Signals.Cpl

Guns don't kill people, crazy people, idiots and crazy idiots with guns kill people. Gun control means nothing since it would just force the people wanting to commit violent acts to dig deeper and find another way. Look at the multiple mass stabbing incidents in China, gun control sure works well for those people, they died by a knife rather than a gun.

So? One unarmed drone crashing and having drone " flight centres" does not mean that the government will be arming drones with lethal weapons. Thats for the authorities to deal with, this does not once again mean that we will see armed drones. At a time and a place that is appropriate for the situation, blowing up terrorists in Iraq or Afghanistan is one thing, but killing Americans/Canadians in North America is quite another. There is a time and a place for everything, arming drones would have its time and place but it would be a for a well defined mission with limited objectives. Nothing you have presented supports your argument that there would be armed drones in the apron a regular basis, all it tells me is that Law Enforcement will use another tool in their arsenal to fight against criminals.

Yeah but the ships currently planned if done properly could guarantee jobs in those areas for something like 30 years, and if the government in 20 years time has a brain would keep them employed with more orders when this group of ships comes to be replaced. Building "patrol vessels" would be a short time stint and I don't think the province or the people directly involved would be too happy to lose 20 to 25 years of guaranteed work because of the Liberals or the NDP. When it comes to putting food on the family table ideology comes second as it is less important than feeding the wife and kids. I don't think the arctic is a political dream, rather its a nightmare for the RCN. Should it become accessible for regular naval vessels for any period of time during the year this would simply stretch the resources of the fleet to cover more area.

Like you said, many of those ships will be build in NDP ridings so would the NDP fight the government on this one? And at point I would think common sense would prevail when you see that we have such a long coastline, with a potential requirement for navy presence in the arctic increasing dramatically over the next decade or two cutting the already insufficient numbers would be completely against logic. I don't think even the NDP is obtuse to such a degree as to argue that we can cut the numbers at the same time the RCN's AO will be increasing over the next decade or two. Honestly, if the program is reviewed they might grasp on some straws or minor problems to score some political points against the big bad Conservatives, but if the Government and the CF put out the numbers just like they were required to do for the F-35's the NDP will suddenly fight those numbers as they would be counter productive to their interests.

What are they going to do? Cancel the ships?

For what reason do you believe that the government of the United States or Canada would arm UAV's with missiles, MG's and other nasty little weapons? What do you think will happen if a heavily armed UAV crashes in a residential neighbourhood in any populated centre of this two countries? There is no use for Armed UAV's in NA, at least in the US and Canada. You seem to be confused, at this end a mistake that kills 10-15 people would have more impact than a mistake that kills 10-15 Afghanis, its sad to say but its the truth and thus UAVs will most likely remain armed with non-lethal weapons.

Yeah, sure.... signed... you are a comedian, at least you have a viable career in comedy. When there are more teachers than positions some "teachers" don't get a job...you will be one of those.

1)I highly doubt a new graduate will get a job right away. 2)I highly doubt that if you actually believe half of the BS you spew here you will survive more than a week as a teacher. 3)You do not know the first thing about education, you have made your persona on this forum so ignorant, and I hope its just an online persona rather than well reality because if it is, you will have a very hard time in the real world. 4)I can tell you, as someone who was born in a communist country and saw the consequences after the fall of communism, I can tell you its not all that its cracked out to be.

You will make a positive difference in the lives of kids when you find a calling that would not involve ruining a whole generation of young children, the farther away you stay from kids, the more positive a change you make.

When I read GH's posts I think he is talking about outfitting them the same way as those in Afghanistan. To me at least, there is significant difference between lethal weapons over the US, and non lethal weapons.

And what would they do? Blow up people crossing the border? How would any government justify killing civilians in order to prevent smuggling goods or illegal aliens coming in country? It's one thing to use UAV's to monitor the border, but its a whole different thing to arm them, and it will not happen except for special situations.

How on earth did you come to that conclusion? I highly doubt that the US has armed their drones in any way shape or form when patroling the continental US, and if they have done so it would be on a limited scale for specific situations.

And then look at the 1990's and the further cutbacks while at the same time increasing the Peacekeeping tempo. You probably have a better Idea about this but the missions that were added to the plate were at the same time as the military was shrinking, less troops more missions all the while having some of the lower ranks at or below the poverty line. The Budget cuts of the 1990's are one of the reasons why I could not go and do POET in Kingston instead I have to do it in a college for 3 times as long and at the same time more than 4 times what it should cost the CF to get me qualified. All those so called cuts while saving some money at the time are now costing untold millions if not billions to fix while still leaving certain trades at the breaking point with no light at the end of the tunnel.

I agree with you, giving a blank cheque to any government to waste on useless purchases hurts everyone because the taxpayers lose their hard earned money and the military gets equipment that is of little to no value. What we need is to make sure that one government does not save a pennies today while costing another government a decade in to the future dollars, and this is not restricted to the military.

This is the perfect thread about it, you complain about the conservatives for the sake of complaining without providing proof from the "lengthy" list that is non-existent.

I realize it started a lot earlier, but during the 90's the Liberals hit rock bottom and started digging when it comes to the military. It is under the Liberals that the CF had its numbers cut and budget cut but the mission tempo increased, and from what I hear going to the ranges was not much fun when you had to yell BANG to simulate "firing" your rifle because there was no money for rounds. The Liberals gutted the military while the country looked away and now the Conservatives are getting blamed for trying to bring the CF to a certain level where we can do the missions we are given.

Look at the 1990's and tell me the Liberals care for the military. Cut the budget, cut the number yet increase operational tempo. And no I don’t believe that the conservatives care about the military, the difference was that they were willing to spend the money needed to fight the war rather than go the "cheaper" way and bring more casualties home. I don’t think the NDP would have been happy anyway keep the military starving and bring more casualties home and they (NDP) would cry about the uncaring Conservatives, increase the budget and cut the casualties they (NDP) cry about the extra cost.

I asked you to name SOME of them and you could not what does that say? It says the "lengthy list" does not exist. Yes, but instead of blaming the Liberals for the increase military spending you blame the Conservatives for inheriting a war and arming the military to the minimum level needed to fight said war. My beef is with people who blame the conservatives for the actions and decisions of the previous government, arming the CF was a necessity yet instead of blaming the liberals for nearly destroying the military while sending getting involved in multiple PK missions and a war you blame the conservatives for investing in the military to fight the war they inherited, as if they had a choice in the matter.

Too bad you don't know what social justice means...kinda hard to teach someone when you yourself lack the knowledge.

What? Have you presented any facts that would suggest that such a thing was a bad thing? How do you know that this specific thing was a bad thing? Have you neglected the fact that the Liberals got us in to a war we were not equipped to fight? If the Conservatives had not increase the military spending than there would have been many more dead soldiers coming back, but then that would give you grounds to complain that the conservatives did not increase the military budget... How do you know this was a bad thing? Maybe it kept companies in Canada rather than help the economy of India or China. Name some of them. Just because the Opposition(Liberals) were willing to send the military to Afghanistan but was unwilling to increase the funds suggests hat they didn't care if the CF members were slaughtered like dogs. The Opposition including the NDP asked for increase in spending, when that spending was put forth the opposition including the NDP blamed the government for doing it, you seem to ignore that the Conservatives were a minority, so the other parties hold some of the blame... Yeah, the opposition is responsible for the deficit and increase just like the Conservatives... what it comes down to is that the NDP and the Liberals will gladly take credit when it comes out that a policy was right but will at the same time blame the government for that policy. You can't have it both ways. When the opposition twists the facts, and hides their previous record in order to score points it does not give me much faith in their abilities. What the NDP is saying is that the Conservatives increased the Deficit and the Debt all alone, while the other parties looked from the sidelines helpless to do anything, ignoring that the Conservatives were a minority and someone had to agree with them.

How was that ignorant? Please explain. I did not mean to say you support terrorism, I meant the people who see the terrorists or detainees as victims will see them as victims no matter what proof is presented by any organization.No matter what Khadr says or does, he will always be seen as a victim by some no matter what, if he come to Canada and gets a massive payoff from the government and gets on TV to tell us that he killed the US soldier and his IED's blew up a bunch of other soldiers people will still see him as innocent/victim. J I noticed that you left out Amnesty International. I dont trust his position for other reasons. Yeah sure, it can't be the people who are blaming the US for not putting the captured Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters in a category when in fact both those organizations work really hard to make sure that they don't meet the requirements for any of those groups. Please tell me what should we be classifying the detainees as, then go and look the requirements needed to meet said classification.

I agree with you, but that is one day/month/year in a relationship that spans a long time. I can pick up virtually any year since 1945 and show you a divided west while you try to present a united west by showing one date in time.

I really really really want to see the evidence of this, the highest It could possibly go is the on scene commander who failed to control his troops but I think that any member of the US military with half a brain could have seen the disastrous consequences of such idiotic behaviour.

So you are saying that the official opposition is there to twist the facts in to support their fantasy? I'm sorry but I have higher expectation for the official opposition than that. Just to point out one thing, the official opposition needs to reside in reality rather than fantasy and if you don't realize that they need some serious help understanding the government and how it should work. What happened was the Liberals, the BQ, and the NDP supported increasing the deficit, and once it worked they start blaming the government a minority government btw for creating the deficit and increasing the debt that they(Liberals, NDP and the BQ) helped create.

At this point I don't think it matters, a less than suitable piece of equipment is much better than one that requires a lot of praying to get it off the ground, keep it in the air, and land it all in one piece.