Derek 2.0

And the Super Hornet will no longer be supported once the USN (and RAAF) starts retiring it from service in the early 2030s (late 2030s for the Growler).......aside from the production line closing soon, what is proposed, is that Canada purchase an aircraft that wouldn't fully enter service until the early ~2020s, one decade prior to its retirement by its current users.......

Exactly, with the final Growler completed in early 2017.......

No, the four Victoria class subs are currently our most capable surveillance and sea denial assets our Navy has.....A purchase of 40 Super Hornets (or 40 F-35s) wouldn't allow us the ability to maintain our NORAD commitments, let alone contributing to NATO.

I've no idea, other than what has been reported in the MSM. Again, I don't know.........but why would he, if seeking to further his environmental policies, attempt to join the Tories (with a huge salary), and not the Liberals, who at the time under Dion were promoting such, in addition (at the time) seemed the most likely replacement to the Tories? As I said, maybe the NDP was his only choice.........I am certain though that in the coming days we learn more of this, as both Liberals and Tories come forward and the media digs deeper.........

Thanks, I've met him at a policy convention about ten years ago.........keep up the good work tips........he's since jumped ship with Eve.

Right, but that is not the claim, in that he was to join the PMO as an adviser to the Prime Minister until the next Federal Election, and then, run as a Tory........such things will be known and confirmed by people, I'm certain, other than Mulcair and Soudas........someone will end-up as a liar, and I see know reason why Soudas would confirm such reports, if he didn't have proof......as he would clearly be opening himself up to legal action putting such a claim out there about a public figure.

Because he joined the LPC as an adviser after his girlfriend crossed the floor........

Right, but then, I'd assume at this time, West Coast papers have the most alert staff.......I've no doubt it will be picked up by more Eastern papers by morning......

I think the Soudas implication, in confirming the Macleans' sources, is that a broke Mulcair wanted a lucrative salary prior to entering Federal politics.....nothing illegal of course, but if his political ideology goes to the highest bidder, it speaks to his character, well questioning his commitment to the policies put forth by the NDP. As to joining the NDP, and running in a by-election, from the sounds of it, the NDP is the only Federal party that would have him....

And look at that, now the Globe and Mail has picked up the story via the Canadian-Press: So one of Mulcair (NDP) or Soudas (Liberal) is lying.........It should be interesting to see what the Tories have to offer to clear this misunderstanding up.........and if Soudas is proven correct, how Mulcair will defend attacking the Tories when he nearly joined them, but didn't, because the PMO refused to give into Mulcair's demands. Until then, this story is breaking across the country by the minute........Mulcair won't be able to blame this on a low-level staffer, like he did pooching Canada's corporate tax rate, or the NDP National Daycare outlay duration.......And what of the past stories of Mulcair refusing paper-bags full of money by the mob???? Do these need to be reexamined too?

No, it comes down to two sources of Macleans, of which Soudas (an open source) has confirmed.......and as this story, that only was broke several hours ago (oddly enough a day after I brought up the subject), gains traction, I'm certain more members of the Conservative Party, including the Quebec riding association Mulcair was to run in under the CPC banner, will come forward with proof........ Oddly enough, Soudas's suggestion that Mulcair sought a salary of $300k a year, came about the same time Mulcair was busy remortgaging his home for the umpteen time.........And Mulcair now claims he never spoke with Soudas, nor was to run in the then next election as a Tory (If he got his large salary prior) It would seem most disconcerting at this time if when its proven Mulcair's memory of the incident is in doubt, if proven by both Liberal and Conservative Party members............ So the NDP is being lead by a guy that's first choice, dependent on money, was the Conservative Party of Canada!!!! Yet nobody has yet been able to explain why the Tories and Liberals have been leaving the high-flying NDP alone.......calm before the storm

So your plan would be to oppose (some how) the left-leaning Greek Government seeking improved relations with Russia? So really, what is wrong the Greeks (if its sought bail-out is rejected by the EU) receiving a money-mart/Mafia like loan from the Russians, in exchange, allowing the Russians access to Greek O&G pipelines....... So what is your idea? Give the Greeks money at their terms for fear of them getting money off the Russians? If they do receive money from the Russians, then what? Boycott or create trade barriers with the Greeks? Go to war with the Greeks/Russians? So what is your brilliant idea?

I've "got it" for quite sometime......and you've clearly got nothing but corrected (yet again) As you were

Yes I know.......as I said, this is nothing new, as the RCAF has been doing such since it's creation over 91 years ago.

And look at that: Mulcair could be a Tory today if he got the money he sought? I'm shocked......I wonder what else with come out of these conversations? Oh, and one of the sources: The very same Soudas many felt had bags full of dirt on the Prime Minister and CPC...just sandbagged the NDP.....Per Soudas, Muclair would have run as a Tory if the PMO had given in to his money demands!!!!!!!1 As I said, calm before the storm

The RCAF doesn't have a lack of recruits, there are plenty of applications every year. The RCAF had trouble finding educated recruits for non-commissioned trades, as a result, had to provide additional training to current members and future recruits.

Greece isn't pivotal in the region, that would be Turkey........The Greeks, even at the height of the Cold War, were considered unreliable, with largely an antiquated military, requiring the "adults" to keep the Greeks and Turks having at her (over Cyprus)........the inclusion of Greece into NATO was namely due to pent-up guilt on the part of the British and the realization that without including them, the militant Communist groups within Greece in the 1940s would have won the civil war, and brought Greece willingly into the Soviet sphere....... Better a crappy ally, then another enemy in the region back then when most of Europe was in ruins.......today, let the Russians have Greece.

Replace Russia/Putin with Gazprom and Turkish Stream Pipeline, and yes, its a possibility, but unlikely.

Thats great!!! I heard an interview with Karl Rove on FNS, in which Rove says Trump has yet to provide financial info to the RNC....and he doubts he ever will, as such, won't be able to run under the GOP ticket.

I did, it doesn't support your claim that the CPC has violated the Geneva Convention.

Read your article: You claimed there were 200 ex-RAF pilots set to join the RCAF.

No, you quoted just two sections..........and no, I had no problem understanding the baseless claim, I don't think it merits a thoughtful response. 1) Yes it does 2) Yes it does 3) You're correct 4)Yes it does, as dead POWs can't be forced to endure demeaning treatment, as they are dead. Is the CBC violating the Geneva Convention by reporting on POWs captured by ISIS, or showing docs on the Passionate Eye relating to captives of ISIS? My political loyalties are entrusted with the CPC due to far more than one issue...... How much merit would you afford me if I stated that Tom Mulcair runs dog fights in his basement, as evidence, I read it on a comment section online, but I don't really know all the facts of this claim as there is far too much reading involved.......and the onus is on you to prove that he doesn't!!! No, I understood your post just fine, but, your interpretation is based on incorrect information stated as fact from the original article......Civilian and members of non-State militaries are very much afforded the same protections under the Geneva Convention.

They did no such thing. The MOD cut the number of military personal through voluntary (early) attrition, well reducing the number of new (youth) trainees, but the majority of said cuts came from a 20+% reduction in the RAF's civilian workforce...........there is not, nor has there not been an influx of 200 former RAF pilots laid-off due to the SDSR headed for the RCAF........The RCAF has recruited no more than 30-40 foreign born, experienced, pilots, including Brits, in the last decade...........200 former RAF pilots added to the RCAF's total strength would result in a reduction of Canadian born pilots.

Of course I dismissed such partisan implications........its absurd, up there with 9/11 inside job or fake Moon landing conspiracy theories...... -edit- to add- But I appreciate that you looked it up online for yourself.

Yes, I know.......I provided you said section part and parcel last night. No......First, said POWs are not in the custody of Canada, second, said POWs are from our allies, captured by our enemies........and third, they are dead. And such acts were in direct violation of the Convention....hands down........But the rebroadcast of British POWs by the BBC, or PBS doing a doc on Abu Ghraib does not make a violation of the convention.....nor the use of said images in a political add in Canada. And said article is wrong.........civilian members of the Merchant Marine or Red Cross (and other aide orgs) during the second world war were afforded such rights, just as non-state actors like the Viet Cong were expected to afford their enemies treatment as outlined within the Geneva Convention.