Article

2004-06-21 Great White North

Canadian Textbooks Spur Anti-Americanism

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mark Espinola 2004-06-21 12:53:52 AM|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The Canuckistani academi-liars are at a disadvantage compared to their Euro and Muslim colleagues, since a high percentage of Canadians can spend enough time here to see for themselves that homelessness is a political myth, that inner city gangsterism is more common in pop culture than in real life, and that American health care is not causing people to fall over dead in the streets. In fact, the big medical centers here in Lubbock have a high percentage of Canadian nurses, lured here by non-socialist wage rates, and a fair number of Canadian patients, the latter willing to pay cash on the barrelhead rather than risk life and limb on endless waiting lists.
Canadians are not as far behind us on the media-culture curve as Europeans, but they have still had little time to develop any degree of skepticism and independence from mass media claims. As for the Euros, there is a reason so many of them get off the plane for the first time and start lecturing us on our alleged shortcomings.
This incredible presumption makes sense only if one realizes that these people have absolute childlike faith in the pronouncements and representations of their media. Canadians are a little less gullible; they may be on the verge of the 1970s in their average awareness of media manipulation, while the Euros are still in the Walter Cronkite heyday of the early 60s.
As for Islamos, they are in the 1890s yellow journalism stage of awareness but, alas, with super powerful electronics as the medium of duplicity and manipulation.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2004-06-21 3:02:30 AM|| 2004-06-21 3:02:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 As for the tide turning in WW1 by the time the US joined in, it had, but in favor of the Germans. By the time US troops were able to intervene in force, the spring of 1918, the Germans had knocked Russia out of the war, and were in the midst of their most successful offensive yet against Britain and France.
I'm sure some of our historians can provide more detail, but the Germans were close to winning outright by the time the US actually got involved.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2004-06-21 3:07:58 AM|| 2004-06-21 3:07:58 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Atomic Conspiracy,

British will claim French were still shaky after 1917 mutinies and it was Haig's offensive which broke Germany.Unfortunately for British claims,they took very few prisoners as Germans were fighting delaying action while retreating to new shorter,stronger defensive line.

Ludendorff lost his nerve after news of success of American offensive in Argonne,and demanded German Government make peace.(Argonne offensive was demanded by Foch,French CinC.Transferring forces to make the offensive ended American offensive in St.Mihiel.Patton,Marshall,MacArthur and German commander of St.Mihiel defences all believed continued American attack in St.-Mihiel sector would have quickly broken German defenses and w/breakthru could have decisively defeated German Army in the field.)For those interested in slightly revisionist history of WW1,see John Mosier's THE MYTH OF THE GREAT WAR.

As to could Germany win in 1918,doubtful.She had two allies,Austria-Hungary which was disintegrating and Turkey which was losing in Mid-East.Allies had lost Russia and Italy was about done,and Balkan allies were defeated,but...a mixed force was reclaiming Balkans,and there were all those lovely Americans.W/out American intervention WW1 might still be straggling on.Britain had neither the troops,nor the Generals to beat the Germans,France was exhausted and the Germans weren't strong enough to finish France off.

Final note.US forces in WW1 were almost entirely equipped w/French and British cannons and aircraft.Most training camps were run by French mountain troops.W/out French assistance there would have been no AEF.US politicians talked of massive armaments but delivered nothing to troops.One reason Hitler discounted US power in WW2.And why Chamberlain rejected Roosevelts' attempts to help before WW2,believing US to be paper tiger.This is what the Rabid Left refuse to accept when they make reckless attacks on President's policy simply cause they don't like him;there are others listening to your words and they will draw deadly conclusions.

Posted by Stephen 2004-06-21 4:35:06 AM|| 2004-06-21 4:35:06 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 I was watching"History of the Gun"(History Chanel),they were talking about the effectivness of the BAR(sure wish I could get my grubby little hands on one)The War Dept.(U.S.)was so worried about the BAR falling into enemy hands they refused to issue them to the troops(dumb ass').Thousands sat in wharehouse' for the duration.The Doughboys had to carry a badly made French automatic weapon.When asked"If that is such a lousy weapon,why are you carrying it?"
reply:Because the parts make a great still.

By the way the BAR was Bonnie's(Bonnie and Clyde)favorite weapon.
Spaceship one took off about an 40 min ago,seperation and pre-orbit burn in aprox.20 min.

Posted by Raptor 2004-06-21 10:36:43 AM|| 2004-06-21 10:36:43 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Damn snowbacks...

Posted by mojo 2004-06-21 12:31:14 PM|| 2004-06-21 12:31:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Still the best use of a BAR
in a movie goes to MoonShine War

The Prisoner impersonating a revenuer assembling his BAR from a suitcase in a cheap hotel just has to be seen.

Ever Seen One of these Boy?

Oh... yeah a presenstive Alan Alda plays the moonshiner.
A hoorificly good bad movie

Posted by Shipman 2004-06-21 12:34:18 PM|| 2004-06-21 12:34:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 This may come as a surprise to my American cousins, but Canadians never did like Americans. In my school days I remember one teacher explicitly telling us that "Canadians don't like Americans", though she didn't give a reason why and did not otherwise engage in anti-American tirades. This was over two decades ago. I can imagine what sort of anti-American bile gets cranked out today.

Posted by Rafael 2004-06-21 12:41:02 PM|| 2004-06-21 12:41:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Why should Canadian textbooks be different than American textbooks? The American educational establishment has been deriding, denigrating, or deleting the foundations and successes of American culture as the product of dead white guys for years. In the new multicultural world Western civ sucks.

Posted by RWV 2004-06-21 12:44:44 PM|| 2004-06-21 12:44:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 yea canadians never liked the US ..but all thier best people go south..kinda conflicted up north

Posted by Dan 2004-06-21 1:38:57 PM|| 2004-06-21 1:38:57 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 AC, Stephen-
I disagree in the sense that I think Germany could have won in 1918. Their spring offensive was pretty successful initially, but by that time the number of US troops in combat began to turn the tide (US troops in combat really began to be of important numbers in about June of 1918). With regard to France, as much as we like to dis them (and appropriately so for their recent actions), the loses she took in WWI were enormous. As a percentage of the population France was the hardest hit of that war. The whole country was shell-shocked.

Posted by Spot 2004-06-21 6:14:09 PM|| 2004-06-21 6:14:09 PM|| Front Page Top

14:18 Robert Crawford
14:18 Robert Crawford
14:18 Robert Crawford
14:18 Robert Crawford
14:17 Robert Crawford
14:17 Robert Crawford
18:00 A Loved One
22:37 Frank G
22:28 Anonymous6299
18:33 Anonymous5746
06:11 USMarine1980
09:21 B
09:10 Aris Katsaris
01:11 Zenster
00:57 Atomic Conspiracy
00:52 Atomic Conspiracy
00:44 Zenster
00:39 Dog Bites Trolls
00:28 Mark Espinola
00:23 Mark Espinola
00:13 Zenster
00:12 Traveller
00:09 Anonymous5184
00:07 Edward Yee