O Canada

[Walker]

Apparently Trump consulted Grok about kidnapping Maduro in Venezuela.

Foreign policy, made by AI.

Is Trump asking Grok what to do about Canada?

Woman, defined by AI.
A woman is defined as an adult female human being or an adult who lives and identifies as female, including transgender women.

Years previously, the same question for a Biden nominee to the SCOTUS (a woman):
Can you provide a definition for the word, “woman”?
Answer:
“Can I provide a definition? No, I can’t.”

Commentary:
Uh oh, doubled.

[Walker]

Victor Davis Hanson, on behalf of the USA.

“We (USA) didn't say to the Canadians, who are a strongly moral and ethical people, you shall lead the world in assisted suicides — 5.1% of all your deaths, 19,000 people a year — ostensibly to save overwhelming healthcare costs for people who may be terminal because the economy doesn't support that.

“The economy doesn't support open borders and the amount of immigrants who are coming in. The economy doesn't support fulfilling your defense needs. The economy doesn't support fair trade with the United States that's symmetric.

“But we didn't do that. Your leaders did.”

Emphasis added.

[phyllo]

We (USA) didn't say to the Canadians, who are a strongly moral and ethical people, you shall lead the world in assisted suicides — 5.1% of all your deaths, 19,000 people a year — ostensibly to save overwhelming healthcare costs for people who may be terminal because the economy doesn't support that.

This is complete nonsense.

The economy doesn't support

The US is more than $40 trillion in debt. It's running a deficit.

The US economy does not support current US policies.

Get your own house in order, before criticizing others.

[phyllo]

I will say that one thing is true ... Canada has not been paying its fair share of defense.

Over a long period of time, governments would promise to increase defense spending and then it would be the first budget item to be cut. That happened under both Liberal and Conservative governments.

The current Canadian government is actually spending on defense and meeting the 2% GDP NATO target.

[MikeNovack]

I will say that one thing is true ... Canada has not been paying its fair share of defense.
.........
The current Canadian government is actually spending on defense and meeting the 2% GDP NATO target.

The reality is that in terms of national defense, it's entire GDP would be insufficient to protect Canada from the US, and its direct needs for defense otherwise small. So yes, the "NATO target" a reasonable measure << agreed share >>

[Impenitent]

Canadian national defense... I can't imagine Dudley Doright driving a tank...

-Imp

[Walker]

Tell it to the Victor (Davis Hanson).

The rest of the story.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... blems.html

[Walker]

We (USA) didn't say to the Canadians, who are a strongly moral and ethical people, you shall lead the world in assisted suicides — 5.1% of all your deaths, 19,000 people a year — ostensibly to save overwhelming healthcare costs for people who may be terminal because the economy doesn't support that.

This is complete nonsense.

The economy doesn't support

The US is more than $40 trillion in debt. It's running a deficit.

The US economy does not support current US policies.

Get your own house in order, before criticizing others.

Victor says, The Economy Doesn't Support That.

Thus, Canada's need to piggyback on the USA.

How USA pays the piper to carry the burden, is their problem.

[phyllo]

When VDH posts on this forum, I'll respond to him directly.

[MikeNovack]

Canadian national defense... I can't imagine Dudley Doright driving a tank...

r
Did at Dieppe. << not that the tanks got far, but the whole raid didn't get very far. Not the fault of the Canadians as a rather hopeless venture. too big/costly for a raid and too small for an invasion >>

[Walker]

When VDH posts on this forum, I'll respond to him directly.

- VDH presents ideas directly to the world that his words reach.
- You could do the same with your reach, here.

After all, PNF's economy is supporting that, directly for you.

[phyllo]

I'm not here to pontificate or evangelize

[Immanuel Can]

I'm not here to pontificate or evangelize

Except for Ukraine?

Well, we all wish them well. But it's a kind of funny thing to say, given your icon.

On another note, Quebec has just reinstated the Parti Quebecois. But it's a minority government, which means they don't have controlling say. Quebec is also much more Socialistic than other provinces, so it's a drain on finances, rather than a value-add. They're unlikely to leave their cash-cow, which is Alberta. So this result may not amount to much.

If Alberta does a referendum, then that will be the one to watch.

[MikeNovack]

They're unlikely to leave their cash-cow, which is Alberta. So this result may not amount to much.

If Alberta does a referendum, then that will be the one to watch.

Economics will not be a major factor if/when Quebec tries to separate. The decision will not be based on "will be better off ECONOMICALLY". But won't even consider holding a referendum while Trump is in power in the US << actually said in the run up to the election >>

Alberta will not hold a referendum on separation NOW (while Trump is in power) either, but in this case, because the threat of Trump might well influence people to vote against (who in more normal times would be for).

[Immanuel Can]

They're unlikely to leave their cash-cow, which is Alberta. So this result may not amount to much.

If Alberta does a referendum, then that will be the one to watch.

Economics will not be a major factor if/when Quebec tries to separate. The decision will not be based on "will be better off ECONOMICALLY".

No, it will be cultural and linguistic...and xenophobic, if we take the word of the previous PQ leader in the last referendum. But economics will define the limits of the possible. Quebec is not capable of providing for itself, or of functioning as an independent country. That's why, the last time, they were trying for what they called "sovereignty association," a plan whereby they would get their political and cultural autonomy, but still be able to draw on the gravy train running from Ontario and the West.

They didn't get it then: they won't get it now.

But won't even consider holding a referendum while Trump is in power in the US

Oh, you vastly overestimate Trump's importance. They don't care about that. Canada's already put themselves way out of favour there.

Alberta will not hold a referendum on separation NOW (while Trump is in power) either,...

Wait and see. You also clearly have no idea how angry people are in the West with interference from Ontario and with having to send their own money to Quebec. They are not happy about either.

They may or they may not hold a referendum. But they've prepared for one. And if they do, that will be the one that counts. Alberta has all the natural resources that fund social programs in Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes, and yet lose a lot of their own money through"transfer payments" to those provinces. The LIberals have so far been unhelpful and unsympathetic to the Western sense of injustice, because they don't want to give up any of the money they get, and they like their "green agenda" and hate things like oil and lumber. So Alberta has lots of resources, and yet finds itself struggling because of the rest of Canada. And America seems quite accommodating to Alberta's ambition for self-determination, so they may never again have such a powerful ally.

We will see. But one thing for sure: the Quebec election doesn't mean much, all by itself.