Bush's Permission, ha, ha, ha

Good Post Rafe.

Hopefully Bush will have to get his jailer's permission to go to the bathroom soon enough.

Putin is so much smarter than Bush, it's like they are different species. He even speaks English more coherently than the First Fool.

The whole end of the "Cold War" could have been handled so much more constructively. Instead you had the same bunch of Neo-Cons that brought US Iraq Redux, including the supposedly Russian "Expert" Condominium Oil Tanker Rice, insisting Russia was just faking defeat and playing dead in wait to project their evil on the world. Then when that finally wouldn't fly they had to find a new enemy and a new "Pearl Harbor." Voila, 9-11 and IslamoFascism (or GWOT, or whatever they call it this week).

I think Russia and China may be the only thing keeping the fools in DC from launching an attack on Iran. They still might, but if they do, it will be pretty much the US and Israel against the world. In that case, hopefully Canada will just stay out of it, or join the good guys. I guess that pretty much depends on whether Pee Wee Harper is still pretending to be Prime Minister or not.

I don't know what they're

I don't know what they're planning, but we have the B52s over our heads all the time. Yesterday we had 3 within a few minutes, flying in different directions.

These are not the long established "fail safe" planes, but are practicing pinpoint navigation and timing, getting ready for some mission. Most likely Iran.

Now Putin is also planning incentives and benefits to increase Russia's dropping birth rate, when the world is already over populated.

In short, the world has always been ruled and governed by idiots and mass murdering nut cases, many of them now called "great", but never to this degree of madness, considering the weapons available to them.

Imagine a megalomaniac Alexander the Great with nuclear weapons? The best thing that happened even in his time was when he croaked at 33, or whatever.

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

Looking at the maps provided

Looking at the maps provided in the article http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6586
the US has reason to worry. Their Arctic coastline is miniscule in terms of that of Russia, Canada and Denmark.

After Russia, Canada and Denmark have the largest transpolar territories.

To effectively challenge and encroach upon Russian territorial claims in the Arctic, Washington requires not only the collaboration of Canada and Denmark, but also jurisdiction over their respective Northern territories, which are considered by Washington as strategic from both a military and economic standpoint.

The US has a military presence in both Canada and Denmark (Greenland). Both countries play an important role in Washington's Arctic strategy.

Canada's territory, extends northwards to the Queen Elizabeth archipelago which includes Ellesmere Island bordering onto the Sea of Lincoln, which is part of the Arctic Ocean. Ellesmere Island is part of the Canadian territory of Nunavut.

Alert on Ellesmere Island (located at 82°28'N, 62°30'W) is considered the northernmost human settlement in the world. In practice it operates as a military intelligence station (Canadian Forces Station Alert) is under the jurisdiction of the Canadian military. CFS Alert is 840 km from the North Pole.

The militarization of the Arctic is part of the process of North American integration under the Security and Prosperity Partnership Agreement (SPP). The proposed North American Union (NAU) constitutes a means for the US to extend its sovereignty over Canada's Arctic territories.

When the creation of US Northern Command was announced in April 2002, Canada accepted the right of the US to deploy US troops on Canadian soil, extending into its Arctic territories:

"U.S. troops could be deployed to Canada and Canadian troops could cross the border into the United States if the continent was attacked by terrorists who do not respect borders, according to an agreement announced by U.S. and Canadian officials." (Edmunton Sun, 11 September 2002)

In April 2006, Canada formally ratified a renewed North American Aerospace Defense Agreement (NORAD), ("renewed NORAD"), which allows the US Navy and Coast Guard to deploy American war ships in Canadian territorial waters including its Arctic seabed territories. (For further details, see Michel Chossudovsky, Canada's Sovereignty in Jeopardy: The Militarization of North America, Global Research, August 2007)

Largely a result of western greed

It's actually far worse than that. During the Boris Yeltsin years the "west" participated in the looting of Russia's resource wealth, and the mass impoverishment of the majority of the population. The Russian oligarchs (many of them now in exile, and most of them living in London) were mostly just management level functionaries who were in a position to sell resources to western corporations extremely cheaply. They did this because they got secret kick-backs for the cheap resources, which were deposited in tax havens outside Russia. They used those kick-backs to buy up Russia's state owned assets at fire sale prices which they and their friends set. Then they squeezed as much profit as possible out of those businesses. Poverty ballooned, huge numbers started to literally starve. It was a truly disgusting example of kleptocratic capitalism, and it led to the rise of Putin, who proceeded to re-exert state control of all major industry, and of the energy sector in particular. Many European corporations had gotten fat off of cheap Russian natural gas, and they got a real shock when Putin started getting Gazprom to charge market rates.

So the west is almost entirely to blame for the aggressive nature of the Russian resurgence. And the Bush Administration's war crimes and military belligerence has made the situation with Russia far, far worse. It is the essence of short-sighted stupidity caused by the blindness of greed. Sadly, most of the criminal oligarchs are now billionaires living under the protection of primarily the UK, and US governments, and they, of course, donate large sums to various politicians' election campaigns.

The claim...

The territory in question is currently international waters, and has never been recognised as part of either Canada or the US:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6925729.stm#map

Also, they've not made a formal claim, as far as I'm aware:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6242736.stm

Geography...

Canada does not border Russia. Neither does Armenia, nor Tajikistan, nor Greenland, nor Pakistan. Nor do several other countries in this list.

How to handle the Russians

" Act respectfully not to say obsequiously towards Russia. And open talks."

Well said, Raif. Canada certainly knows how to be obsequious; it was and is the basis of our foreign policy, by Liberal, Conservative, and Reform as one, especially with reference to the United States... and while I think of it, it was the basis of your Social Credit government's policy towards the United States as well... so I take it you are speaking from experience? On how to deal with a bully?

With reference to some of the comments about the looting of Russian resources and the Oligarchs, I would point out that when these oligarchs do exactly as the Kremlin (Putin) tells them, they are still tolerated, wealthy, and free. The public relations problems began when some of them started to think that they were independent: what used to be called 'being too big for their britches', and dared to disagree with the President. Or even oppose him.

R. Smiley

Please think

No that's just the story the mainstream western media promoted, because that was the line promoted by the US State Dept. The trouble started when the Russian government, led by Putin began either repossessing assets, or requiring oligarchs to fall in line with the direction Putin and his crew wanted to take Russia, in part to start repairing the damage they had done, and in part to consolidate their power. Khodorkovsky was made an example of, but he was undoubtedly also guilty of tax evasion. But frankly, it is also perfectly with the rights of a democratically elected leader to limit power of the super-rich. Their power is entirely based on their money and their self interest. Why should they have the right to use their stolen wealth to influence the political direction of the nation? Having the oligarchs do exactly what Putin tells them to is a vastly better situation than them telling Putin what to do.

But what you appear to be failing to see, is that the rise of a strongman like Putin is a direct result of the chaos brought on by shock therapy capitalism. It enabled the rise of a tiny class of super-rich, who proceeded to loot the Russian economy at the expense of everyone else. It is an unsustainable situation, and it is largely the fault of the "west", and the economic "reform" we pushed them into.

That said, Putin is Bush's mirror image. I don't like Putin any more than I like Bush. Putin is just as much of a war criminal as Bush is. The primary difference between them, however, is that Putin is extremely popular with the Russian public.

going to war

I have just returned from 3 weeks hunting in Germany and the Czech Republic. The Germans and the French are beating the drums for an attack on Iran and their nuclear facilities.

They would like to get the Americans or Israelis to do it for them but if they can't they and Britain will do something and they will get Russian help.

Points

JB as to:
That said, Putin is Bush's mirror image. I don't like Putin any more than I like Bush. Putin is just as much of a war criminal as Bush is. The primary difference between them, however, is that Putin is extremely popular with the Russian public.

I also think Putin is much more mentally agile and more his own man than the first Shrub.

And Gatorator, I agree the French now with Sarkozy in office are much more willing to be US and/or Bush sychophants. However Britain has had enough of Bush's needless wars and at most will re-deploy to Afghanistan, apparently having forgotten their experiences there when the sun never set on the empire.

Germany has NO INTEREST in attacking Iran, indeed someone in the Bush administration has already said if it comes to war it will be Germany's fault as they wouldn't even give enough support to sanctions on Iran. As to Russia getting involved, yeah, if Iran is attacked they will likely get involved, in defense of Iran. Russia and China both have many irons in the fire and mutual interests in Iran. If they have to pick sides it won't be to side with the guys that want to point ICBMs at them from Poland.