The firm acknowledges that the Arctic's petroleum deposits are the "common heritage of mankind," but has argued that the polar region requires a private "lead manager" to organize a multinational consortium of oil companies to extract undersea resources responsibly and equitably.

Translation: There's profit to be had.

exclusive rights to extract oil and gas from rapidly melting areas of the central Arctic Ocean

That's funny.

Gutsy move. The end result is huge buy off/settlement. A courtroom lottery. The first shots are being fired. It's a Gold Rush.

Well Canada and the US maybe not. Russia however probably has as much claim as Canada does. They won't play as nicely.

You don't think Russian is just going to sit back and watch, do you? Well.. ok at first

You mean things really work like that?

Dibs on Las Vegas!

Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Russia, and the United States are going to fight it out? *Grabs Popcorn*

We should just have an hockey tournament to determine who gets the rights.

Gwendolyn: Well Canada and the US maybe not. Russia however probably has as much claim as Canada does. They won't play as nicely.

You'd be surprised. Your forces are concentrated in the Pacific and South Atlantic, we're building some bluewater ports and turning the local population into the sort of hunter/killer units that destroyed the Soviet advance in Finland.

Want to see how effective an M16 will be in arctic warfare? Take a plastic baseball bat, stick it in your deep freezer for a day, and whack it against concrete.

Bored Horde:
You'd be surprised. Your forces are concentrated in the Pacific and South Atlantic, we're building some bluewater ports and turning the local population into the sort of hunter/killer units that destroyed the Soviet advance in Finland.

Want to see how effective an M16 will be in arctic warfare? Take a plastic baseball bat, stick it in your deep freezer for a day, and whack it against concrete.

Are you referencing a force matchup between the U.S. and Canada? Seriously? You realize how many treaties, cooperations, mindsets and other stuff you'd have to cut through to even have a "frosty" relationship? Canada is probably the U.S.'s closest ally, literally and figuratively. It will take a lot more than some pissy oil reserves to consider doing anything other than sending a strongly worded letter across the border.

The biggest threat in that region is indeed the Russian Federation (that's the current title, yeah?). What better way to show your resurgence as a superpower than to conduct a low-level hostile action in a remote part of the world when your only major rival is heavily involved in two other places far from your zone of interest? Flex your muscles *and* solidify your hold on rather valuable natural resources.

wait, wait, wait. i thought melting arctic ice/global warming was a socialist myth

Someday, in the next 50 years or so, potable water will be the commodity more precious than oil. Not only clean water, but clean water which is easy to 'produce' - so to speak. Canada has it all over the place. The U.S., not so much.

I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. found a reason to invade Canada in 2060. Maybe they will need democracy up there or something.

Sandwyrm: Bored Horde:
You'd be surprised. Your forces are concentrated in the Pacific and South Atlantic, we're building some bluewater ports and turning the local population into the sort of hunter/killer units that destroyed the Soviet advance in Finland.

Want to see how effective an M16 will be in arctic warfare? Take a plastic baseball bat, stick it in your deep freezer for a day, and whack it against concrete.

Are you referencing a force matchup between the U.S. and Canada? Seriously? You realize how many treaties, cooperations, mindsets and other stuff you'd have to cut through to even have a "frosty" relationship? Canada is probably the U.S.'s closest ally, literally and figuratively. It will take a lot more than some pissy oil reserves to consider doing anything other than sending a strongly worded letter across the border.

The biggest threat in that region is indeed the Russian Federation (that's the current title, yeah?). What better way to show your resurgence as a superpower than to conduct a low-level hostile action in a remote part of the world when your only major rival is heavily involved in two other places far from your zone of interest? Flex your muscles *and* solidify your hold on rather valuable natural resources.

Canada isn't an American protectorate, we're planning for the future based on how America treats their allies today.

In foreign policy, America is a psychopath. Psychopaths don't have friends, they have people they are currently cordial to.

Josephmother

That movie was called "ice pirates" and was not bad for a "B" ish movie

Man people are insane. Yeah, there'll be a shooting war between Canada and the US. Ok, nutjob. Hell, even armed conflict with Russia is a ridiculous prospect in this day and age.

hockeyfarker: Man people are insane. Yeah, there'll be a shooting war between Canada and the US. Ok, nutjob. Hell, even armed conflict with Russia is a ridiculous prospect in this day and age.

A decade ago, people would have called you insane to say that the Iranian and Iraqi heads of state would be talking about joint security operations.

Perhaps I was too restrictive in my comment. ALL nations are psychopaths in their foreign relations, friends of convenience today are targets of military expedience tomorrow.

Bored Horde:
In foreign policy, America is a psychopath. Psychopaths don't have friends, they have people they are currently cordial to.
...

Perhaps I was too restrictive in my comment. ALL nations are psychopaths in their foreign relations, friends of convenience today are targets of military expedience tomorrow.


Psychopath.

Right, know what? You have a very small world view, and any discussion between us will be pointless. Enjoy your endeavors and have a nice day.

JosephMother: Someday, in the next 50 years or so, potable water will be the commodity more precious than oil. Not only clean water, but clean water which is easy to 'produce' - so to speak. Canada has it all over the place. The U.S., not so much.

I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. found a reason to invade Canada in 2060. Maybe they will need democracy up there or something.

by 2060 China will own the US

Sandwyrm: Bored Horde:
In foreign policy, America is a psychopath. Psychopaths don't have friends, they have people they are currently cordial to.
...

Perhaps I was too restrictive in my comment. ALL nations are psychopaths in their foreign relations, friends of convenience today are targets of military expedience tomorrow.


Psychopath.

Right, know what? You have a very small world view, and any discussion between us will be pointless. Enjoy your endeavors and have a nice day.

Read this. (new window)

Apply it to your particular country and really give your position a think.

I realize that applying a descriptor of mental defect to an abstract concept is shaky at best, but it does give you some relative sense of how a country operates in relation to other countries.

Bored Horde: A decade ago, people would have called you insane to say that the Iranian and Iraqi heads of state would be talking about joint security operations.

That's right. Because they fought a decade long war. So yeah, one could guess that they might not get along, security operation wise.

Canada and the US are military allies who do more cross-border trade than any other two countries in the world. Yes, you are crazy.

JosephMother: Someday, in the next 50 years or so, potable water will be the commodity more precious than oil. Not only clean water, but clean water which is easy to 'produce' - so to speak. Canada has it all over the place. The U.S., not so much.

I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. found a reason to invade Canada in 20602020. Maybe they will need democracy up there or something.

In the West, we largely have our heads buried in the sand, metaphorically, when it comes to clean water. But the problem is already here. Right now, it's South America (the Andes) and China that is currently squeezed for water, and we seem to have lots of it. But there's much less than you think there is, and the crisis has already started.

On the other hand, a war with Canada is America's worst farking nightmare. It's like Iraq/Afghanistan all over again - the opposition will be a bunch of armed guerillas who know the territory, especially in the North - only it's right in America's backyard and they can't really stop us from coming over that long-ass border for retribution.
Not to mention the PR, Commonwealth retribution (sanctions), and our current fifth column inside America.
It's hard to imagine such hostility becoming a shooting conflict, though I can imagine things might get very, very tense.

hockeyfarker: Bored Horde: A decade ago, people would have called you insane to say that the Iranian and Iraqi heads of state would be talking about joint security operations.

That's right. Because they fought a decade long war. So yeah, one could guess that they might not get along, security operation wise.

Canada and the US are military allies who do more cross-border trade than any other two countries in the world. Yes, you are crazy.

So you're saying that an unlikely seeming outcome based on what was known at the time proves that what is known currently is a good predictor of future relations?

starsrift: and our current fifth column inside America.

Eh?

JosephMother: I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. found a reason to invade Canada in 2060.

I'd be surprised, because they won't have the troops what with the ongoing wars in Iraq, Iran, Syria and Venezuela. President Olsen and Vice-President Olsen will have their hands full just keeping the draft going and trying to solve the border dispute between Mexico and Oregon.

I claim this land in the name of Mars! Isn't it lovely?

Aarontology: starsrift: and our current fifth column inside America.

EhHey?

FTFY.

Shh! Remember, you're American!

I'm flabbergasted anyone seriously entertains the notions of war with Canada. There are so many ties binding our two countries, any hostile actions would be tantamount to civil war. Modern civilized countries don't do civil war, people are not pushed to desperation. We have a LOT of fat to trim before we start feeling hunger(figuratively).

Large scale desalination plants and other such ventures would cost less than any play for more natural resources and would be the first option. The U.S. has the money and the technology NOW to do this, once enough people start biatching it'll be put into play.

Methinks you are all too pessimistic regarding the problem solving abilities of our respective nations.

Sandwyrm: Methinks you are all too pessimistic regarding the problem solving abilities of our respective nations.

Given the standard "problem-solving" approach of America since the start of the Cold War - both covert and overt - the notion is justified.

I think it's far more likely, however, that Americans will just start heading up to the Arctic and opening shop, international law and treaties be damned, somewhat similar in fashion to how they steal Canada's agreed upon fishing allotment, how they've exercised punishing tariffs on softwood in violation of trade agreements to the contrary, etc.

The irony will come when they're farking trapped up there and have to beg for a Cdn Coast Guard heavy icebreaker to get them out. The question will be, as it always is when Americans break their word or international law in regards to Canada - what the hell can we do about it? It might be worth starting conflict, which will be Cdn navy vessels arresting American civilian ones operating in the area and escorting them to the nearest port.

"Living next to you is in some ways like swimming with an elephant. No matter how bouyant and even-tempered is the beast, if I can call it that, one is affected by every splash and paddle."

/adapting famous relevant quotes for at least 10 minutes

That is not oil, according to President Chimpy Flightsuit McFartwit, that is an addictive substance America needs to stop using.

There's already oil in Canadia (eh), in the sands or something, but they went and wrote laws saying we had to get our oil from the middle east.

/damn big oil

whereisian: We should just have an hockey tournament to determine who gets the rights.

please enter politics

Bored Horde: So you're saying that an unlikely seeming outcome based on what was known at the time proves that what is known currently is a good predictor of future relations?

No. Maybe try using fewer words, you won't get confused so easily.

I was saying that Canada and the US enjoy very healthy relations, and there is every reason to think that that will continue.

starsrift:
I think it's far more likely, however, that Americans will just start heading up to the Arctic and opening shop, international law and treaties be damned, somewhat similar in fashion to how they steal Canada's agreed upon fishing allotment, how they've exercised punishing tariffs on softwood in violation of trade agreements to the contrary, etc.

The irony will come when they're farking trapped up there and have to beg for a Cdn Coast Guard heavy icebreaker to get them out. The question will be, as it always is when Americans break their word or international law in regards to Canada - what the hell can we do about it? It might be worth starting conflict, which will be Cdn navy vessels arresting American civilian ones operating in the area and escorting them to the nearest port.

I will excuse your arrogance as misplaced nationalism. Assuming the mistakes made by our politicians to be normal operating procedure is silliness. Here's a hint, you never hear about politicians unless they screw up. Ever heard a news report praising someone for doing a good job? It doesn't make good news; it doesn't earn Pulitzers. Your assumptions are akin to assuming the sun is bad because fools get sunburned every year.

Sandwyrm: I will excuse your arrogance as misplaced nationalism. Assuming the mistakes made by our politicians to be normal operating procedure is silliness. Here's a hint, you never hear about politicians unless they screw up. Ever heard a news report praising someone for doing a good job? It doesn't make good news; it doesn't earn Pulitzers. Your assumptions are akin to assuming the sun is bad because fools get sunburned every year.

When the same mistake is made every farking year, it's policy. Every single year, a sizeable chunk of the agreed fish sharing allotment is stolen - twice - once from Alaska fisheries, and once again from Washington fisheries. The softwood lumber dispute is still ongoing, after years, though for now, America is behaving since our PM Harper conducted negotiations.

These are not assumptions. These are verifiable facts. This is how your country operates.

See what I mean? As an American, you have no idea just how shiatty your country behaves. Your opinion is so far removed from reality on the issue of America's relations with Canada and their attitude about our sovereignity, you are exactly the kind of person that the Gen. in this article is talking to.