US-Canadian-Mexican NAFTA-Type Military Merger Proposed

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

US-Canadian-Mexican NAFTA-Type Military Merger Proposed

7-7-99

This astonishing exclusive report on the proposed union of all North American military forces comes from this morning's edition of the TORONTO STAR.

Reflective readers will remember that the NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE warned, just prior to the recent secret Bilderberg Conference in Sintra, Portugal, that one urgent item on the agenda was the fast-tracking of North American economic and political union in conjunction with the preparation of a single Western Hemispheric Union of North, Central and South America.

Immediately following that Conference, proposals began to circulate in Canada for 'monetary union', or a 'common currency', with the United States; and the Canadian cabinet, headed by Bilderberger Jean Chretien, took a weekend away to consider, among other things, an 'open border' with the United States.

Now, right on cue, comes this proposal to unite the North American military into what would be, in effect, one set of continental armed forces.

Note its proposed mission:

"Such a command would co-ordinate military action on terrorism, insurgency, security threats..."

its ultimate extent:

"a joint North American command would expand as free trade involved more countries in the hemisphere. If, for example, the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas becomes reality, the military command would stretch from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego."

and its final "single flag" allegiance:

"Asked whether he foresaw the joint command leading to an integrated armed force, with everyone marching under one flag, Nunez said: ``I see it growing, with all of the change and integration of new ideas . . . what it achieves depends on the types of missions it is assigned.''

With the recent reports of intensifying U.S. National Guard military preparations for Y2K chaos across the United States, and only six months to go to the 1st of January, 1999, you might be forgiven for wondering if the unified command structure for such a continental military force might not be rushed into existence and operation within the next few months.

Those who doubt the seriousness, extent and duration of the coming Y2K crisis would be well advised to read our updated Y2K QUOTES page at:

http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/Y2KQUOTE.HTM

It is becoming increasingly evident that too little has been done, too late; and discussion is now increasingly turning to 'contingency plans' and 'emergency measures.'

If food, water and essential services shortages DO occur over an extendend period, and chaos erupts, such a unified command would be perfectly situated to handle the 'insurgency' and 'security' threats which would result, on the basis that they formed a 'continental emergency.'

And one more nail would have been neatly hammered thereby into the coffin of 'national sovereignty'.

John Whitley, Editor NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE [To join the NWO/Y2K low-volume mailing list, send your e-mail address to jwhitley@inforamp.net] ______________________

`NAFTA' FOR MILITARY PROPOSED

U.S. war college report urges joint command with Canada, Mexico

By Linda Diebel Toronto Star Latin America Bureau

MEXICO CITY - A United States military report advocates a joint command for American, Mexican and Canadian forces, in the same way the three countries are united under free trade.

The report, by Lt.-Col. Joseph Nunez for the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, Pa., also suggested a North American peacekeeping force, headquartered in the U.S., with deputy commander positions rotating between Canada and Mexico.

``Moving from bilateral arrangements to a (military) organization that reflects regional economic and security concerns is a better strategy, particularly considering our burgeoning trade through NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and the growing threat of terrorism that can penetrate through our borders,'' the report said.

The war college study is the first to publicly advocate the sensitive issue of integrated military command - a matter of sovereignty in Canada and Mexico, as well as countries throughout the hemisphere.

Such a command would co-ordinate military action on terrorism, insurgency, security threats and drug trafficking.

___

`It's an important issue and it's time to take a good, hard look at how we currently operate. If we fail to change our current strategy, the country could become less stable . . . . ' - Lt.-Col. Joseph Nunez, for the U.S. Army War College

___

Nunez said the joint command would replace, for example, NORAD (the North American Aerospace Defence command) which ``is getting pretty out-of-date when it comes to drugs, terrorism and other threats.''

``The U.S. does not have the kind of working arrangement with Canada and Mexico that it should.''

Nunez admitted the proposed unified command ``may be a U.S. defence arrangement, but a lot of things would evolve to the benefit of Canada and Mexico - that would be my hope.''

Most major initiatives in Canada in recent years - from free trade with the United States to the ongoing initiative of a hemisphere-wide economic pact - began with reports from think-tanks or academia.

The report comes during debate over other controversial free-trade issues, such as whether Canada should adopt the U.S. dollar as advocated in a recent report by the C.D. Howe Institute, a conservative think-tank in Toronto.

`A lot of the geographic considerations are a bit out-of-date'

Canadian nationalists have seen free trade as the tip of an iceberg that put Canada at risk in other areas, from culture to monetary policy.

``A lot of the geographic considerations are a bit out-of- date and do not reflect current realities,'' Nunez, 43, a former West Point instructor, told The Star yesterday.

He said his report, which carries a stamp saying it does not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Defence Department, has garnered a lot of attention in recent days.

The war college has received requests for copies from the Canadian and Mexican governments, as well as several U.S. government departments, including state and defence.

``It's an important issue and it's time to take a good, hard look at how we currently operate,'' he said.

In Ottawa yesterday, Lt.-Cmdr. Denise Laviolette, defence department spokesperson, said she had never heard of the study, adding it was not an ongoing concern of the Canadian Forces.

She added the report would carry more weight if it had come from the Pentagon, rather than the war college, a teaching institute that focuses on strategic perspectives.

Nunez, a 22-year army veteran, said a joint North American command would expand as free trade involved more countries in the hemisphere. If, for example, the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas becomes reality, the military command would stretch from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego.

Asked whether he foresaw the joint command leading to an integrated armed force, with everyone marching under one flag, Nunez said: ``I see it growing, with all of the change and integration of new ideas . . . what it achieves depends on the types of missions it is assigned.''

`It's time to take a good, hard look at how we currently operate'

The report has created a stir in Mexico since it was published by the Mexico City daily, El Financiero.

Nunez' report is called ``A New United States Strategy for Mexico,'' and details current revolutionary movements n Mexico and the threat to U.S. national interests here.

``If we fail to change our current strategy, the country could become less stable, thus jeopardizing the viability of NAFTA and the Free Trade Area of the Americas,'' it said.

Nunez said yesterday a joint peacekeeping force could be deployed wherever it was needed, ``without people thinking the United States - or any other country - was trying to influence things too much.''

U.S. intervention is a touchy subject in Latin America. Because of the history of U.S. involvement in the region, any kind of military co-operation, or shared duties with the U.S., is viewed with suspicion.

Whenever the Mexican government approves joint manoeuvres with the U.S., for example, there is a storm of opposition and media criticism.

Recently, the U.S. has been criticized for taking a stronger military role in Latin America after an apparent cooling-off period.

In his report, Nunez said a new North American peacekeeping force - which might be funded 60 per cent by the U.S., 25 per cent by Canada and 15 per cent by Mexico - would be used for everything from human rights work to hurricane disaster relief. __________________________________________

http://www.sightings.com/politics4/merg.htm

-- (@ .), July 11, 1999

Answers

(A)

All I can say is...You sure know how to ruin a good night's sleep. I but wonder now about all the U.N. Humvees I have been seeing on low boy trailors down here in S. Texas of late. And the proposed hundred mile "nutral" strip that Fred. Fud. wants to put in place between Mexico and the United Staes.

Really Shakey now LOL

-- Shakey (in_a_bunker@forty.feet), July 12, 1999.


USA pop=270 million Canada pop=30 million Mexico pop=100 million

I brought up the subject of a possible merger with Canada a while back, didn't garner a whole lot of interest from either side.

A merger with Mexico I just couldn't agree with. That would effectively put at least 50 million more people on the government gravy train in one stroke of the pen. No thanks, I'd like to keep SOME of my paycheck.

On the other hand...we could use a few more senorita's in my neck o'the woods. Hummmmmmmm..........

-- Gringo (midwestmike_@hotmail.com), July 12, 1999.


Hell why not just go straight to forming STARFLEET!

-- (snowleopard6@webtv.net), July 12, 1999.

"Hell why not just go straight to forming STARFLEET!

-- (snowleopard6@webtv.net), July 12, 1999."

"Scotty, prepare to beam me up" "Oh, and don't forget the babes in the mini-skirts!" YOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWEEEEEEEEE.

oh yeh.

hum...

-- missinDietER (midwestmike_@hotmail.com), July 12, 1999.


Better yet, boot this nunez traitor back to where he came from. Notice the veiled threat of "we could have disruptions". This jackass wants to be a corprorate-police state soldier.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), July 12, 1999.


Starfleet sounds like alot more fun to me. But, they'd have to keep the original uniforms NATURALLY. Otherwise, they'd be bitchin' and moanin' and compromising and the next thing ya know we'd have a bunch of armed forces running around in camouflage kilts, wearing sombreros and ordering Big Macs.

The thing is, If we include Mexico....the US and Canada will only have more weight to pull. Let's just give Mexico the big 'smoothie' (Clinton's so humpin' good at that) all the while building up Shakey's border. Canada's in with me.....nothing like large, tatooed calves in kilts to get my heart pumpin'!

"We've got 10 acres boys....need a place to hang your spats??????"

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), July 12, 1999.


(1) The US does joint exercises with Canadian military. The US signed a treaty to do some joint exercises with Mexican military.

(2) There is a major problem with trying to fully integrate the three militaries...language. Many Canadians speak only French. Many Mexicans speak only Spanish. I assume that everyone would need to learn English? That would include some citizens of the US, as well!

(3) Weapons systems. Since Canada is in NATO, most of their weapons systems are compatible with those of the US military. No so for Mexico. When your radios don't work on the same frequencies, your computers don't exchange the same data, and your cartridges don't fit each other's weapons, you can be in a world of logistics hurt. On the other hand, it would benefit the US arms manufacturers.

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), July 12, 1999.


Mad Monk... "Many Canadians speak only French." Yikes!! There's another misconception about Canadians. No, actually must of us speak Eskimo.

-- (eileen_macdonald@acmepet.com), July 16, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ