North American Union? Is this all for real?

[owequitit]

On a lighter note, I just read that Obama carried Wisconsin, for his 9th straight primary win. McCain gained further support, as was expected. In a race between McCain/Obama, it would be a tough tough choice for me to make, although at this point I am leaning slightly toward Obama.

The good news though was that 15% of independent voters were first time voters. That is a VERY promising growth rate. I hope that this momentum continues, and that more people get pissed off enough to get up and vote.

THAT is the healthiest thing that can happen to our country.

[deevergote]

Also, as a "superpower" we don't have any obligation but to ourselves. Just like everyone else. We CHOOSE to help because it is the right thing to do. Only to be slapped in the face when bad stuff happens to us. We help because we are generous in that regard, NOT because we are obligated.

As a superpower, we are also have an obligation to defend our position. That means we are a target for those that aren't at our level. We are one of the first countries that anyone with the technology shakes the nuke-stick at. We are the main "David vs. Goliath" target for terrorism and outright hatred. We are the evil, money grubbing, all consuming, all polluting, got-a-country-from-sea-to-shining-sea monster that has damn near dominated the world for most of the past century.

Are we do-gooders? Or are we protecting ourselves? Kuwait... was it about oil? Was it about Iraq gaining more power in the Middle East than they already had? Was it about someone unfriendly gaining control of a resource that this country depends on? I'm sure we didn't JUST go over there to save that little country. I can't say that we only did it for the financial interests of "Big Oil"... but this country NEEDS oil... more than any other country in the world. We thrive on it... and we don't have enough to survive without the Middle Eastern supplies. However, to say that the war is about oil is NOT saying that we're being run by "Big Oil". We NEED oil to survive. Without oil, we can't work. Our economy suffers significantly. A country with a suffering economy has a suffering military, as well as political unrest. It would make us considerably weaker if we lost our oil. We'd eventually recover... if we weren't overtaken first.
Also, by "peace keeping" missions, like that in Somalia, we're making a good name for ourselves. Additionally, we're showing that we still have the spare military forces to involve ourselves in such missions. We're also showing that we're aware of what is going on in the world, even when it comes to relatively small tribal conflicts. "You're not going to get any military action past the US, world!"

We're not the international Superman. We act with our own interests at heart... but we DO seem to try to do so by the most humane methods. That is part of the responsibility of being a superpower (also, it helps us from being more of a target... if we weren't a benevolent presence, we'd be seen as potentially hostile... not a good thing)

[MikeW]

The United States is also one of the youngest countries/governments on this planet....yet we run(or try to run) everything.

[deevergote]

The United States is also one of the youngest countries/governments on this planet....yet we run(or try to run) everything.

Yeah, we rock

This IS a very good country. I like being here, and I'm proud of being an American. The sad thing is that when you're in the spotlight, and you want to stay there, people will pick you apart. Your flaws are easily seen, and very often pointed out. I learned that on a smaller scale when became a moderator here, and then when I took over. You can't be a big shot without screwing up a few things, and making a few enemies.

[bigjoegood1]

Yeah, we rock

This IS a very good country. I like being here, and I'm proud of being an American. The sad thing is that when you're in the spotlight, and you want to stay there, people will pick you apart. Your flaws are easily seen, and very often pointed out. I learned that on a smaller scale when became a moderator here, and then when I took over. You can't be a big shot without screwing up a few things, and making a few enemies.

U. S. A., U.S.A.!!!

Deev is like Charlie Daniels

[MikeW]

God...I hope not...

[foamypirate]

Cheney: What are we going to do tonight, Bush?

Bush: The same thing we do every night, Cheney. Try to take over the world!

Cheney: Narf.

[lokuputha]

The United States is also one of the youngest countries/governments on this planet....yet we run(or try to run) everything.

I think US is so powerful because it was built by other very old and powerful nations.


anyways, back to the topic of the North American Union:

Akin to slowly turning up the heat on a pot full of lobsters....I think NA is slowly going towards a Union.
Have a look at the hassles of crossing our borders for example...ID this, birth certificate that. The NA Union will "solve" all these tediums.
The EU happened. The Asian Union is currently being deliberated, in fact I know someone in that deliberation right now. The African Union is growing to "tackle" famine and economic development. The America's are not so special.

I think the World Unions is an economic strategy to gain political power.


"Let me control a peoples currency and I care not who makes their laws..." Meyer Nathaniel Rothchild in a speech to a gathering of world bankers February 12, 1912.

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order [referring to the 1991 LA Riot]. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond [i.e., an invasion], whether real or *promulgated* [emphasis mine], that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this *scenario*, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government." Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

"We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent." Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, l950

here I go again...adding fuel to the fire. 1 2 3

[qbodsyt]

This has been interesting.......

Speaking as a Canadian with no superiority complex or any political stance at all in fact, I'm just going to say:

Conspiracy theories are, and always will be popular with a portion of the population because they are glamorous and exciting.

Just as there were people lining up to subscribe to a system of belief based on the Da Vinci Code (which was a friggin' work of fiction!) without any due diligence investigating it's credence, there will always be people who are at least entertained if not enthralled with the idea that some big, powerful baddie is targeting little ol' them for brainwashing.

Owequitit's remarks as always are very interesting and entertaining. You never fail to meet the bull head on do you Scott? That's mainly why I think you are a cool guy (that and you process encylopedia's like light reading). I don't agree with everything you say, but I'm also not American (or like I said, political)

I respect America as being a nation founded on admirable ideals. I wept at parts watching Ken Burns "The Civil War". Amazing men have stood up and fought for what they thought was right, willing to die for that cause. And the cause was true.

I may be blinded by sentimentality or a romantic shading of past events, but I'm not sure how some of the great statesmen of America's undeniably illustrious past would feel about the country as it exists and is run today. Bismarck may not have any beefs with some of the "realpolitik" being practiced, but pragmatism and self interest aside, I find it hard to view the America today as of a country that has held true to its core ideals after the devestating degeneration of the world since WWI.

I don't paint America alone with this brush, the whole world is in the crapper in my opinion. The current situation in countries like France or Britain is no better, and for countries such as Britain, they don't have the same history of cultural and social reform that is commonly associated with America.

I guess what I'm saying is, I can't defend all of America's actions unless I'm willing to shove aside the ideals that made the nation great in the first place. At the same time, I don't put all the blame on any one American either, whether it be Dubya, the apathetic average American who doesn't vote, or Jesse Jackson!

I think America takes the brunt of criticisms because it is the focus of the world. To a degree, the world at large has at least until recently revolved around the US to some extent or another. Just as Lindsay Lohan's photographic mishaps garner her multiple pages of commentary in another thread in the near vicinity just because she is a celebrity, so too, will the US's choices be analyzed and criticized by all and sundry because of its somewhat "celebraic" (not a word, lol) status in world affairs.

Anyways, I have a cold so I've spent too long on here reading through all of this.......happy sparring everyone!!!

[owequitit]

As a superpower, we are also have an obligation to defend our position. That means we are a target for those that aren't at our level. We are one of the first countries that anyone with the technology shakes the nuke-stick at. We are the main "David vs. Goliath" target for terrorism and outright hatred. We are the evil, money grubbing, all consuming, all polluting, got-a-country-from-sea-to-shining-sea monster that has damn near dominated the world for most of the past century.

Are we do-gooders? Or are we protecting ourselves? Kuwait... was it about oil? Was it about Iraq gaining more power in the Middle East than they already had? Was it about someone unfriendly gaining control of a resource that this country depends on? I'm sure we didn't JUST go over there to save that little country. I can't say that we only did it for the financial interests of "Big Oil"... but this country NEEDS oil... more than any other country in the world. We thrive on it... and we don't have enough to survive without the Middle Eastern supplies. However, to say that the war is about oil is NOT saying that we're being run by "Big Oil". We NEED oil to survive. Without oil, we can't work. Our economy suffers significantly. A country with a suffering economy has a suffering military, as well as political unrest. It would make us considerably weaker if we lost our oil. We'd eventually recover... if we weren't overtaken first.
Also, by "peace keeping" missions, like that in Somalia, we're making a good name for ourselves. Additionally, we're showing that we still have the spare military forces to involve ourselves in such missions. We're also showing that we're aware of what is going on in the world, even when it comes to relatively small tribal conflicts. "You're not going to get any military action past the US, world!"

We're not the international Superman. We act with our own interests at heart... but we DO seem to try to do so by the most humane methods. That is part of the responsibility of being a superpower (also, it helps us from being more of a target... if we weren't a benevolent presence, we'd be seen as potentially hostile... not a good thing)

Yes, to some extent this is true. However, we WERE asked to intervene in the situation by sovereign countries. It isn't like we marched in and said "we are here to protect our OIL!"

Also, it should be noted that while the Middle East does supply most of the worlds oil, we actually have enough reserves to not really be as dependent on them as everyone thinks we are. Like good strategists, we are using their oil and saving ours for a rainy day. However, it isn't like Saudi Arabia and most of the other countries that are freely selling oil on the open market are seeing no economic benefit either. Look at the explosive development in UAE. And they just mostly supply natural gas. They also seem to be well run in that they are not just sitting on the oil money and going hog wild figuring it will never run out. They seem to actually be diversifying their economy, so that when it is gone, they will be OK.

Also, it is rumored that the Anwar field is producing mostly water. Since water is heavier than oil, wells are pumped by pumping pressurized water in their place once the natural pressure drops to low to continue producing the same yield. Eventually, you keep pumping water in, and at some point, you start to get water back out. The % of water keeps increasing until the oil is gone. I don't know how much is left. Saudi, says plenty (they have a vested interest in saying that), while other "experts" say it will be dry in 20 years or less. Time will tell I guess.

[deevergote]

Very true. Of course, protecting the world economy as it is now IS in our best interest. Defending those countries to keep things as they are is important. Any shift in political or economic power could result in a drastic change!

Of course, being the evil, all-consuming country that we are, the Middle East will never stop selling us oil. Love us or hate us, we buy a shitload of the stuff!

[owequitit]

Very true. Of course, protecting the world economy as it is now IS in our best interest. Defending those countries to keep things as they are is important. Any shift in political or economic power could result in a drastic change!

Of course, being the evil, all-consuming country that we are, the Middle East will never stop selling us oil. Love us or hate us, we buy a shitload of the stuff!

LOL! When you are the best customer, you can be a dick I guess.

I often ponder what exactly will happen to the region when the oil is gone, if we don't invent some other means before then. Once the demand drops, then what? That will be an interesting and probably unstable point in history.

[deevergote]

Very true. Aside from the historical and religious value of many of the areas... it really is a fairly undesirable part of the world. The Middle East is NOT one of the places that people generally think of as being very beautiful! (I'm sure there are plenty of beautiful places... but it's far from the south of France!)

[owequitit]

Very true. Aside from the historical and religious value of many of the areas... it really is a fairly undesirable part of the world. The Middle East is NOT one of the places that people generally think of as being very beautiful! (I'm sure there are plenty of beautiful places... but it's far from the south of France!)

Yeah, I am sure it is beautiful, but the conflict between the modern world, and the extremist fundamentalism that exists will preclude it from being a desireable place to visit.

[lokuputha]

the Arabian peninsula is a beautiful place...my dad visited Oman and he said the people are also very friendly...that place is an ancient trading zone and people have grown up celebrating each other's uniqueness.

..



Beautiful Oman Link

I am sure even Americans can visit the area....just slap on a Canadian Flag on your back pack