism”

    I translate that as “not expending its blood and treasure on things that we want done and that benefit us but that we have never had to spend anything on ourselves.”

    “Canada plans to strengthen its military presence in the most dangerous parts of the world”

    With what? Cuts have made Canada’s already decrepit military even weaker. Just this past April, Canada withheld $4 billion already earmarked for improved military equipment. Former Canadian general Rick Hillier said the military was now “fragile” and that “Every time we run operations now we’re strained and we’re stretched and we’re scraping from other places.” (http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/canadian-military-could-be-on-verge-of-new-decade-of-darkness-rick-hillier).

    This isn’t Canada striking a bold, independent stance in the world, this is Canada posturing to try to pressure the US to keep doing what it’s always done. It is time countries like Canada carry their own weight. I, for one, very much welcome Canada to commit to defending people in various places around the world and I encourage them to not only increase their military spending, but to double it. If Canada actually doubled their military expenditure, they’d finally meet their NATO commitments of 2% of GDP. (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS)

    Until they manage to match deeds with words, I would encourage our Canadian friends to STFU.

    • I am not an animal!

      Not that I disagree with Canada spending 2, 3 or 4% of GDP *tomorrow*, but the agreement to spend the 2% figure is a commitment (and a voluntary one) by 2024. And there are no arrears, even if Trump “says so”. Furthermore, telling them to STFU is probably not the best way to get them to do what you want, when not doing so will perhaps help moving them along. It’s not like they can tear up the foundation and move it to Europe. They are neighbors with a lot of resources this country needs, unless you think annexing 38 million Democrats is a wise choice.

      • Beauceron

        “but the agreement to spend 2% is a commitment by 2024”

        This statement is so egregious it borders on spreading disinformation.

        The latest round of promises, made in 2014, were that our NATO allies, such as they are, would work toward spending 2% of GDP by 2024. But they all made the exact same commitment in 2006. (https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/nato-european-spending-us-grievances) And that commitment was itself just an echo of the promise to spend 2% agreed upon during the 2002 NATO Summit (dtic.mil/100.2/ada424522). It’s been 15 years since the 2% target was agreed upon– and that target itself arose from dissatisfaction of low NATO ally spending from previous decades. As much as I’m sure you’re delighted at the opportunity to take flight on a spittle-flecked anti-Trump rant, it predates Trump by decades. It would help if you at least made an attempt to base your opinion on reality and history, not your political biases.

        “Furthermore, telling them to STFU might not be the best way to get them to do what you want, when simply not doing so will perhaps help move them along.”

        First, it’s been 15 years. Being sweet about it has clearly not worked. Canada has never even come close, or even tried to come close, to meeting their commitment. In fact, Canada’s defense spending has been steadily going down recently, not up.That makes them a bad ally. There’s no nice way to put that, and in any case, being nice about it has done nothing. Second, the offer to Canada to STFU is one made in tandem with Freeland’s laughable grandstanding. Canada can’t put troops on the ground anywhere without us being there. Heck they literally can’t even transport them there, much less sustain them without our aid. Canada IS a client state, and if Freeland is unhappy with that prospect, just imagine how those of us who have been footing the bill for decades feel.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/16249ff3dbf61c2bb3f6f50b72dc28a511195923a1a54356f737984cb62ac669.jpg

  • Andrew Allison

    Shock, horror! Canada to pay for its own defense? Perish the thought.

  • solstice

    Trudeau is the very embodiment of a Western civilization that is rotting and decaying from within. He is an effete, limp-wristed, Islam-loving, open borders-supporting, free speech-hating promoter of feminism, sexual deviance, cultural degeneracy, and self-flagellating white male guilt. If the West ever collapses from within in the manner of ancient Rome or ancient Egypt, it will be because, in its dying days, the West produced people like Trudeau en masse.

    • f1b0nacc1

      Tell us what you *really* think

  • dj currie

    Critical that we keep the Anglosphere strong and united as we face the emerging threats from the east and aslo islam! Couldn’t ask for a better neighbour than the USA! respect from Canada

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service