Derek 2.0

Do you? The USN Sea Kings procured in the early 1960s (when ours were procured) were in the desert, sold off as FMS or used as parts sources for the SH-3H fleet by the later 70s, at such a point as to when we started looking towards a replacement (alongside the European users) that became the EH-101..........hence apples to oranges. That's very true, the current Marine 1 Sea Kings were produced in the later 70s (to be replaced with the Cyclone/V-92 in the next several years) and spent their low usage careers transporting VIPs around greater Washington DC.......hence Chretien's quip was apples to oranges. Again, supporting my apples to oranges point.......the few remaining RN FAA Sea Kings were procured in the 80s, when the EH-101 were underdevelopment........ All examples that offer a factual contrast to the Chretien quip used to support bad public policy........The current Prime Minister is fond of off-the-cuff quips to support his illogical justifications of his confused policies..........

Political niceties? Right, and I assumed Carter's speech was indirectly speaking to Canada (and others).......none the less, it doesn't explain why we weren't invited. Australia has stated they won't increase their current commitment, a commitment of the same scope as our current one. The Germans were invited, but unlike us currently, aren't partaking in airstrikes. Italy only increased its commitment (of ground troops) after the Paris attacks, which would align with the Trudeau's stated desire to increase Canada's presence on the ground......... So what gives?

It really is apples to oranges comparing RCN/RCAF Sea King service to that of the USN though, as the Americans were still procuring Sea Kings into the 1970s, then had extensive attrition reserves with the retirements of their ASW carrier groups, and what remained operated from big deck carriers, support ships and land bases.......and had far less cumulative hours then ours, well receiving extensive rebuilds in the mid 1970s and then again in the later 90s .........none the less, Chretien still quipped as justification that if the Sea King was good enough for the Presidential flight, it was good enough for us.....and just over five months after he was sworn into office, we had yet another fatal Sea King crash. As noted early, there is a stark contrast between good public policy and electioneering, a theme this new Government seems to have embraced.....likewise the willingness to over promise and under deliver.

Then why wasn't Canada invited?

Has that officially been announced as part of the Government's plan going forward? When? How much of an increase and when? How much and when? There is no reason that any of the above proposals can't be made public........until such a time, as confirmed by Lloyd Axworthy, this Government's planned approach is both muddled and unclear. When did Trudeau and his cabinet get sworn in? I don't know how you come up with 30 days as Government.....

Sounds like a line from a Motorhead song I thought you spoke of convictions? The NDP had no qualms with articulating their position.........So this Government has no problems making happy mouth noises, but will still partake in militaristic adventures, just not promote it..........Trudeau part 2 is much like his dad, who had no qualms with Canadian companies providing munitions to the Americans for the Vietnam war.

No need, we already have our own Pravda.

Here, by the previous Liberal Government.

Exactly.......and from what is suggested in the press, once the Hornets do come home, RCAF's transports will continue to ship NATO's Eastern European members munitions and arms to the region, and our Auroras will continue to provide targeting information to allied strike packages, and our sole tanker will continue to refuel allied strike fighters........Who knows what our Special Forces will be doing, but if the media is to be believed over this confused mess, their size and scope will be expanded on the ground.

The "hypocrisy" is with this Government still seeking to stay apart of this mission, and continuing on presently, with a yet to be explained (lesser) supporting role. Though I disagree, the NDP made their alternative "convictions" quite clear, versus the CPC's stance.

I feel the importance stems from political grandstanding made by the Liberals during an election campaign, verses a choice grounded in good public policy........as is happening now with this Government's confused approach to combating radical Islam. ------------- And Yes, Trudeau should put a halt to workers deaths in Asia, but I've yet to see any proposed policies from this Government that will reverse this.

No, but I knew one of the pilots that died in the crash and was at the time employed by Boeing, on the dynamic component upgrade of the USN/USMC CH-46 fleet (same helicopter as our CH-113), a program intended to improve aircraft safety and the extension of service life....something the Canadian Labs should have been given after their replacement was cancelled. Simply put, Chretien campaigned on cancelling the replacement (EH-101) for our Sea King and Labrador (SAR) helicopters, both helicopters then past their best before dates. One of his first acts in Government was to do exactly that, then several years later, the Lab crashed due to a fire caused by a leaking fuel line, killing all on board.......Chretien's Government was embarrassed into replacing the SAR fleet, and purchased the same helicopter they cancelled years previous at a greater cost. Hence, Shady's claim is true (and cited now).

Chretien's Foreign Affairs Minister, Lloyd Axworthy, feels the current Governments response lacks direction and is unclear, well feeling Canada can't be seen as sitting on the sidelines in the fight against radical Islam.

The ADF served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, losing over 40 personal and having over 200 wounded in the later.

Here and more details on the crash summary.

Exactly, as pointed out by former (Liberal) Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy : Axworthy could hardly be confused as a Hawk on Foreign Affairs...........Sunny Sunni Ways!!!!!!

The Germans, not involved in a combat role, were invited to said meeting by the Americans/French.

In its envisioned scope and implementation..........in other words, no details have been forthcoming on what we will be doing and when. I never made the distinction (on purpose), citing Islamic terrorists.........which the three previous Governments since 9/11 all had detailed (and public) plans to contend with radical Islam, including combat missions initiated by the three previous Prime Ministers..........

And Canada is back........back to being irrelevant that is: A clear indication that the Trudeau Liberals position on combating ISIS, though very aloof and confusing, is hurting us with our biggest Allies and trading partners. Defenders of the Liberals are quick to point to the actual size of our contribution in the fight against ISIS, suggesting that its token at best and wouldn't be missed, but that doesn't explain why Australia, with a similar sized effort was invited to the meeting. Others have pointed to the Liberals proposed focus on non-combat roles in support of our Allies, like the Germans are doing, but unlike the Germans, we weren't invited by the Americans and French to the meeting. Further to that, the Liberals have offered up mixed messages over increasing our effort on the ground (helping Iraqi and Kurdish forces), like Italy, that was largely on the sidelines until the Paris attacks, but have since deployed special forces alongside Americans and Kurds to defend a major Dam in Northern Iraq......but no information forthcoming on any proposed future role from the Liberal Government...... I have to feel sorry for MND Sajjan (and the men and women in the Forces currently still fighting ISIS), a very well respected military and police officer, having to defend and attempt to explain this muddled policy from the Trudeau Liberals.......Post Paris attacks, and now Canadians have been killed by Islamic terrorists in two different attacks in as many weeks overseas........and now, being snubbed by our longstanding Allies.

Which would be insane........California is Ontario will palm trees and nice weather.

You don't need to transfer everything, just open an account with your current bank that deals in USD (currently though, you'd be raped on the exchange). Furthermore, depending on your field and ability to get a US work Visa, you could very well require putting more skin into the game. Some without a doubt have higher county/property taxes, but this is often still offset by no State taxes. With that said, dependent on where you go, you could end up paying a premium for real estate if you plan to live in a larger city (where the work is of course)......of the above mentioned States without State taxes, Texas or Washington State offer the best balance between livability and work in a low tax jurisdiction (In my experienced based opinion)

I can't speak for hitops, but he could very well see a 100-150% increase in income if he's in an industry that has been devastated (or will be) by both Federal and Provincial policies in Canada versus the United States.

Likewise, with a level of excitement equal to what I would feel if Zoolander were to become Prime Minister.....

It could be difficult unless you have/had a USD/Foreign Currency account with a considerable percentage of your assets/saving in USD......otherwise, with the current exchange rate, you'd take a huge haircut. And of course, if you do, look to States without a State tax (Alaska, Texas, Florida, Washington, Nevada, South Dakota and Wyoming). ------------ Missing from the article (fixed link for you), which I think does touch on several important points, is the far more probable avenue for many moving their assets outside of Canada. One of the lowest risk vehicles, if you can, is to first set-up a full Canadian corporation (not a limited partnership), investing your own assets into it, and then create a US subsidiary, paying yourself limited dividends as income.........get a lawyer and look into it.

Well allow me to retort.......from Proverbs 12:16 Furthermore, from Proverbs 20:22 You may continue to judge my responses and me, consider me the embodiment of evil, but I'm compelled out of interest in preventing damnation being brought upon thy sole, to remember John 8:7