Derek 2.0

The Americans and Arabs are, already, conducting air strikes in Syria...........As to Assad, for domestic reasons, I doubt he could ever offer a public request, but from his POV, I fail to see how this would be counter to his own interests. Care to offer the reasoning behind the Trudeau Liberals refusal for support of limited military action……despite polling showing over 60% of Canadians favour military action to some extent? Does Quebec/the NDP factor into his stance?

The requests of the Syrian Government (if given) and the present request of the democratically elected Government of Iraq.

A portion of the fleet (~1/3rd IIRC) that showed early fatigue life (mostly our twin seats conversion trainers) were given partial structural upgrades, the extent based upon the actual estimated airframe life of the individual aircraft…….this proposal would seek a uniformed upgrade across the entire fleet……. As to mothballed fleet (there isn’t any in Canada), the few airworthy examples were used as parts sources, with a portion of the fleet sold to Finland in the late 90s/ early 2000s.

Why? Our contribution, teamed with Australia, Denmark, the Dutch and Belgium, will allow an equal number of Americans resources to be used in Syria. Likewise, such action will limit ISIS from operating in larger formations, well reducing their ability to move between villages/towns/cities……thusly, Iraqi and Kurdish resources will be focused, with the aide of coalition training, on combating ISIS forces amongst populated areas.

Not sure of what? Do you think air strikes will hinder Kurdish and Iraqi Army operations against ISIS?

I doubt fiscal restraint can be found within the Trudeau Liberals vocabulary.........

Somewhat surprised, if true, of the level of Canadian support for action against ISIS: I suppose the Trudeau Liberals opposition to airstrikes was determined by the stance of the NDP, and the political calculus within Quebec, which I assume would have very little support for military action in Iraq. With this, Trudeau has clearly steered the Liberals to the left, fearful of losing support in Quebec to the NDP, well hedging his proposed inaction won’t hurt him in the rest of moderate Canada, up to and including “hawkish Liberals” that have favored prior military intervention. I will assume this, coupled with his root causes meme, will be highlighted in Conservative ads in English Canada on how Trudeau, if leader, would contend with threats to Canada………a far cry from recent Liberal leaders like Ignatieff, Dion, Martin and Chrétien.

Not at all, combined with the other smaller players, will equal that of a carrier battle group, allowing an equal amount of American aircraft to operate in Syria.

Our contribution, paired with the other smallish forces (Australia, Danes, Dutch, Belgium) equates to the striking power of one US carrier in the gulf…….nothing to scoff at to be sure.......by far though, our CP-140 deployment will have the most effect. As to munitions, Canada has plenty of conventional bombs left over from the Cold War, but it’s doubtful any of the members of the coalition (outside perhaps the Arabs and British) will be using their own….The Americans have enough in the gulf and Diego Garcia to fight three wars…….It would take most coalition members months to bring their own munitions to the theatre…..

Agreed, it will help the Iraqis/Kurds, but in the end, it will be the Iraqi army and Kurds that have to do the hard work of mucking ISIS out of the cities, towns and villages.

His reaction has me somewhat surprised, I didn't think they would support the Government in the end, but thought they'd rely upon a UN sanctioned cop-out......Trudeau has managed to steer the Liberals further to the left.

Those are just facts/figures/strategies that I’ve gleamed from our local riding association meeting last week………As I’ve said, we/me could be colossally wrong the morning after, but as it stands, the party itself isn’t as worried about the Liberals as many suggest that they should be……. I doubt it.......but we have little over a year to see who is right.....

I certainly understand the difference……….obviously asking questions and judging the merits of each response is a part of civil discourse… Funny you mentioned him.....he was on the O'Reilly Factor (he's now a Fox News Contributor) last night….O’Reilly and him are both friends (he’s on a weekly segment on the show), Bill asked Carville if he’ll work on the presumptive Hillary bid in 2016….His response is that aside from local functions in Louisiana, he’s tired and considered semi-retired……funny enough, his wife has a similar role with the GOP….

Or this Trudeau "gem"........

Indeed, Harper was equipped with a conscious protocol from the factory.......

More machine now than man, twisted and evil.........oh wait, that's Cheney

Indeed, one part devil and two parts Cylon

He has stated the Liberals will vote against? Was that recently and do you have a source?

Voting against is certainly valid (and what I think we will see), but seeking NATO support is irrelevant, as it’s not a world governing body (unless of course you wear a tin-foil hat) and most of the key players (US, UK, and France) are currently supporting such action……….Now reliance upon the UN is plausible, and would be something I would expect of the NDP, but is surely not going to be taken up, as the US knows already how China/Russia would vote, and of course, the UN Secretary General has already voiced tepid support for such action……..as such, the requirement for a UN mandate is hollow, as it will never happen. Could you elaborate further on this? Of course your above points can all be labelled as simplistic political, partisan theatre………I would be worried if none of the three sides (CPC/LPC/NDP) made use of it……

That 5-6% equates to ~20 seats in Ontario proper...........And your "easily gained 100 seats", coupled with their current total, would result, today in a minority for the Liberals......170+ seats will be needed for a majority, the Liberals, based on current polls, the level of support held by both the CPC and NDP, don't have the numbers........The Tories currently have 161 seats, and are expected to gain ~20 of the new seats carved out of current Tory ridings, which would translate into a ~180 seat majority.....But the Tories are currently at risk of losing upwards of 25 seats, which would negate any gains made with the new seats and result in ~150ish seats, and dependant upon Liberals totals, would see a toss-up between the LPC and CPC to form a minority....... Of course, these projections are based on current polls numbers, over one year away......and won't factor in the various party platforms, debates, missteps etc once the writ is dropped.......... As I said, as it stands presently, based on polls and the level of expected support the NDP and CPC have maintained, the Liberals do not have the numbers to put them into majority territory by over 20+ seats.......as such, talk of an NDP supported Liberal Government, right now, is not premature.

Yes, Canada's political response domestically will relate to how we respond to ISIS..........

So again, based on our current economy, how is that a bad thing? I'm not meaning to sound combative, I'm generally interested in this topic, perhaps we should start a new thread?

What was the NDP's vote share during prior Liberal Governments, contrasted with their polled support (~20ish%) today? Furthermore, what was the NDP's political impact in Quebec during previous Liberals Governments, versus today? And what do you base "suburban Canadians abandoning the Tories" on? Though polling has indicated a drop in support, Ontario (as polling currently) is far from lost, with a difference between ~5-6% between the LPC/CPC, likewise the NDP polling in second at ~30% in Quebec........the only area indicating presently strong Liberal support is Atlantic Canada, which is countered by the Tory support in Alberta/the West.......But worth mentioning, the NB Liberals were expected to nearly sweep NB in their recent election, though they did win a several seat majority, the results saw a far diminished return than expected, with the NB PCs remaining competitive.......Or look at the results in recent by-elections, though the Tories did lose precentage points, they have only lost a single seat (NFLD) to the predicted "Red Tide".............The Liberals, despite what is indicated in the media and polls, have only managed two gains (one from the CPC and one from the NDP) in ten by-elections that they could have added to their total....

And that is the question posed to you........what factors will lead to the Liberals supporting or opposing such action. You outlined a handful of mission specific factors, but failed to detail how said factors weigh on the Liberals.......So, what do you feel the Liberals will do, and how will they reach said selection? What does that have to do with the price of tea or war against ISIS?

Yes I know, what conditions on these factors would result in the Liberals supporting/opposing such action?