Canada Added to U.S. Piracy Watch List

hearty0

New member
Jul 22, 2008
115
0
0
Therumancer said:
Snipped due to epic fail
Modified letter of complaint generator working out for you(that or Jack Thompson has trained you well)?

Anyways I'd like to say that if you guys can't even properly invade a country that is filled with poverty, then I don't think you have any right to say our military are a bunch of pansies. That and while cleverly's posts are awesome yours make me want to fall asleep.
 

stompy

New member
Jan 21, 2008
2,951
0
0
Therumancer said:
I think you're missing the point.

I'm going to say this in a sentence, and hopefully, it will make things clearer: no one has to listen to the ICJ [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Court], because it cannot assert its authority without infringing upon state sovereignty, something the UN will not and cannot do.
 

Bobbovski

New member
May 19, 2008
574
0
0
Even if the world court manage to give a ruling it will just be taken up to the security council. "Article 94 establishes the duty of all UN members to comply with decisions of the Court involving them. If parties do not comply, the issue may be taken before the Security Council for enforcement action."

"The International Court has been criticised with respect to its rulings, its procedures, and its authority. As with United Nations criticisms as a whole, many of these criticisms refer more to the general authority assigned to the body by member states through its charter than to specific problems with the composition of judges or their rulings. Major criticisms include:

* 'Compulsory' jurisdiction is limited to cases where both parties have agreed to submit to its decision, and, as such, instances of aggression tend to be automatically escalated to and adjudicated by the Security Council."


And both China and the US has a right to veto issues that's been taken up by the security council...

"The Security Council's five permanent members have the power to veto any substantive resolution:

* China
* France
* Russian Federation
* United Kingdom
* United States"

So, no, it's very unlikely that there would be any wars because of copyright laws. Because both China and the US can veto any decicsion that works against them. Which is why the UN as a whole is basically useless...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_Council
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Court_of_Justice

Also, I don't think you can only blame China's growth on their lack of action against copyrighted materials. I think the main reason why things are going fairly well for China right now is that European and American companies move their production to China. Because they're cheaper. I'm not that worried though, sooner or later the situation will probably solve itself. As the Chinese workers get richer and richer they will demand more and more. Larger paychecks, longer vacations, longer lunchbreaks e.t.c. Heck... they might even start to demand democracy? At least if we're lucky. Anyway, this will probably cause most of the companies to pull out since it's no longer profitable to stay in China.
 

cleverlymadeup

New member
Mar 7, 2008
5,256
0
0
ontherisess said:
Cleverly made up I agree with everything you've said except for this wrong out army is on par if not better than most of your special forces, ie rangers and seals. the only 2 groups better are the SAS and the Gurkhas. funnily enough the only ones that say that's not true are americans, even the British army is scared to mess with the Canadian army.


Why would the British army be scared to mess with the Canadian army if you yourself admit the British army are better? Though personally the British army or American army wouldn't stand a chance if a proper war broke out again rather than these shit little invading countries that can't even fight back. I'd also like to say that atleast 95% of British people (atleast the ones I know) absolutly hate America. However the British government couldn't care less about their citizens besides the ones on "disibility benefits" because they have a sore throat and as such unfortunatly if the Americans went to war with Canada our government would help the Americans even though we all hate them. Britain is America's ***** now tbh. Britain used to be the most succesful nation in the world until about 100 years ago or so when we started getting retarded prime ministers that decided to make all our lands independant and then started going on about health and safety and human rights constantly.

ok if you don't believe me about our army take a look at ww1 and ww2 and the British reaction to not being able to do something and that was .... send in the Canadians and then hey they obtained the objective. it happened several times

also the whole "Britain is America's *****" you also miss the fact that Canada and Britain are part of the British Commonwealth, so if there was a war, Britain would be on Canada's side as well we both have the same monarch
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
hearty0 said:
Therumancer said:
Snipped due to epic fail
Modified letter of complaint generator working out for you(that or Jack Thompson has trained you well)?

Anyways I'd like to say that if you guys can't even properly invade a country that is filled with poverty, then I don't think you have any right to say our military are a bunch of pansies. That and while cleverly's posts are awesome yours make me want to fall asleep.
Hmmm let's turn the discussion into a flame war. Very mature. :p

We didn't really "invade" we're involved in a police action. Big differance. If we wanted to simply level the entire place it would be leveled. The fact that a lot of countries do not understand this point is part of the problem. We wouldn't be there playing gueriella war games if we simply wanted places like Iraq removed from the map.

What's more our morality is also part of the issue, even involved in a police action we simply care too much about the techniques we're using.

I'd imagine you find Cleverly's posts "awesome" simply because you agree with them. But that's okay. You are apparently trying to troll the thread to begin with and derail what has actually been fairly civil so far.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
stompy said:
Therumancer said:
I think you're missing the point.

I'm going to say this in a sentence, and hopefully, it will make things clearer: no one has to listen to the ICJ [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Court], because it cannot assert its authority without infringing upon state sovereignty, something the UN will not and cannot do.
Actually read the post.

You are correct, nobody HAS to listen to the World Court. However the pretensions of someone maybe listening to it are what is holding things together.

No matter what they say, in the end the issues involved are too big. It ends with a direct conflict whih cannot be mediated as the prosperity of entire civilizations is at stake.

Basically I'm agreeing with you.

This is pretty much why if viewed impartially (which this subject could never be) nobody is really "winning" this discussion because it generally comes down to me saying something, and then someone else saying "no it isn't", and me going "is to" on a lot of levels. This is the internet. Everyone is going to form their own opinions.

While not directly related to you (the writer of the post I'm responding to) I guess I'll let this thread go like I usually do since we could keep this going eternally simply because people are trying to turn it into a flame war (post I responded to before this one) and I generally don't play that game.


The final thing I WILL say (in response to messages in general) is that comments about Britan backing Canada if the chips were down over this issue, and Canada say sided with China, are misguided. Britan being one of the countries that stands to lose more than it would gain overall by losing control of it's patents.

Also people, on this front keep in mind that *I* have been working from the opinion that the exact discussion about media piracy is actually connected to a bigger issue. A lot of you are talking about modding consoles and pirating movies and games, or whatever. I said from the beginning I don't think it's about that really and few people outside of those industries really care. It's about technological developments and who benefits from them economically
on a fundemental level.

Getting into questions like if some guy can spend hundreds of millions of dollars developing something new, but then can't make a profit off of it, or recoup his losses, nobody is going to spend what it takes to develop new ideas. The potential gains being gone would also discourage people from taking risks on new technology that could pay off big. Likewise goverments are going to be reluctant to finance (or help finance) such things because on a fundemental level they would be developing technology for the marketplace that would ultimatly benefit competitors who can knock it off in greater quantities than they can produce it.

But as I said, I'm done. If anyone has actually read these posts, I am sort of going to call an epic fail on some of those that I've been talking to in return, since it seems we've ultimatly been talking about differant things. What's more I get the impression a lot of people here tend not to look at the big picture of what is going on in general.
 

JWAN

New member
Dec 27, 2008
2,725
0
0
bad rider said:
Am I the only one noticing that America has a lot of major countries on their list?

(P.s whos the head of list department, I'd guess Nixon, but I guess thats too cliche)
do you know a lot of hackers in 3rd world countries or something?
 

Baneat

New member
Jul 18, 2008
2,762
0
0
Is it just me that doesn't care what America thinks of my country? I'm on your list? ok...
 

savandicus

New member
Jun 5, 2008
664
0
0
I've never understood why consoles are such gits about mod chips, the only reason i can see to get one is so that you can play games from different countries, develops still get money, gamers dont have to wait 6 months or a year just so that they can get the same game but....errr....nope there is NO FREAKING REASON FOR THE REGIONAL CODE ON CONSOLES.
 

LokiSeto

KUL Member
Jan 25, 2008
43
0
0
Therumancer said:
*snipped*
Eh... not really listenning to reason and it does take two to tango, in other words if you wish to continue and acknowledge the flame war then there very well will be.

Therumancer I can understand the point you've brought forth about war being a possiblity in the future. But you yourself have strayed quite abit from the topic at hand.

Tell me. How will putting Canada on this list actually help in preventing the alienation of an ally of America and prepare ourselves for this grand war you speak of? I am still looking at this thinking that America claims to do whatever they wish when it gives them an advantage over other countries and does not expect to repay it's debt. This list is exactly that. America saying something and expecting every country to believe that it's the only way and that whatever we're doing is not good enough and need to follow Americas foot steps to become a utopia free of piracy.

Also one last thing... In the end an arguement on any plane of exsistence, internet or in real life, can become pointless. It all depends on the people argueing and if they choose to see the valid points that both (or more) sides make.
 

historybuff

New member
Feb 15, 2009
1,888
0
0
And now everyone will go back to blaming Americans they meet on the internet for everything bad that happens.
 

ontherisess

New member
May 2, 2009
31
0
0
also the whole "Britain is America's *****" you also miss the fact that Canada and Britain are part of the British Commonwealth, so if there was a war, Britain would be on Canada's side as well we both have the same monarch
I know but if you think for a second that Britain would support Canada instead of America you're on a different world than me.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
LokiSeto said:
Therumancer said:
*snipped*
Eh... not really listenning to reason and it does take two to tango, in other words if you wish to continue and acknowledge the flame war then there very well will be.

Therumancer I can understand the point you've brought forth about war being a possiblity in the future. But you yourself have strayed quite abit from the topic at hand.

Tell me. How will putting Canada on this list actually help in preventing the alienation of an ally of America and prepare ourselves for this grand war you speak of? I am still looking at this thinking that America claims to do whatever they wish when it gives them an advantage over other countries and does not expect to repay it's debt. This list is exactly that. America saying something and expecting every country to believe that it's the only way and that whatever we're doing is not good enough and need to follow Americas foot steps to become a utopia free of piracy.

Also one last thing... In the end an arguement on any plane of exsistence, internet or in real life, can become pointless. It all depends on the people argueing and if they choose to see the valid points that both (or more) sides make.

-

Well mostly I do not respond by counter-flaming. I just point out the immaturity (as I feel it helps make whatever point I'm making to any third party observers who might just be lurking and undecided). I then let the mods handle things if they feel the need. I rarely if ever make direct complaints about anyone through private mail to mods or whatever.

When I think things are getting too out of hand though I typically stop posting on a subject. I do not need the last word so to speak, and have no idea to spread chaos. Being in this situation with some frequency is the result of having such a... strong personality.

As far as adding Canada to this list, it's intended as a warning to start changing it's policies. In the end it's not really an ally if it's insistant on being part of the problem. I believe approaching them on this front is meant to be a serious hint that they should be getting their act together on who they trade with.

As far as America's attitudes go, like everyone else we're trying to maintain our status and standard of living. Though unlike most dominant world powers before us, we are trying to do so without outright conquest through force. America's success is largely based on it's innovations and control of technology. We've been willing to share it (as opposed to keeping it to ourselves) but expect to reap benefits from doing so. Other nations have similar attitudes.

The problem is of course that a lot of the world sees America like a cop (unpopular, but hopefully there when you need them). They also tend to think that we're basically invincible, endless, and omnipresent (if they aren't seeking to replace us and have their culture dominate). We have a lot of stuff, and they feel they can whack off bits and pieces here and there "because we're greedy" and the US will still be there to do whatever they need. The short term benefits of dealing with China being worthwhile since the knock offs and such improve their standard of living, and if things go wrong the US will allegedly still be there to come in and save the day.

As far as our debts go, well part of the problem is of course that we've been borrowing money from nations that had that money because they arguably "stole" it from us. We're trying to be diplomatic about things on a lot of levels, and don't nessicarly see that money as actually being borrowed.

On top of that, when you get down to it the US also borrows money to maintain it's standard of living, AND provide needed services to the entire bloody planet via things like it's Navy, military, and humanitarian services. For all intents and purposes we are the UN. When problems occur, people do not typically go running to say France expecting help.

Arguably, we have long ago paid any debts through action that we might have incurred. Or such is the attitude I (and many others) subscribe to.

Don't get me wrong also, Canada, France, Spain, and other nations have all backed the US on a lot of important things. But that doesn't mean when dealing with a massive issue like this that we can let it slide since it can influance OUR survival as well as national balance (please note that I mean this generally, I believe France ultimatly comes down on our side on the overall patent issue, but they cause problems elsewhere).

See the thing is that if the US is chipped away at, while nations like China continue to prosper and grow (and honestly they are building a huge military, and there are only so many things they can do with that. At a time when other nations are downsizing and they are upsizing that is noticible), eventually your going to see a situation where those smiling Communists who were selling you cheap toasters and TVs, now want to live in your country under their goverment. Despite what history might have you belive Hitler was viewed as a great guy and had overwhelming support in the countries he took over. He wasn't viewed as a monster to begin with, it's the friendly and popular guys that seem too good to be true that are an issue. The US has it's problems, but we're certainly not too good to be true, that's because we're genuine for the most part. We've also seen this kind of thing before and want to stop it. Face it, we stopped our isolationist policies specifically because of the world paying too much attention to the short term and paying huge prices for it.

... and nobody promised a Utopia, although we would like to unite the globe under our principles (mostly through the spread of ideas, even though some military force would doubtlessly have to be used), that's a long term goal (which I've talked about before).

Right now though, the "piracy" issues come down to the bigger patent issues and in the end it's all about nations, including our allies, putting short term gain (trading with China rather than buying more expensively from the correct patent holders) before the long term repercussions, and also hurting us in the process.

Am I arrogant about America? Certainly. But then again when the chips are down, who is it that is going to save your A$$?

I see the whole situation as being akin to a young child insisting on eating too many cookies despite his parents telling him not to. Canada is basically throwing a tantrum because they've had a cookie swiped (being put on the piracy watch list) and is getting a warning not to give themselves a tummy ache.

At any rate I'm pretty much done with this, because I figure it will just go downhill. Everyone has said what they have to say, and not much is going to change between the vocal posters.

>>>----Therumancer--->
 

bad rider

The prodigal son of a goat boy
Dec 23, 2007
2,252
0
0
JWAN said:
bad rider said:
Am I the only one noticing that America has a lot of major countries on their list?

(P.s whos the head of list department, I'd guess Nixon, but I guess thats too cliche)
do you know a lot of hackers in 3rd world countries or something?
Only in America.... Irony?
 

JWAN

New member
Dec 27, 2008
2,725
0
0
bad rider said:
JWAN said:
bad rider said:
Am I the only one noticing that America has a lot of major countries on their list?

(P.s whos the head of list department, I'd guess Nixon, but I guess thats too cliche)
do you know a lot of hackers in 3rd world countries or something?
Only in America.... Irony?
Russia supports the hacking of US bank accounts so I'm going to say that hackers are in more than just one country, besides maybe Canada should do more, maybe all of the countries should step up, but you don't see that.
 

stompy

New member
Jan 21, 2008
2,951
0
0
Therumancer said:
You are correct, nobody HAS to listen to the World Court. However the pretensions of someone maybe listening to it are what is holding things together.
I think both of us realise that the ICJ is pretty much powerless. However, you believe that people are holding onto the notion that is does have some authority to rule on the matter, yes?

Thing is, it's been shown that the ICJ really has no power when it comes to member nations that are big enough in global politics, namely the P5. People know this, and they criticise the UN for it.

The reason the war you're talking about hasn't been started yet is because the global economy is too interlinked for nations to just stop trading with the other nations and that there's the threat of mutually assured destruction.

PS: I think this post really sums up why the ICJ would be powerless, and why, if there was a ruling, we'd just go back to square one.

Bobbovski said:
 

cobrausn

New member
Dec 10, 2008
413
0
0
For those of you in a Canadian Army vs. US Army pissing contest:

Canadian Army:

As of 2009, approx 60000 active, approx 26000 reserve. Budget accounts for just over 1% of GDP.

US Army:

As of 2009, approx 550000 active, approx 550000 reserve. DoD Budget accounts for over 20% of GDP.

The result of a couple units playing soldier in the mid 1980s means little. The US Army resembles its incarnation in the 1980s very little, and has many more veterans of actual combat now. Numbers, training, and technology win out over time. Besides, last NATO Secretary General said all of NATO would just get in the way of the US Army if it was to try and assist in combat missions in Afghanistan.

Numbers aside, the Canadians tend to put in a good showing for themselves when cross-training, but I doubt it would amount to much in an actual war. Combined arms rules the modern battlefield. Occupations are another (sad) story.

Now can the discussion go back to piracy and how the US is to blame for all world problems and what not?