NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4175446.stm

(Joking on the thread title if you couldn't figure it out)

Vive le Armie Canadien!

The sad fact of the matter is that Edmonton Mall has better submarines then our army does.

I think we should scrap the navy (as it's worthless for us), and focus on an Infantry-based army. Far more usefull for Peace Keeping then boats...

I wonder what Denmark will do. Canada really should have learned from us - as soon as the Danes get uppity, it's time to bitch-slap some sense into them.

Oh, I so wish they'd crush Denmark. I so wish anyone would crush Denmark.

Damn our unwillingness to break 200 years of peace!

I wonder what Denmark will do. Canada really should have learned from us - as soon as the Danes get uppity, it's time to bitch-slap some sense into them.

Oh, I so wish they'd crush Denmark. I so wish anyone would crush Denmark.

Damn our unwillingness to break 200 years of peace!

I'm sure if we could trick the U.S. into thinking the Danes have a WMD and some terrorists we could get those pesky Danes out of the picture.

I'm sure if we could trick the U.S. into thinking the Danes have a WMD and some terrorists we could get those pesky Danes out of the picture.

The Danes are allies of the US in this war on alarmist nouns. Just another reason to hate them!

Canada seems to have the most ridiculous territorial disputes.

The Danes are allies of the US in this war on alarmist nouns. Just another reason to hate them!
The bastards! These Danes will stoop to any low wont they?

I advise that Canada start a huge war over this island that's smaller than a football field, and has no remarkable resources to speak of.

Then Sweden can attack the Danes to protect Canada as we couldn't stand up even to the Danes...

I think we should scrap the navy (as it's worthless for us), and focus on an Infantry-based army. Far more usefull for Peace Keeping then boats...
I fully disagree. The naval component of the Canadian Forces is still a cruical element of our nation and the key to enforcing Canadian sovereignty over her territories over unwanted foreign aggressors. Though our navy is relatively small when compared to others, we must keep in mind that it is also designed with different roles in mind as well. In the end, despite the fact that the Danes are still allies of Canada through NATO, it is imperative that we deploy military forces in the region to back our words with action.

Really though, despite its deficiencies, Canada's naval forces is still underestimated - it is not a large navy like those of the US, but it fits the Canadian government's requirements perfectly. Canadians should be proud of their armed forces, and the dignified men that serves for Canada.

Oldie but a goodie. (http://www.satirewire.com/news/feb02/warship.shtml)

The bastards! These Danes will stoop to any low wont they?

I advise that Canada start a huge war over this island that's smaller than a football field, and has no remarkable resources to speak of.

Then Sweden can attack the Danes to protect Canada as we couldn't stand up even to the Danes...

I bet it would catch everyone by surprise if WWIII started between the US-Denmark and Canada-Sweden.

I fully disagree. The naval component of the Canadian Forces is still a cruical element of our nation and the key to enforcing Canadian sovereignity over her territories over unwanted foreign aggressors. Though our navy is relatively small when compared to others, we must keep in mind that it is also designed with different roles in mind as well. In the end, despite the fact that the Danes are still allies of Canada through NATO, it is imperative that we deploy military forces in the region to back our words with action.
I don't even see why we need too. The Arctic region is so incredibly Canadian territory through-and-through. We've been there far longer than any other nations through research stations, military installations, inhabitants, etc.

However, I do cede the fact that maybe we should keep the navy around. However I ask you what the air force is for... Considering how old it is, it's more of a liability then an asset sometimes.

The bastards! These Danes will stoop to any low wont they?

I advise that Canada start a huge war over this island that's smaller than a football field, and has no remarkable resources to speak of.

Then Sweden can attack the Danes to protect Canada as we couldn't stand up even to the Danes...

We would unfortunately declare neutrality immediately and go "lalalalalala, it's not happening! It's not happening! Fuck the Danes!" and do what we've always done: profit off of both your miseries and accept the gold teeth of your ethnically cleansed adversaries as currency.

Canada seems to have the most ridiculous territorial disputes.
I think they have a right to get uppity once in a while.

SIlly Canadia dont have the vessels to do this type of exercise in Winter because they dont have IceBreakers.LOL

Denmark is better than Sweden but both are netter than Norway.

How is this a conflict between Denmark and Canada anyway? Didn't Denmark grant Greenland almost complete autonomy? Shouldn't they be the ones pissed with Canada? The island is just off their coast, after all.

We would unfortunately declare neutrality immediately and go "lalalalalala, it's not happening! It's not happening! Fuck the Danes!" and do what we've always done: profit off of both your miseries and accept the gold teeth of your ethnically cleansed adversaries as currency.
Yes... I'm quite saddened at the fact that the Swedes reject there Viking blood (correct me if I'm wrong on them havinbg any ties to vikings). What ever happened to the Swedish blood lust for a united Scandinavia!?

I think they have a right to get uppity once in a while.

They do, but if you look at their territorial disputes, they're all over little specks that have absolutely no inherent value.

[QUOTE=Mr Gigglesworth]

SIlly Canadia dont have the vessels to do this type of exercise in Winter because they dont have IceBreakers.LOL

</QUOTE]

Actually we do have ice breakers (albeit old ones). Our ships don't have ice-hulls (which make it easier for them to travel in the Arctic).

I don't even see why we need too. The Arctic region is so incredibly Canadian territory through-and-through. We've been there far longer than any other nations through research stations, military installations, inhabitants, etc.
Incorrect - despite the research stations and military installations there, they are still rather small in strength, and things like warships are still more cruical as they provide an official sense of presence in the region. Though I think the Canada's navy right now is sufficient to do that job, there are still areas that needs improvement - such as warships that has ice breaking capabilities (which I recall, is the case with the Danes but not our Navy - even though we do have vessels with such capabilities in the Coast Guard - I could be wrong, though).

However, I do cede the fact that maybe we should keep the navy around. However I ask you what the air force is for... Considering how old it is, it's more of a liability then an asset sometimes.
...again, from people who keeps underestimating the threats growing from the rest of the world, and the ever-growing need for the Canadian Forces to grow in its strength and presence. Scrapping the Canadian Force's air components wouldn't make any sense either. A modern military must have an efficient and effective air force in order to support its operation on the surface.

Yes... I'm quite saddened at the fact that the Swedes reject there Viking blood (correct me if I'm wrong on them havinbg any ties to vikings). What ever happened to the Swedish blood lust for a united Scandinavia!?

Umm, three centuries of constant wars during which we went from backwater shit hole, to largest power in Northern Europe, to Russia's bitch having to give up the Baltic states + Finland, and finally despotic rulers of Norway as one of the victors of the Napoleonic wars, until we let them go without a fight after an additional century, saying we didn't mean anything by it and that they could keep their lousy lutefisk and lusekoftor, the ingrates, that's what happened...

Incorrect - despite the research stations and military installations there, they are still rather small in strength, things like warships are still more cruical as they provide an official sense of presence in the region. Though I think the Canada's navy right now is sufficient to do that job, there are still areas that needs improvement - such as warships that has ice breaking capabilities (which I recall, is the case with the Danes but not our Navy - even though we do have vessels with such capabilities in the Coast Guard - I could be wrong, though).

...again, from people who keeps underestimating the threats growing from the world, and the ever-growing need for the Canadian Forces to grow in its strength and presence. Scrapping the Canadian Force's air components wouldn't make any sense either. A modern military must have an efficient and effective air force in order to support its operation on the surface.

Firstly, I think that any ways we assert ourselves in the Arctic region our good, and we don't need to do it by showing off our military. I think we should focus more on enviromental issues within the Arctic and research then military matters. Show the world Canada cares about it's land. Secondly a modern army is a nice thing to have, but let's face facts there more expensive now than ever before, and considering that we have so many allies, and most of our attention is focused on peace-keeping issues, troops are more important than planes. Planes might help win the war, but it's the grunts who will take and hold the land.

Umm, three centuries of constant wars during which we went from backwater shit hole, to largest power in Northern Europe, to Russia's bitch having to give up the Baltic states + Finland, and finally despotic rulers of Norway as one of the victors of the Napoleonic wars, until we let them go without a fight after an additional century, saying we didn't mean anything by it and that they could keep their lousy lutefisk and lusekoftor, the ingrates, that's what happened...

Damn... Canada basically just whined a lot and we came out pretty good in the end.

I love Sweden though! I want to move there someday.

Damn... Canada basically just whined a lot and we came out pretty good in the end.

I love Sweden though! I want to move there someday.

We should trade places.

And here I thought Japan's and China's squabling over rocks was silly...

We should trade places.
Sure you want to be a part of a country that cries over a rock?

Sure you want to be a part of a country that cries over a rock?

Been there, done that. Half-assedly, but still. Åland. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85land#History)

Firstly, I think that any ways we assert ourselves in the Arctic region our good, and we don't need to do it by showing off our military. I think we should focus more onenviromental issues within the Arctic and research then military matters. Show the world Canada cares about it's land.
Again, the military establishes a presence that cannot be replaced by any other elements - research, whatnot. Environment issues, frankly, isn't the most important thing in the world - one must be able to consolidate his territory before they can think of environmental matters. Yes, environmental matters are important, but they mean nothing when you can't even consolidate your territory, enforce your sovereignty, and defend every square inch of your land from foreign imperalist and colonial aggressors. And this is why the military is absolutely needed in establishing the presence - it gives us a sense of strength, regardless of its size; it gives us a sense of pride and gives us a solid will to back our words up with action. Sending a Environmentalist Hippy sailing ship isn't the way to do it.

We show that we care about our land by defending it. Not whine about it without action.

Secondly a modern army is a nice thing to have, but let's face facts there more expensive now than ever before,...
Again, the disadvantage of cost can be easily overridden by the benefits that it would bring - give Canada a bigger footing in world affairs, being able to combat threats around the world with greater proficiency, establishing ourselves as a peaceful but determined member of the world, and be able to fulfill our obligations to the UN and NATO. Failing to live up our words will result in much greater consequences than spending more money on something cruical. Apparantly some people in the Canadian government forgot about that.

and considering that we have so many allies, and most of our attention is focused on peace-keeping issues,
Which is why we must be able to fulfill our obligations.

troops are more important than planes. Planes might help win the war, but it's the grunts who will take and hold the land.
Any person with a knowledge of modern warfare will tell you that ground forces is only an individual ingredient of a modern military. The idea of even considering to scrap the currently-formidable fleet of Canadian fighter aircraft and so on is a dangerous thought, that will result in the failure of the Canadian Forces to accomplish its task in situations other than peacekeeping in some Central Asian nation such as Afghanistan. I certainly hope that some members of our government won't resort to such dangerous measures.

Yes... I'm quite saddened at the fact that the Swedes reject there Viking blood (correct me if I'm wrong on them havinbg any ties to vikings). What ever happened to the Swedish blood lust for a united Scandinavia!?

The greater scandinavia idea, died when someone killed Charles the 12th in norway. With him gone they decided that it was better to hide behind neutrality when trouble loomed on the horizon..

About the island, if there is going to be such a fuss about it, i'll take it..

Whoa. Picking up strong semi-imperialist emanations from this thread. Anyway, the days of "greater Scandinavia" were over when Sweden left from the Kalmar union. And who's to say Scandinavia didn't eventually turn out to be a better place for it?

Whoa. Picking up strong semi-imperialist emanations from this thread. Anyway, the days of "greater Scandinavia" were over when Sweden left from the Kalmar union. And who's to say Scandinavia didn't eventually turn out to be a better place for it?

Of course it's a better place for it. Norway and Finland have a right to be countries.

It's just that bloody Denmark... ;)

I am of course just fooling around. I like all our neighbours.

Again, the military establishes a presence that cannot be replaced by any other elements - research, whatnot. Environment issues, frankly, isn't the most important thing in the world - one must be able to consolidate his territory before they can think of environmental matters. Yes, environmental matters are important, but they mean nothing when you can't even consolidate your territory, enforce your sovereignty, and defend every square inch of your land from foreign imperalist and colonial aggressors. And this is why the military is absolutely needed in establishing the presence - it gives us a sense of strength, regardless of its size; it gives us a sense of pride and gives us a solid will to back our words up with action. Sending a Environmentalist Hippy sailing ship isn't the way to do it.

We show that we care about our land by defending it. Not whine about it without action.


Again, the disadvantage of cost can be easily overridden by the benefits that it would bring - give Canada a bigger footing in world affairs, being able to combat threats around the world with greater proficiency, establishing ourselves as a peaceful but determined member of the world, and be able to fulfill our obligations to the UN and NATO. Failing to live up our words will result in much greater consequences than spending more money on something cruical. Apparantly some people in the Canadian government forgot about that.


Which is why we must be able to fulfill our obligations.


Any person with a knowledge of modern warfare will tell you that ground forces is only an individual ingredient of a modern military. The idea of even considering to scrap the currently-formidable fleet of Canadian fighter aircraft and so on is a dangerous thought, that will result in the failure of the Canadian Forces to accomplish its task in situations other than peacekeeping in some Central Asian nation such as Afghanistan. I certainly hope that some members of our government won't resort to such dangerous measures.

Sir I loved debating with you, but I unfortunately must sleep as per the requirements of this damn body. It's been a joy debating with someone so splendidly as yourself. Good night all!

And here I thought Japan's and China's squabling over rocks was silly...

LOL

But is not just Japan and China. Taiwan wants the Diaoyu Islands (or Senkaku) as well.

Oh for crying out loud! Its just a bunch of useless rocks. Grab Kim Jong-Il's nukes and bomb it! Problem solved.

I'm sure if we could trick the U.S. into thinking the Danes have a WMD and some terrorists we could get those pesky Danes out of the picture.


you canadiens are a sneaky lot aint you..lol

we are still combing the desert in iraq like in spaceballs for the wmd's..so i dont think that will work.

maybe osama's 32nd half brother is holed up there...

good luck with the danish issue..however i happen to love danish's,especially pineapple cheese,damn..now i'm hungry...grr :fluffle:

I fully disagree. The naval component of the Canadian Forces is still a cruical element of our nation and the key to enforcing Canadian sovereignty over her territories over unwanted foreign aggressors. Though our navy is relatively small when compared to others, we must keep in mind that it is also designed with different roles in mind as well. In the end, despite the fact that the Danes are still allies of Canada through NATO, it is imperative that we deploy military forces in the region to back our words with action.

Really though, despite its deficiencies, Canada's naval forces is still underestimated - it is not a large navy like those of the US, but it fits the Canadian government's requirements perfectly. Canadians should be proud of their armed forces, and the dignified men that serves for Canada.

i once had some beers on a canadien warship in philly,traded em a few cheesesteaks for some down time in the officers mess...what a mess i might add...me
they were parked at penns landing,and i was parked on south street...kismet i say

They do, but if you look at their territorial disputes, they're all over little specks that have absolutely no inherent value.
Like America? :p :mp5: :sniper: :gundge:

Actually we do have ice breakers (albeit old ones). Our ships don't have ice-hulls (which make it easier for them to travel in the Arctic).
It was in the paper that Canada didnt have Icebreakers and thats why they were 'showing their might' in Summer not Winter-It was a joke...... :rolleyes:

Incorrect - despite the research stations and military installations there, they are still rather small in strength, and things like warships are still more cruical as they provide an official sense of presence in the region. Though I think the Canada's navy right now is sufficient to do that job, there are still areas that needs improvement - such as warships that has ice breaking capabilities (which I recall, is the case with the Danes but not our Navy - even though we do have vessels with such capabilities in the Coast Guard - I could be wrong, though).


...again, from people who keeps underestimating the threats growing from the rest of the world, and the ever-growing need for the Canadian Forces to grow in its strength and presence. Scrapping the Canadian Force's air components wouldn't make any sense either. A modern military must have an efficient and effective air force in order to support its operation on the surface.


didnt we sell you guys,for some trees or seal blubber some f-18 hornets for exactly that reason,you know,those pesky danes/eskimoes/and if i remember in my alcohol induced fog...you guys have issues with some island ?new brunswick or new foundland or sumthin..lol

just kidding..but it is sorta like playing dodgeball with a blind person you guys fight with...lol...please..just a joke
wow..that may have come out wrong...i love canada..i kid cause i love...you got you big brother next door so no worries mates..lol...again kidding,no sarcasm,just i see so many tease us,and it gets so hotly debated here i thought i would try to add a bit of levity,but it keeps coming out incorrect...less beers and janes addiction i suppose.
canada rules..i love you guys...drunk guy at party says and hugs you :fluffle:

Again, the military establishes a presence that cannot be replaced by any other elements - research, whatnot. Environment issues, frankly, isn't the most important thing in the world - one must be able to consolidate his territory before they can think of environmental matters. Yes, environmental matters are important, but they mean nothing when you can't even consolidate your territory, enforce your sovereignty, and defend every square inch of your land from foreign imperalist and colonial aggressors. And this is why the military is absolutely needed in establishing the presence - it gives us a sense of strength, regardless of its size; it gives us a sense of pride and gives us a solid will to back our words up with action. Sending a Environmentalist Hippy sailing ship isn't the way to do it.

We show that we care about our land by defending it. Not whine about it without action.


Again, the disadvantage of cost can be easily overridden by the benefits that it would bring - give Canada a bigger footing in world affairs, being able to combat threats around the world with greater proficiency, establishing ourselves as a peaceful but determined member of the world, and be able to fulfill our obligations to the UN and NATO. Failing to live up our words will result in much greater consequences than spending more money on something cruical. Apparantly some people in the Canadian government forgot about that.


Which is why we must be able to fulfill our obligations.


Any person with a knowledge of modern warfare will tell you that ground forces is only an individual ingredient of a modern military. The idea of even considering to scrap the currently-formidable fleet of Canadian fighter aircraft and so on is a dangerous thought, that will result in the failure of the Canadian Forces to accomplish its task in situations other than peacekeeping in some Central Asian nation such as Afghanistan. I certainly hope that some members of our government won't resort to such dangerous measures.


i got to lay off the booze,when i think of canada..the last thing i think of is a determined military prescence,nice folks that i would love to hang out with..hell yea...a military thing...never...please let us dirty our hands and keep you guys pure...i mean that..i love canada,well the vision i have in my addled brain of it...nice people,nice enviroment..keep my dreams alive please. :)

LOL

But is not just Japan and China. Taiwan wants the Diaoyu Islands (or Senkaku) as well.

Oh for crying out loud! Its just a bunch of useless rocks. Grab Kim Jong-Il's nukes and bomb it! Problem solved.

Its not just you guys! Its also Spain and Morocco fighting for a rock of the size of a football field! here (http://slate.msn.com/id/2068077/)

Plus the Spanish want Gibraltar from the Brits.

Its not just you guys! Its also Spain and Morocco fighting for a rock of the size of a football field! here (http://slate.msn.com/id/2068077/)

Plus the Spanish want Gibraltar from the Brits.
And despite the wishes of nearly 98% of the population two faced Tony is still talking about negotiating with Spain over it! So much for democracy! I think the US should invade to protect the democratic rights of Gibraltarians!

mmmmm Spain could take Gibraltar by force.. then it would be "evicted"... muahahahah :D sounds nice, start the fight!

And despite the wishes of nearly 98% of the population two faced Tony is still talking about negotiating with Spain over it! So much for democracy! I think the US should invade to protect the democratic rights of Gibraltarians!

Uh, most gibratarians want to remain british, and they (The people who actually live there) don't give a damn what spainiards want.

Well it seems to be in fashion to argue over little bits of rocks and such, nothing like a barren bit of rock to fuel such patriotism :) .

Perhaps it's time sweden started something as well, Åland is close. But there are so many rocks to claim, perhaps we should call on our ancesterial rights. And demand england back, or hey lets go even further and claim bits of America :D

Canada seems to have the most ridiculous territorial disputes.

Well, the British went to war over the Falklands. If the UK considers rocks with sheep to be valuable, how much more valuable would rocks without sheep be to Canada?

:p

The uk never went to war with the Argies it was a confilict, and theres apparantly these loads of gold or oil or some thing down there we aint as stupid as the americans we go to war for a reason and we always kick ass unless we lose in which case we it probly wasn't a very important place to start with.

The uk never went to war with the Argies it was a confilict, and theres apparantly these loads of gold or oil or some thing down there we aint as stupid as the americans we go to war for a reason and we always kick ass unless we lose in which case we it probly wasn't a very important place to start with.

Very well said.

Uh, most gibratarians want to remain british, and they (The people who actually live there) don't give a damn what spainiards want.
Exactly so why does two faced Tony not just tell the Spanish, all settled no chance things will stay as they are?

About Icebreakers: Canada has some. In fact, we rescue a few ships every winter with them.

About Environment: The military establishes Canada's sovereignty on the territory. When that is done, we can force the ships that want to go near there to follow our environmental laws. If we don't establish our sovereignty, they can take the most fuel-defficient, environmental-hazard dingy boat they want and there's nothing we can do but to spend some money to mop their mess.

About That piece of Rock: It serves to establish sovereignty of Canada on a naval passageway that Canada, Denmark and the US (among others) foresee as being very useful in the future with the polar ice melting rapidly. So it's not so much about a rock as about who gets to sail our seas.

About Greenland: It is still very much a part of Denmark. It has some independant stuff, but for all intents and purposes it is the Alaska of Denmark. They are not semi-independant from what I've gathered discussing this dispute.

About Everything else: I refer you to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Island) who has a rather thorough entry on the dispute.

And now for something completely different:Danish sent ship too! (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1123166944024_118576144/?hub=Canada). The danish ship should be near the Island any day now.

I'm surprised Canada can afford to deploy any more troops. Their military is nearly bankrupt...a first for the industrial nations. If Britain is now considered uncapable of fighting another Falklands War, I can't imagine what Canada would do against a nation like Denmark.

Perhaps it's time sweden started something as well, Åland is close. But there are so many rocks to claim, perhaps we should call on our ancesterial rights. And demand england back, or hey lets go even further and claim bits of America

You never had anything in England or America, it was Norway who was first in America and us and the danes who where in England.
It would be soo sweet to see a war break out over this.

I say Canada, Denmark and every other country interested in this start thinking about something else: THE POLAR ICE CAPS ARE MELTING. That´s what should be discussed, not a rock which will be important when the polar ice caps keep melting. To hell with the stone, it will be sumberged if things continue to develop like this!

Actually, it's exactly because of global warming that there has been renewed interests in regards to the island and the region in general. Think of melting ice, higher temperature, natural deposits, and economic exploitation. A lot of oil down there too.

You never had anything in England or America, it was Norway who was first in America and us and the danes who where in England.
It would be soo sweet to see a war break out over this.


And you know this cause you where there? :) who is to say that no swedes where in the ships that whent that way hmm?. Anywho, if we can't go there, we'll just go to russia,turky and such. There we have historical facts to prove we lived and traded.

And on another point, nations have rarely botherd about history when claiming bits of rock or bit of land :D. So i say Go Canada, don't let those pesky danes tell you that the rock is theirs..

And we did have stuff in america, perhaps just not during the viking days. Minnesota for to mention one thing..

Does anyone know the latitude and longitude of the island, and whether it's flat on top or rocky?

Does anyone know the latitude and longitude of the island, and whether it's flat on top or rocky?

80° 49′ 41″ N, 66° 38′ 46″ W

And there's a picture at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Island

Minnesota for to mention one thing..

what do you mean?

Interestingly, The Disputed Territories of Hans Island ( http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_nation/nation=hans_island) is in danger of deletion for inactivity.

:p

The way that this land dispute is being handled reminds me of little boys fighting over something of absolutely no value, that they both want for the sole reason that the other seems to want it. It's pathetic. The island was never officially claimed by either party. Whoever has a way to put the land to some use should be able to use it.


We should trade places.I don't think you want to do that. Fischer Land is from London, Ontario, officially the shittiest town there ever was (except maybe for Chatam). I can say that because I live here too (unfortunatly). There is no culture, unless you count the drunken antics of UWO students. The best gay bar (Club 181) is only open two days of the week...
Seriously, don't even joke about moving here.

Exactly so why does two faced Tony not just tell the Spanish, all settled no chance things will stay as they are?

Because the very, very proud Spanish have one of the largest amphibious assault forces in NATO :)

I have one thing to say about this article...

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b383/DrkHelmet/canadian_navy.jpg

I have one thing to say about this article...

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b383/DrkHelmet/canadian_navy.jpg

I'm trying to imagine a whole fleet of those :D

I'm trying to imagine a whole fleet of those :D

No, that's the Mexican navy you're thinking of! :p

I'm surprised Canada can afford to deploy any more troops. Their military is nearly bankrupt...a first for the industrial nations. If Britain is now considered uncapable of fighting another Falklands War, I can't imagine what Canada would do against a nation like Denmark.

A hockey game? Played on Hans Island of course.

I don't think you want to do that. Fischer Land is from London, Ontario, officially the shittiest town there ever was (except maybe for Chatam). I can say that because I live here too (unfortunatly). There is no culture, unless you count the drunken antics of UWO students. The best gay bar (Club 181) is only open two days of the week...
Seriously, don't even joke about moving here.

I wouldn't well stay put - I'd quickly move to Montreal. My eventual plans are to move there in real life anyway...

I wouldn't well stay put - I'd quickly move to Montreal. My eventual plans are to move there in real life anyway...You are so, so wise. :)
If I were going to stay in Canada, I'd go for Montreal.

How about Montreal in the summer (June, July, August), and Vancouver for the rest of the year? With global warming our other 3 seasons seem to be melding into one- WINTER. Its a pity we can't pick where the warming and cooling trends happen, because if so we could take the warming from the polar regions, send them our extra cold winters, and have longer summers, fake beaches, and maybe a couple penquins for decor here in Montreal :P serving drinks with umbrellas of course :D

Vive le Armie Canadien!

The sad fact of the matter is that Edmonton Mall has better submarines then our army does.

I think we should scrap the navy (as it's worthless for us), and focus on an Infantry-based army. Far more usefull for Peace Keeping then boats...
Navy's are never worthless. I just don't think anyone knows what to do with them now that the Cold War is over. Everyone sees a navy as an anachronism, which is not true.
At the very least, a navy is needed to protect coastal sovereignty (as is the case with Denmark) and to rescue ships. But one can also be adapted for Canada's peacekeeping purposes. The navy should probably have more minesweepers, plus a few destroyers to escort them. It should also focus on patrol boats and some torpedo boats. Large subs should be replaced by minisubs to deploy special ops. Otherwise, Canada does not need a big navy.

80° 49′ 41″ N, 66° 38′ 46″ W

And there's a picture at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Island


thanks for the link,it was pretty informative and kinda funny. :)

No, that's the Mexican navy you're thinking of! :p


i thought it was the french navy... :D :rolleyes:

Sorry if this has been posted before here
but its a joke I've always enjoyed
and its got canadians in it and theres the sea and everything

btw this is def a joke no matter how much we might like to believe
it to be true

This is based on an actual radio conversation between a U.S. Navy
aircraft carrier (U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln) and Canadian authorities
off the coast of Newfoundland in October, 1995. (The radio
conversation was released by the Chief of Naval Operations on
10/10/95 authorized by the Freedom of Information Act.)
Canadians: Please divert your course 15 degrees to the South to
avoid collision.

Americans: Recommend you divert your course 15 degrees to the
North to avoid a collision.

Canadians: Negative. You will have to divert your course 15
degrees to the South to avoid a collision.

Americans: This is the Captain of a US Navy ship. I say again,
divert YOUR course.

Canadians: No, I say again, you divert YOUR course.

Americans: THIS IS THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS LINCOLN, THE SECOND
LARGEST SHIP IN THE UNITED STATES' ATLANTIC FLEET. WE ARE
ACCOMPANIED BY THREE DESTROYERS, THREE CRUISERS AND NUMEROUS
SUPPORT VESSELS. I DEMAND THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR COURSE 15 DEGREES
NORTH--I SAY AGAIN, THAT'S ONE FIVE DEGREES NORTH--OR
COUNTER-MEASURES WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THIS SHIP.

Canadians: This is a lighthouse. Your call.