Discussion Forums for the Dialogue Paper

Values and Culture

Thank you for participating in the Dialogue on Foreign Policy. The interactive web site is now closed. The Minister's report will appear on this web site once it is released.

This Forum is bilingual, and participants post messages in their language of choice.

Previous Topic | All Topics |

Start Topic | Next Topic

Prime Minister & Foreign Policy

Contributor: cfallon

Date: 2003-03-24 13:32:03

Fatmomma, in BC, I can understand that you don't see a link between France and Quebec. BUT:

France always keeps a tab on Quebec politics.

France and Quebec have special diplomatic relations (Quebec is a member of the Francophonie).

You seem to forget the catalyst that deGaulle's words were in Quebec - it sparked the separatist movement.

finally, Fatmomma, I have tried in other areas to point out how I believe you come to your opinions thoughtfully and with principles. But, no Canadian can tell me that you or any other person in the pro-Saddam lobby would extend the same courtesy to me. I am brain-washed by the US or have read the "right" website full of articles from the "right" journalists.

Reply to this message

Show in topic

Prime Minister & Foreign Policy

Contributor: codc01

Date: 2003-03-24 14:51:00

"France always keeps a tab on Quebec politics. "

I am a Quebeccer and Francophone, and i know exactly what is happening in my province (even though I'm not living there for the moment), and i can tell you that your statement is absurd. Yes, France checks on Quebec politics, which is normal, but they don't interfere actively with us now (De Gaulle's phrases was spoken a long time ago..., and yes they did interfere before)

"France and Quebec have special diplomatic relations (Quebec is a member of the Francophonie). "

Yes, but does that mean Canada is being bullied??

"person in the pro-Saddam lobby would extend the same courtesy to me. I am brain-washed by the US or have read the "right" website full of articles from the "right" journalists. "

Nobody is right or wrong here (except if you believe me pro-Saddam!), its not black or white, but by reading your responses, you have not fully disclosed facts, while i have (and i think others)... and by lacking facts, its very difficult for me, at least, to understand your position... Some other people which seem to be closer to your opinion (even though not having a strong opinion as much as yours) did give plenty of facts - and even though i disagree with them, their facts and arguments were so logical, that there is nothing much to respond to!

I do respect your opinion, but you should not have distorted opinions of people who don't have the same opinion as you... I for one am not a peace activist, neither a pro-Saddam, nor a pro-Bush, i am not Anti-American, but i simply don't like unilateralist superpowers, be it the US or the ex-USSR...

You know, even though i did not live those times, i really prefered the old isolationist US... Maybe its a myth, but for me they seem to represent a silent superpower which did not interfere in world affairs unless they had too... Even though China is not a country known for its democracy, what i admire from them is their isolationist view - they don't bother anyone, and they don't want to be bothered... That is wise (even though my facts regarding China could be wrong - its only an impression)... And yes, there are human rights abuses in China, and i do condem them... I'm just talking about foreign policy...

Reply to this message

Prime Minister & Foreign Policy

Contributor: cfallon

Date: 2003-03-25 13:05:42

I am a Quebecer as well - but an Anglophone.

I know full well that France has more than an "innocent" interest in Quebec politics.

Where we agree is that it would be nice to return to isolationism. The US (and Canada) would benefit from extracting themselves from the terrible corruption that sweeps our world.

I did not read anything you wrote as pro-Saddam. But the protest movements that have driven Canadian foreign policy are the single greatest weapon Saddam has to defend his regime.

Reply to this message

Prime Minister & Foreign Policy

Contributor: codc01

Date: 2003-03-26 04:56:36

Yes, its a weapon of Saddam, but if there were pro-war protests everywhere, we could say that its a great weapon of the US administration... I know its a bit shaky, since Saddam is a dictator and Bush is democratically elected... But still....

Reply to this message

Prime Minister & Foreign Policy

Contributor: fatmomma

Date: 2003-03-26 00:19:05

Jean Cretien is a Federal politician; interested in keeping Canada together. France cannot have anything to offer our Prime Minister. Its only influence would be to offer Quebec support and backing if they were to separate. I realize that you are correct in believeing France would like Quebec to separate so it could spread its influence there.
I would like to remind you that I am NOT Pro Saddam. I do believe he is an evil despicable excuse for a human being. I just believe it was a BIG mistake for the USA and Britain to insist on invading Iraq while the UN was getting cooperation from Saddam / Iraq. If there are WMD under Saddam's control; he would have balked shortly down the road. Then Canada and most other members of the Security Council; I am confident would back them. This is my understanding of the idea Canada was trying to promote. Then actionagainst Saddam would be justified. I was also very distressed to know that the USA/Britain were blatantly trying to win votes by offering money or weapons or by thinly veiled threats of economic repercussions; they were not trying to sway votes by making others understand their point of view.
I was also very disillussion by having reports of their proof of Iraq's possession of WMD being found to be fraudulent, old and copied from student's paper, or just lacking substance.
I must admit, I generally ignored politics; believing one democratic political party much like the other. I was shocked to wake up and see the World Trade Center crumbling. I spent that morning at work supporting a friend whose sister worked on the 50th floor. (fortunately, she got out with 2 min to get away.) My first thought was Saddam was guilty. Then the USA with full world support went after the taliban in Afghanistan. When the USA left that endeavor before meeting their objective and turned their attention so quickly to Iraq; I became suspicious that this was just a little too convenient time for the USA to settle old scores.
I believe and hope that Canada would be quickly at the side of either the USA or Britain if they were attacked; I just think it was unwise to rush into this war; it will only anger Muslims and Arabic countries and could bring more terrorist attacks to North America.
I am sorry if you feel I disrespect your beliefs. I am finding it very difficult these days with such heavy propaganda on both sides coming out;much of it insults our intelligence
and headlines that are very deceptive.

Reply to this message

Prime Minister & Foreign Policy

Contributor: codc01

Date: 2003-03-26 14:56:49

I totally agree with you, I think the Guardian reporters also seem to agree, here is a rundown of some assertions:

http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,921649,00.html

Reply to this message

Previous Topic | All Topics |

Start Topic | Next Topic