English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

7 answers

although i dont want this how that makes me a racist i dont know
but he's right a union is what the goal is

Mexico's foreign secretary says he expects Mexico and the U.S. will one day be "integrated," The official spoke about the future of U.S.-Mexico relations, saying he envisions a day when the United States and its southern neighbor would be "integrated."

Not all the students in attendance supported Baustista's vision of the future.

"I don't believe there will be complete integration here," Clarissa Pena told KRGV. "I don't think that's right."

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has just let the cat out of the bag about what's really behind our trade agreements and security partnerships with the other North American countries. A 59-page CFR document spells out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter."

"Community" means integrating the United States with the corruption, socialism, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open U.S. borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

"Community" is sometimes called "space" but the CFR goal is clear: "a common economic space ... for all people in the region, a space in which trade, capital, and people flow freely." The CFR's "integrated" strategy calls for "a more open border for the movement of goods and people.

i dont see how this would be good for us as

The United States has no official language. Mexico has one: Spanish. Canada has two: French and English. The bi-lingual status of Canada is a political hot-button issue there. Will Canadian Francophones tolerate giving equal position to Spanish? Will Mexicans accept English as an official language?
The United States has no appreciable barriers to land ownership by foreigners. Canada has only modest barriers. Mexico has strict restrictions on land ownership by foreigners and an outright ban on land ownership by foreigners close to the border or the sea coast. Note that part of the EU agreements was removing such restrictions. Let’s not mince words. The United States is in a position to buy Mexico. What stands in the way are Mexican laws. And those laws are a part of the reason for Mexico’s lagging growth relative to its two Anglophone neighbors.

the nafta super highway has already begun

http://infowars.com/articles/nwo/nafta_superhighway_bush_admin_secret_plan.htm

2006-08-03 04:03:18 · answer #1 · answered by hayleylov 6 · 1 0

"the NAFTA countries become an American Union kind of like EU"

What planet are you living on? Let me guess - you're a student or someone who's managed (so far) to avoid the real world and has no idea what's really going on nor, more importantly, *why* it's going on.

If this sounds vaguely insulting, it's not meant to be; it's that your question betrays an apalling lack of understanding of (presumably) your own country.

To make it clear - the "NAFTA countries" ARE NOT going to become "an American Union kind of like EU". The EU was formed for political reasons (so that the member countries would have common interests and, therefore, cease having incredibly destructive wars every few decades) that have no relevance in this hemisphere.

There is no logical connection between NAFTA and the EU.

How you managed to work racists into your "question" is beyond me.

2006-08-03 09:49:15 · answer #2 · answered by Walter Ridgeley 5 · 0 0

Most of the people you run across today,or for that matter yesterday are not racists. They maybe race based or even predjudist in otherwise selective ways. They need to be told or influenced to dislike others, mostly by those that would be their leadership! Maybe at one time you were in a group that hung out together,and when you were with one of them they would complain to you about others and try to influence you to aquire the same attitude as they. When you are young growing up in brooklyn you learn the difference in race and creed. You banter with the other skin tones in friendly ways,fully aware of the differences,and what great talents they bring to the table so to tell. When someone says " some of my best friends are ---- they are not being forth-coming about what they truly feel in most cases.It is much better if they demonstrate their feelings and lead by example. Oh! I'm a christain so therefore I will not decieve, thats when I run to the nearest bar and have a beer with someone less pretendfull

2006-08-03 10:18:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It isn't a matter of being a racist, obviously. I'd prefer to be a separate country or in such a partnership with a country that gives benefits to its people equal to those we give. Canada might work out. With Mexico, we'd be flooded with their poor people and it is bad policy to import poverty. Look at the problems the EU is having over just that thing.

Is 'racist' the only argument you have? Because it really limits you.

2006-08-03 10:42:11 · answer #4 · answered by DAR 7 · 0 0

Walter Ridgeley pretty much told you how it is. Also, what makes you think only the racists are going to be pissed if someone tries to make an "American Union"?

2006-08-03 14:55:30 · answer #5 · answered by Mr. Bojangles 5 · 0 0

They´re just going to have to accept it and tough crap. It won´t necessarily be a race issue since Canada would also be involved.

2006-08-03 09:40:18 · answer #6 · answered by Double 709 5 · 0 0

We won't. There's really no more room in the US for uneducated and unskilled Mexican labor, or the socialist leanings of both our Mexican and Canadian friends.

Thanks, but, no thanks.

2006-08-03 09:50:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers