1 I think a bigger story is how George Lucas believes the U.S. is in danger of losing its democratic ideals.

http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=8&id=337337

http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/13776.html

2 If I honestly thought George Lucas was any kind of threat to be taken seriously, I'd consider wasting a minute or two of my time to refute his nonsensical ramblings. Since he isn't, I won't take the time to point out the MANY errors of logic in comparing actual history to his so-called epic adventure.

3 Matt, my above comment was meant:

1) To emphasize the triviality of the original post. While border security is important, I'd hardly call it "porous," since Canada has had to comply with U.S.-stipulated border controls. In short, since Canada wanted to continue to do business with its largest trading partner, it had to tighten all of its borders (land, sea, air, electronic, etc.) in manners the U.S. deemed necessary.

2) To have a little fun. This is, after all, a Star Wars-themed blog.

4 Whether or not the US/Canada border is "porous" is certainly up to debate. That it can be characterized as "secure" is not. That really is what my post was trying to point out. The border with Canada is just as important as the US/Mexico border, but it doesn't get near the scrutiny that it should (mainly because Canada is cooperating with us on these issues - at least in theory).

I got the fun part... : ) However, I can imagine someone trying to make the point that Lucas has some sage advice for the world on the issues of the day...and I ain't buying that even on a STAR WARS-themed blog...

5 "Too many think that anti-Americanism, their rejection of our aggressive efforts to expose and stop these extremists, bestows upon them a shield from those extremists. They are wrong."

I don't really know who you're referring to in this statement. If you're commenting on the Canadian government, I'd say that stationing troops in Afghanistan and helping rid that country of the Taliban & Al Qaeda pretty much proves their on the U.S.'s side of the GWOT. Remember, the GWOT means "Global," not just Iraq.

If you're referring to elements of the Canadian population, I'd counter by saying that there are likely more "Americans" in the U.S. that share those exact same views (just by using proportional representation in both countries). I'd say these people would pose the bigger threat, since they're already inside.

Of course, I suppose it's much easier for you to lash out at another country rather than reflect towards home.

6 Canada has sheltered a lot of islamic extremists and terrorist sympathizers over the years. That is according to the RCMP itself. While I admire the small unit of troops Canada sent to Afghanistan, Canada's support in the GWOT is lukewarm at best. Canada's inability to defend itself, and its policy to undermine the US' attempts to defend both the US and Canada ( witness their idiotic stance on missile defense ) is not the behavior of a ally but of a narcissistic Left elite isolated from reality.

7 Robin, could it also be said that the actions of the U.S. are not the actions of an ally of Canada but, rather, those of a narcissistic, neoconservative right that cares only of its well-being and bases most foreign policy decisions on fear rather than fact?

Your definition of ally seems to imply that other countries should act not in their own best interests, but in the U.S.'s best interests. Why? Further, what definition of ally do you use?

8 Venom, you seem to have a reading comprehension problem. Not to mention a problem with false hypotheticals.

Canada acts in ways that are not even in its own best interests.

9 Not really, Robin, I understood what you were saying. I simply think you're wrong. You're making a call as to what constitutes an ally, but your view is narrow.

And as for this:

"Canada acts in ways that are not even in its own best interests."

Please elaborate. Canada seems to be doing pretty well with its own foreign policy. It's able to keep the U.S. as an ally while making its own decisions.

10 "Canada has sheltered a lot of islamic extremists and terrorist sympathizers over the years."

As if the US hasn't? Wake up people!!!!

11 Good point...another reason for border control. We can catch these guys on BOTH sides of the border.

12 ...or at least contain them better than we are right now.

13 Odd. Seems this blog is bashing Canada more aless. Hasn't anyone forgoten that the reason our border is so friggen loose-ended is the "Free Trade" aggrement between the US and Canada. Canadians and Americans DO NOT require a Passport from either side. This was so Truck drivers movinf products had less time at the border. But as of 2006, Canadian will require a passport to enter the US. Which will make all of those Americans that Travel to Alaska for holdidays, also require a passport. Only becasue for Americans who want to go home, have to prove they are American. Canada decide, why waste the few millions on passport requirments when the americans will do it for us!!!! Thinkign about all of this, it seems that our so called "Free Trade" Agrrement will sease to end, while Canada has been more focused on its Trade Agreements with the East! (Britian, Ukraine, Russia) Since Alberta cant export its Beef to the US, seems that Britian has taken the Bill. And Russia, require expert Oil Engineers, so canada is helping with support of the large oil projects in the North, to send help. Either way, seems Canada is moving away from the US....also have you checked your dollor, the canadian dollor is catching up fast!!!!

14 I am a Canadian with a pretty thick skin when it comes to people making statements about my country, but I have to comment on a couple things I read here.

"While I admire the small unit of troops Canada sent to Afghanistan, Canada's support in the GWOT is lukewarm at best."

I think you should realise that while we have a great land mass up here our population is equal to that of the state of California. We are a small country in terms of population - we are a country that takes pride in our international efforts in peacekeeping missions and being a tolerant people NOT in being a military power.

"Canada's inability to defend itself, and its policy to undermine the US' attempts to defend both the US and Canada ( witness their idiotic stance on missile defense ) is not the behavior of a ally but of a narcissistic Left elite isolated from reality."

We could not defend ourselves against an attack from a major military power like the USA... nobody in their right mind would claim we could - but I think many of our American brothers south of the border greatly underestimate what capabilities we do have up here in military terms. We are quite capable of defending ourselves from any REALISTIC threat, as the likelyhood of the US, Russia, England or other countries with massive populations declaring war on us is next to nil. I suppose if we devoted all of our resources to the military we could bump ourselves up the list on "countries we can compete with" but even with %100 devotion to becoming a military power we would never come close to the USA or England. We do not devote massive resources to R&D of military technology but we do keep our forces up to date with the latest aircraft, naval vessels and infantry equipment and tactics and I'm sorry my friend but no matter how many times the stereo type that we depend on the USA for national defense is spouted it won't bring it any closer to being the truth.

I'm also sorry to say but our idiotic stance on ballistic missile defense isn't so idiotic at all. When and if the next attack comes to North America what will be the means of delivery. A ballistic missile or a suitcase left in a truck? Think about it. The USA and Canada already have NORAD to monitor our airspace. We have no interest in putting weapons in orbit around our planet or escalating/pushing the R&D of such weapons. We have no desire to undermine the security of this continent, we've just realized that the 80's are OVER.

I can't speak for all Canadians or for the future decisions of our government but it is my strong opinion that the best position for us (as Canadians) is to concentrate on internal security rather than sending our troops abroad to stir up trouble or escalating the delivery systems of WMD's no matter who's behind the trigger. Now, I may strike a nerve here but look at my statement from my shoes - We don't go around the world whacking the hornets nest with a big stick. We are a target of terrorism on the basis of association with "Western Culture" not because of our actions abroad. That being said, we (being the average Canadian citizen) are not ignorant to our own position or the position of our neighbors to the south. The least we can do is help keep terrorist elements out of our continent and support logical and sane actions - to us Afghanistan made sense, Iraq did NOT.

Times are changing, if Sep 11 had been a conventional military attack by ANY country in the world we would be mobilizing our entire force right now as we've done throughout EVERY major overseas conflict since WWI with the exception of Vietnam and the 2nd action in IRAQ. I would say we've done our fare share when it comes to fighting for freedom and democracy. It's not unfair to expect that we can stay out of certain conflicts (Vietnam and the Invasion of Iraq WITHOUT UN support) without being blasted as narcissistic Left elite isolated from reality.

Amazing what a few draft-dodgers moving to Canada during the Vietnam war will do to a reputation. Stop beleiving what's spoon fed to you and look it up.

Thank you.