Signals.Cpl

Since you are an expert in that field please tell us what should have been done and in what kind of a timeline, please be specific. It seems to me that many people who are complaining would willingly send the HUSAR Team in to the building no matter how risky it is, save a life but add more casualties.

Do you have a source to support your claim that the RNC, OPP or the SQ do such things?

Yeah, I don't think a new local police force will help you with that. So your Idea is that we maintain the RCMP and BC should create its own provincial police?

1) Panama canal was build almost 100 years ago... do you have a figure adjusted to todays dollars to justify your comment? Canada spend 1.6billion dollars in WW1, and I don't see how that could be compared to today. 2)It's quite easy when the labour is cheap considering most of the labourers who build the Burj Dubai come from out of country and are basically little more then slave labour. The price includes 25 years of maintenance amongst other things. Source: http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/biens-property/nouvelles-news/frpdgrc-rcmpprpfs-eng.html

Yes, because creating a whole other unit will save so much money...

And where did it say anything about a different standard? This is likely not the first nor is it the only RCMP mess in existence. The mess serves as much more then a place to drink and/or get drunk, its the place that uphold traditions and celebrates the highs and lows of the job and the people who do the job. I know a lot of people might not understand this because it is a different culture but sometime you just need to go to the mess, have a beer with friendly faces around.

In a mess wether military or RCMP alcohol when served has nothing to do with tax dollars. In a mess the members will buy the alcoholic beverage and if there is an even where free alcohol is given it is paid for from mess dues that each member of the mess pays. Tax Dollars are not involved.

I'm sorry but did you actually expect the UN to do anything even remotely useful?

There is a significant difference between defence and nation building, especially when the original mission was to take down the bad guys protecting the even worse guys. So, if the mission was intended to takedown the Taliban in order to get to al-Quida, then that was the defensive portion of the mission, past that people started asking why a defensive alliance is doing nation building. Would you support the idea of Canada deploying 2,500 soldiers back in to Afghanistan till 2014 or later in order not to abandon the Americans? Yes, and as a democracy the people elect the Canadian Government and as such the people are ultimately responsible. The Liberals since Pierre Trudeau have been cutting the military at every opportunity, and yet they kept on being reelected. We could put this on the government, but the elected officials take their cue from the Canadian people, if the people don't care about their own defence the politicians cut that to the bone in order to give the people something that will make them happy now, and all of that is made possible because of the United States and the fact that many Canadians including Politicians spit on the US but then assume that the US will protect us no matter what. This breeds the belief that we can have our cake and eat it too, as in we are safe and secure because the US is next door and we can spend the money on other things instead of our defence. My position is that obsolete equipment is a negative but superb training and intelligence as an institution go a long way yo make up for obsolete equipment. Now, it does not make up for the obsolete equipment completely but it still leaves a capable force. Nothing can be done, if the people don't want to do it then they don't want to do it. From above link: Why did Canada leave Afghanistan before the mission was "over"? As far away from both of them as possible! By this I meant the period between 1700 and 1910. During that period Britain usually equipped the East Europeans(and by that I mean pretty much everyone east of France) and would deploy a small force with them while leaving the rest to harass the enemy coast. When would you say that was? As in 1914 they realistically had no choice but to enter the war at some point even if Belgium's neutrality was honoured as a French Collapse would have put Germany well ahead of England economically and then England's Naval domination would have ended shortly thereafter.

Be careful, otherwise if you hurt sensitive Rick's precious feelings he goes and complains to the Mods...

What ethnic slurs are you talking about?

How is his screen name offensive?

MP's are the government, I don't care about the fancy definition, it comes down to us electing our representatives and they pass down decisions based on our wishes.

I think he might be mistaking us for the Americans...

Yeah, so? Are they to take orders from 33million people? We have a government for a reason, to take care of the day to day running of the country. We elect that government for a reason to represent the wishes of the people.

We weren't involved in Iraq... I don't really know what your talking about here.

They have internal budget and have external budget, they give the one that was requested. They have a budget for themselves that includes expenses that would normally not be included in the purchasing budget because those epexnses will be the same regardless of the product purchased. The salary of the pilots and aircrew will not change the budget that much...

The liberals didn't take a lot in to consideration with the Subs...

Actually I am, they used the exact same method of calculation for the new ships for the navy yet no one bothered to complain.

Debatable, they used the formula that they have always used. The opposition just blew the discrepancy out of proportions.

But at the same time you should trust your security apparatus. For example do you trust the CF to uphold democracy? Meaning do you believe that its likely a General will overthrow the government and create a dictatorship?

Many people hear what they want to hear, when I'm in uniform or when people know I am serving in the military rarely do they grasp or care it my opinion, they take it as the department policy.

I don't know, you tell me its your head.

So everyone is corrupt regardless if he is the patrol cop or the chief, wow it must be hell in your head.

So how corruptible was Jack Layton?