So Canada is right above U.S. Why are they not helping - War In Iraq. They have like 5 platoons or somethin?

Question

Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing. I'm just wondering. If Canada had a problem with another country, you know damn well the U.S. would be there to lend a helping hand. But when the U.S. has a problem with another country(War in Iraq) where is Canada? Why should they even be considered an ally if they are not even helping?(Mind you a neighboring country to the U.S.(RIGHT ABOVE US)) Like I said, I'm not criticizing, just out of curiosity.

Like I said, Not Criticizing/Accusing. So lay off buddy, it's a question, not an argument.

I understand that Canada does not approve of the war, but how can a country survive in this world if they do not have a decent sized military? What if Canada was to be Invaded? Who would they rely on?????

Answer 1

Because, like a lot of civilized countries around the world, they realize that the reason for the war in Iraq is one that only the american government knows about. Nobody knows why Americans are in Iraq. Not even the " I'm an patriot American" loudmouth knows exactly why there are troops in Iraq.
Canada has some troops in Afghanistan though, where it's justified and necessary.

Answer 2

First of all, Canada never initiates any wars or conflicts; it does help when the war seems justified. Remember: we were in WWII long before the US entered. Second, the Iraq war was very unpopular with Canadians, and it was considered illegal--lacking the support of most of the world, and so on. Therefore, the government at the time the war started opted to stay out. We are in Afghanistan, though. That is seen as something different. The Taliban were an obvious threat, whereas Hussein was not. Of course, he was rotten, at least after he decided to be defiant towards his former friends in the US, but he was not an obvious threat.

Answer 3

During the thirties there were two regimes in Europe. Both were ruled by despotic totalitarian' dictators operating under a political system that called for world domination. Both regimes had secret police and prison camps where people were tortured and died. Disagreement with the regime meant death. The difference between the two was that the USSR saw world domination available through peaceful means and was too busy trying to feed its own anyway. Nazi Germany went to war. Not an exact analogy to today's world but close. Iraq was starving, friendless and although brutal ,obtained. Tighten the embargo and they would have had a regime change on their own. Afghanistan wasn't a state with a terrorist org. but a terrorist org. with a state. There was firm and verified evidence of al-Qaeda in the country and their use of that country as a base for attacks on the USA. The Taliban's treatment of their own people was a reminder of Pol Pot. This was a legitimate target That's why Canadians are fighting and dying in Afghanistan and declined the invite to Iraq.

Answer 4

What an odd attitude. You admit that Canada has provided some troops but then complain that they "aren't helping" and are somehow obligated to support even an illegal invasion bvecause they share a border.

If Canada or Mexico illegally invaded a sovereign nation and took over its government, killing tens of thousands and in defiance of the United Nations, would the USA be obligated to "help"?

As for not criticizing, sure you're not. You're accusing. And allies do not necessarily support every action the other takes.

Answer 5

France helps us in Afghanistan, they have despatched countless their acceptable troops there. The conflict in Iraq is diverse, a million) France had significant funding in Saddam's Iraq and replaced into anxious about dropping all that money 2) besides the easy undeniable reality that we technically had grounds for renewed attempt hostile to against Iraq, for violations of the 1991 supply up hearth, in 12 years, with the help of means of three US presidents, 2 republican and a million democrat we did not carry out a touch ingredient, except hearth some cruise missiles and hearth at air threat-free practices internet internet sites.

Answer 6

well there is no reason for us to go to Iraq, that war is bullshit ,world war 1 and world war 2 had a meaning,and the war in Iraq isn't necessary it's all about oil and the Us believing that they are the worlds police,and that whole thing about the united states backing us up,well you don't have to worry about that because we don't view ourselves as the police of the world and we don't kill allied forces and call it "friendly fire" so i doubt we'll be attacked anytime soon.now comes the statement that got me all fired up "should they even be considered an ally if they are not even helping" well if by "helping" you mean killing innocent women and children,then you shouldn't consider us an ally.

Answer 7

Canada doesn't maintain a massive armed force, so it can't send a lot to Iraq. It's mostly symbolic (although it's very real for the soldiers they do send, and their families).

But basically, Canada probably also rejects the idea that the U.S. is "having a problem" with Iraq. If there is no real reason for the U.S. to be there, then there's no real reason for Canada to be there either.

Answer 8

Given what we know now, why did the US itself bother to get involved in Iraq? My take is that Canada figured there was no justification, so why get involved? Today, it looks pretty smart.

Answer 9

war=bad, peace=good. not really sure why canada is not involved in iraq. maybe the peacekeeper thing prevents canadians from participating in actual wars.

Answer 10

publicly, canada is against a lot of US policy. many canadians describe their "canadian-ness" as being first and foremost "not american".

HOWEVER: canadian troops are in afganastan. canadian sailors recently finished up a navy exercise with the US navy in the pacific ocean. our militaries cooperate.