A Letter To The Editor: Ambassador Celucci

1."Washington would like Canada to beef up its elite JTF2 special forces and establish a Canadian strike force that could deploy anywhere in the world on short notice." 2. "The U.S. would also like Canada's security agencies...to help collect and interpret intelligence for its allies." 3. "On missile defence, Cellucci said he hoped Prime Minister Martin would give his approval before he leaves as ambassador on March 18..." Cellucci also has some advice for the critics of his recipe. He first pointed out that during the recent tsunami tragedy, it was not Canadian, but "U.S. helicopters which got there quickly because we have the capacity to deliver choppers and the soldiers where they were needed and they were providing water and food to people who would have died without it." While we should applaud the humanitarian efforts of the U.S, I thought there were other nations, including Canada, helping out? Maybe someone should point out that CNN is not the only television channel available in Canada. And to forestall any economic naysayers regarding costs, Cellucci states that "this would require an increase in defence spending, but I don't think it would be overwhelming..." While I believe that more funding is necessary for our military capability and that vigorous debate is required regarding Canada's role in an ever dangerous world, this is still an exclusively Canadian matter. We don't need another scolding from the US ambassador or his suggestions about where we should spend taxpayers' money. Equally important, why do some journalists simply parrot what is said by American officials? Don't most journalists endorse critical thinking? If it's simply about printing the scripted text, then we don't need journalists. Regarding Ambassador Cellucci, would it be too impolite to ask even some obvious questions: 1. How would the American government respond to our Canadian Ambassador if he told the White House what policies they should follow? Isn't this a breach of diplomatic protocol, and unacceptable? 2. What is your response to your own American Union of Concerned Scentists (numbering 20,000 plus) who are opposed to the U.S. "missile defence" project because it won't work, will cost trillions of dollars and will accelerate the proliferation of nuclear weapons? [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on February 13, 2005]