Does anyone find it strange...

[athlete]

That we spend so much on National Defence to prevent against the almost ludicrous prospect of foreign invasion, and so little on government funded medical research by comparison.

For example...this years annual defence spending in the united states will top $596B...Medical research is in the order of $30B...

500,000 US citizens died in 2004 from Cancer...none from foreign invasion.

Seems wierd.

 

[Truncador]

Medical research takes place in a space of security created by defense spending. There wouldn't be very much quality research going on if the nation was overrun by Commies or Mahometans, or if some maniac dictator abroad was allowed to upset the nuclear/biowar applecart...

 

[onthebottom]

I can find no source that compares US government and private spending on medical research with other wealthy countries. There are several articles that mention that US Federal research budget has grown by 50% in the 1998-2003 timeframe, the largest increase in a single year being 13% proposed by W. I would be prepared to guess that most research is private and that a disproportion of it happens in the US.

Our military budget reflects our military obligations, if you want to talk about withdrawing from NATO and Asia to a purely defensive posture (like say Canada) then that's another debate. There are many that would welcome an isolationist America, most of them Americans.

OTB

 

[athlete]

Medical research takes place in a space of security created by defense spending. There wouldn't be very much quality research going on if the nation was overrun by Commies or Mahometans, or if some maniac dictator abroad was allowed to upset the nuclear/biowar applecart...

Alright, so who is it again that has anywhere near the resources required to launch an invasion of the US?

Our military budget reflects our military obligations, if you want to talk about withdrawing from NATO and Asia to a purely defensive posture (like say Canada) then that's another debate. There are many that would welcome an isolationist America, most of them Americans

100B of that 600B was spent on the invasion of Iraq, you had an obligation to invade Iraq? The rest of the world didn't seem to think so...and Canada was in Kosovo, the first Gulf war...we're not entirely defensive...we just don't see the need to use our military (at the expense of our economy) as our primary tool of foreign policy; as a result, we can afford to offer nationwide, comprehensive medical care, for example.

 

[yychobbyist]

Alright, so who is it again that has anywhere near the resources required to launch an invasion of the US?

Well, according to Americanson, the CBC is sure trying.

 

[Truncador]

Alright, so who is it again that has anywhere near the resources required to launch an invasion of the US?

Nobody- because of American defense spending, without which the bad guys would have overrun Europe a long time ago and acquired sufficient resources to invade.

 

[onthebottom]

Alright, so who is it again that has anywhere near the resources required to launch an invasion of the US?
..........

Through the blessing of geography we only have Canada and Mexico to worry about. Mexico won't invade because they are already here and Canada won't invade because they wouldn't know how to define themselves without the trusty "we're not Americans". Unfortunately two World Wars in the span of 50 years in Europe stirred us from our isolationist slumber and, having wasted millions of men freeing the French, we've made the decision the world is in no position to govern itself.



OTB

 

[athlete]

Nobody- because of American defense spending, without which the bad guys would have overrun Europe a long time ago and acquired sufficient resources to invade.

OMG. So you are suggesting that the US ought to keep spending more on the military than they can afford to protect themselves against 'bad guys' that haven't had the capacity to pose a viable, conventional threat since the mid-eighties?

Alrighty...well if you believe that there is a higher probability that the Russians are going to invade the US than there is of you ever getting sick than keep going to the polls (or like most of our NAmerican populations, not going to the polls and allow your government to spend over half a trillion dollars a year on defense. Meanwhile, make sure you save your pennies because if you ever have to have your appendix out you don't want to have to take out a loan or run up your credit card bill.

As for me? I will remain content to be in a more moderate country, generally liked throughout the world, with comparitively no risk of being targetted by terrorists, and under no illusions about the risk of being invaded and if I get sick I'll check into one of my modern hospitals and walk away financially no worse for wear.

To each his own.

 

[Truncador]

Just to clear the air, I too am a Canadian, one who looks to the USA for a model of responsible government.

I will remain content to be in a more moderate country, generally liked throughout the world, with comparitively no risk of being targetted by terrorists, and under no illusions about the risk of being invaded and if I get sick

The bad guys of this world see Canada and the USA as about as different as Coke and Pepsi, and have referred to us as, variously, a mini-Satan, a place where boys get indoctrinated into homosexuality by their 13th birthdays, and (of course) an imperialist aggressor (because of our peacekeeping presence in Afghanistan among other things). Al-Qaida has sworn that it will "bomb Canada into the stone age" (their words) when it gets the chance.

Were it not for the American defense apparatus, eventually Al-Qaida would likely have acquired the resources needed to make the dream a reality. Sooner or later, Bin Laden and Saddam would have come to the realization that they hate the West (North America in particular) more than they hate each other. Would they have been able to invade ? Probably not. Would they have used Iraqi State resources to develop nuke/chem/bio weapons for use in terror attacks ? Yes.

It would have put an awful strain on the health care system if nuke bombs or plague carriers were set off in downtown Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver at the same time...

Assuming it is true that we purchase crappy socialized health care at the expense of defense, I say that we've incurred an additional cost: the loss of our national dignity. It's downright humiliating to hear Americans say that we sleep under the blanket of security they create- knowing that it's true. Why should we have settle for being a "mini-Satan" in the eyes of the bad guys and "America Jr." in the eyes of the good guys ?

 

[feminista]

OMG. So you are suggesting that the US ought to keep spending more on the military than they can afford to protect themselves against 'bad guys' that haven't had the capacity to pose a viable, conventional threat since the mid-eighties?

perhaps the US admin is privvy to some "intelligence" indicating that an alien attack is imminent.

 

[onthebottom]

Just to clear the air, I too am a Canadian, one who looks to the USA for a model of responsible government.



The bad guys of this world see Canada and the USA as about as different as Coke and Pepsi, and have referred to us as, variously, a mini-Satan, a place where boys get indoctrinated into homosexuality by their 13th birthdays, and (of course) an imperialist aggressor (because of our peacekeeping presence in Afghanistan among other things). Al-Qaida has sworn that it will "bomb Canada into the stone age" (their words) when it gets the chance.

Were it not for the American defense apparatus, eventually Al-Qaida would likely have acquired the resources needed to make the dream a reality. Sooner or later, Bin Laden and Saddam would have come to the realization that they hate the West (North America in particular) more than they hate each other. Would they have been able to invade ? Probably not. Would they have used Iraqi State resources to develop nuke/chem/bio weapons for use in terror attacks ? Yes.

It would have put an awful strain on the health care system if nuke bombs or plague carriers were set off in downtown Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver at the same time...

Assuming it is true that we purchase crappy socialized health care at the expense of defense, I say that we've incurred an additional cost: the loss of our national dignity. It's downright humiliating to hear Americans say that we sleep under the blanket of security they create- knowing that it's true. Why should we have settle for being a "mini-Satan" in the eyes of the bad guys and "America Jr." in the eyes of the good guys ?

It's a false test to say the US has the defensive posture it does for defensive reasons. Clearly we live next to two countries, one that is in the process of moving to the US in mass and the other so disarmed they can't do anything useful without help. Hey, I'm all for an isolationist US, bring back the troops, the only one you will hear complain is the countries where those troops are now based. I'm sure the UN can handle it along with that new EU defensive plan

I also love the "everyone loves Canada" mantra, let's face it no one knows you so how can they love you (maybe there's something to that?), how many Europeans know who the PM of Canada is.........

OTB

 

[athlete]

It's a false test to say the US has the defensive posture it does for defensive reasons. Clearly we live next to two countries, one that is in the process of moving to the US in mass and the other so disarmed they can't do anything useful without help. Hey, I'm all for an isolationist US, bring back the troops, the only one you will hear complain is the countries where those troops are now based. I'm sure the UN can handle it along with that new EU defensive plan

I also love the "everyone loves Canada" mantra, let's face it no one knows you so how can they love you (maybe there's something to that?), how many Europeans know who the PM of Canada is.........

OTB

Can't do anything useful without help? God forbid nations co-operate...oh, wait, wasn't it GWB that said that "we could not have accomplished so much without a coalition of the willing?" No, I suppose we couldn't arbitrarily invade sovereign countries without the co-operation of our allies....couldn't just go it alone in an aggressive military action based on, at the very least faulty intelligence and at worst (and more likely) bold faced lies that most of the rest of the civilized world saw as suspect from the start.

Can we defend our borders? Well, in a sense we can...we can establish friendly relations with the vast majority of foreign governments, and certainly anyone who posed a threat...and we ARE capable of lending military, humanitarian aid in cases of genocide, oppression, etc...as it's required and sponsored by the UN and NATO, (ala KOSOVO, Cyprus, Afghanistan, Korea...)

No, we don't run around the globe on some kind of modern crusade and invite people to strike back with whatever pitiful means they can muster (ala 9/11) and then bitch and moan that we are the victims of an 'unprovoked' attack. We're smarter than that...or so the evidence would seem to indicate...(Ref: the smashed NYC skyline).

 

[onthebottom]

Can't do anything useful without help? God forbid nations co-operate...oh, wait, wasn't it GWB that said that "we could not have accomplished so much without a coalition of the willing?" No, I suppose we couldn't arbitrarily invade sovereign countries without the co-operation of our allies....couldn't just go it alone in an aggressive military action based on, at the very least faulty intelligence and at worst (and more likely) bold faced lies that most of the rest of the civilized world saw as suspect from the start.

Can we defend our borders? Well, in a sense we can...we can establish friendly relations with the vast majority of foreign governments, and certainly anyone who posed a threat...and we ARE capable of lending military, humanitarian aid in cases of genocide, oppression, etc...as it's required and sponsored by the UN and NATO.

No, we don't run around the globe on some kind of modern crusade and invite people to strike back with whatever pitiful means they can muster (ala 9/11) and then bitch and moan that we are the victims of an 'unprovoked' attack. We're smarter than that...or so the evidence would seem to indicate...(Ref: the smashed NYC skyline).

You can't even provide disaster relief to people without renting a farking airplane or float a boat across the Atlantic without someone getting hurt. It's best you stay at home where you won't get in the way.

You’re a spoiled little country, spoiled in that you’re sitting on natural resources that provide your wealth and spoiled in that you’re next to the worlds largest market. You don’t pull your weight internationally, you don’t lead, in fact, all you’re really good at is being smug, playing hockey, making beer and bickering over how to spend your money on yourself.

OK, I'm kidding, sort of.

OTB

 

[oldjones]

You can't even provide disaster relief to people without renting a farking airplane or float a boat across the Atlantic without someone getting hurt. It's best you stay at home where you won't get in the way.

You’re a spoiled little country, spoiled in that you’re sitting on natural resources that provide your wealth and spoiled in that you’re next to the worlds largest market. You don’t pull your weight internationally, you don’t lead, in fact, all you’re really good at is being smug, playing hockey, making beer and bickering over how to spend your money on yourself.

OK, I'm kidding, sort of.

OTB

Why you honey-tongued old blarney pedlar, are those sugary words supposed to make us ashamed of the anti-americanism you keep coming up here to bleat about?

One wonders at your altruism; any ordinary person would have left us to our own devices—undoubtedly low and ill-fated—and kept his wise counsels, and pithy observations for his own superior kind. We can only marvel at our good fortune and your selfless generosity.

 

[athlete]

Sure...and your problem is that you think 'leadership' means charging ahead (and alone) with guns blazing.

You're not capable of negotiating without the threat of military action...and now you've successfully pissed off enough people in the world that despite an annual defense budget of over a half a trillion dollars, and the two largest moats in the history of mankind you can't protect your citizens from a couple hundred guys that contributed to your GDP by buying a dozen plane tickets. Further, you kill more of yourselves every year than anyone else has since you got your asses kicked by another group of pissed off peasants in Vietnam, and despite THAT, you still chose to charge head first into an armed conflict based on a lie, with no exit strategy and only token international support.

Meanwhile, us spoiled brats up north can take our kids to see the doctor about an ear ache without re-mortgaging the house.

I'm joking too...well, not really.

 

[dickydee292004]

if your number of 500, 000 people in US dying of cancer in 2004 is accurate well I am not sure that this is a coincidence.

Me also thinks that DEMOCRACY as we always here about does not exist anymore as our ideologies like to think. There are just too many people to actually allow for a so called democracy. Could it be propaganda perhaps that allows us to believe in the so called democracy theory? Especially since many so called democratic nations spend billions on military each year to protect from the so called anti freedom believers. Thoughts anyone?

 

[Pete Graves]

Back to the original topic, I'm sure it does seem weird to liberals. To the rest of us, we understand that US drug companies spend more money on R&D and develop more new drugs and treatments that the rest of the world combined. One more example of how capitalism through the use of the ingenious US patent system is the most efficient system and how it helps more people than all the well-meaning socialist programs put together.

 

[Asterix]

Back to the original topic, I'm sure it does seem weird to liberals. To the rest of us, we understand that US drug companies spend more money on R&D and develop more new drugs and treatments that the rest of the world combined. One more example of how capitalism through the use of the ingenious US patent system is the most efficient system and how it helps more people than all the well-meaning socialist programs put together.

You forgot to list all the side-effect disclaimers.

 

[Peeping Tom]

Canada doesn't have the means to have a foreign policy of its own interest. Let's see, capability to project force; nada, and no important position within the vaunted "international community" - the same UN status as Zimbabwe or Luxembourg - a voice of oustanding importance. Here and there in the past Canada has provided some grunts, with the important distinction: Canada gets told but does not tell what to do.

Behave yourselves, maybe the doc will give you a lollipop on the way out.

we just don't see the need to use our military (at the expense of our economy) as our primary tool of foreign policy; as a result, we can afford to offer nationwide, comprehensive medical care, for example.

 

[oldjones]

Canada doesn't have the means to have a foreign policy of its own interest. Let's see, capability to project force; nada, and no important position within the vaunted "international community" - the same UN status as Zimbabwe or Luxembourg - a voice of oustanding importance. Here and there in the past Canada has provided some grunts, with the important distinction: Canada gets told but does not tell what to do.

Behave yourselves, maybe the doc will give you a lollipop on the way out.

Try to at least approach the topic, if you can't stay on it. No lollipops for you.