Jerry J. Fortin

Perhaps not, but a very desirable means of achieving the end result. It would have the effect of providing a peoples ratification which in turn would resolve any suspicion about the willingness to comply with law. It would provide some legitimacy to the concept of democracy.

That my friend means opening the constitutional can or worms which scares the hell out of everyone.

IF Canada spent ten times as much per year for the next ten years we might be able to field sufficient force to protect this nation, and project at least a minimum amount of force outside the nation while still defending our own land. The Canadian people will not accept this number. Aircraft carrier= 5 billion plus per ship 90 aircraft per ship = 2.5 billion per ship 2700 sailors per ship plus fuel and munitions about 160 million per year per ship Each strike group consists of; 2/3 destroyers or frigates 1/2.5 billion per ship 2 Aegis cruisers 1/2 billion per ship 2/3 guided missile destroyers 2.5/3.5 billion per ship 2 attack submarines 2 billion per boat. Projected cost per carrier strike group possibly 31 billion per group, plus annual operating costs. This does not include supply and refit ships for each group. Canada needs about four of these damned things so you can figure 120 plus billion dollars. Lots of bucks, lots and lots. That is just to cover navy people.........

Molly, there is truth in what you say. Many folks are just like you and me, we do not seek the limelight and the trouble of public life. That is another factor in the spread of the democratic disease of apathy. It is something that must be considered.

You are very right. Yet in the upper ends of society, these things make and break fortunes.

Paperless voting, and online voting are undoubtedly a part of our future. It will happen, the only question is when and how. Our entire political system on this planet is challenged by technological developments, because society has evolved far more quickly than politics. There was a time when language was one of the largest barriers between citizens, but now the greatest barriers are living standards and economies. Times change. Sooner or later politics must catch up to the reality of the human experience. It is not geniuses that this nation or any other needs but instead people with common sense and a sense of civic duty. In truth, the best representatives are citizens who have already lived a life with all of the challenges put before them. Citizens work through their child bearing and rearing years and then retire when that task is complete. Those are the folks that have been there and done that and lived to tell the tale. Those folks know what life is like, they have lived it! Ivory tower lawyers and academics don't sweat for decades just to replace the population of the nation. The average citizen does. There is a 2% cream at the top of the society pile who literally rule over everyone else. That 2% is the most affluent and most influent and they get their way, and they always have. The other end of the spectrum is the 2% of the population that is at the bottom of the society scale, they have nothing and contribute nothing to society. The great unwashed mass of humanity, the 96% of the population works for a living and pays all the bills for the poor and the rich. That demographic will sooner or later choose to exercise their democratic rights in order to get what they want. When that happens in an uncontrolled manner then the top and the bottom will be very adversely affected. It is therefore in everyones interest to do it in a controlled manner. Online voting is a small step toward solving the problem. There is much more that needs to be done.

Yes, but this time things are very different. In international terms, things are very different and in domestic terms things are very different. Back then, our name was huge and our economy growing. The threat was from a friend and more perceived and political than real, this time the threat comes from a former enemy and is a very real economic danger. This time the threat is real in political terms as our sovereignty is truly challenged. To defend the north is a very daunting challenge. We must first occupy and develop the north to provide some kind of economic activity from which to lay sovereign claim to those lands and waters. Once we establish virtual economic colonies there our task will be complete. Please keep in mind that these islands are part of mere "territories" they are not even attached to "provinces" and that in itself poses certain political problems when viewed from the outside of this nation. In my opinion our first move needs to bring those lands totally into confederation as provinces. What I am saying is that the political foundation needs to be constructed first. Without it, nearly any other effort is pointless. The political foundation is itself a nation building exercise that will have numerous impacts to the issue. It is a necessary first step in a series of steps that need to be taken in the proper order to achieve maximum gain from the effort. In addition is provides a spark of "frontier spirit" to set a tone for the nation. Another thing to keep in mind is that the entire northern portion of this nation is almost empty of human population, and conditions are extremely challenging for human habitation. This frontier cannot be settled by farmers and shop keepers. This frontier must be developed in a very scientific manner. The basic foundation of human society in the north will not be agriculture but instead energy. All things will revolve around energy. Energy will be required to sustain life. No agricultural efforts can be made without it. Each location will require efforts on the order of self sustained off planet colonies, the only difference being an abundant supply of air and water. Everything else will be just the same as living off planet. There are those that will say that we can do the job by simply buying military assets and placing the in the north, but that will only create the illusion of sovereignty. Granted that illusions are a political reality and they can serve to accomplish much, but there is no return on the investment of any perceived effort. This effort will be very costly and yet it has the potential to produce great wealth if undertaken seriously. The northern portion of this nation hold enormous mineral wealth, probably far more than the sum total of all mineral wealth ever found iand produced in the southern and habited portion of this nation. That is why the threat is so very real and eminent. To ignore this issue is to place the entire nation is great danger.

Iggy will be the next PM, bank on it. Harper now has all summer to burn bridges. BY the time any election arrives Harper will be done like dinner.

We lack the leadership with those qualities. The nation is capable.

Sure, you said that you prefered an investment in th aerospace industry. I offered up AVRO Canada in a roundabout kinda way. Once we had such an industry.

Can you spell A.V.ROE? Sir (Edwin) Alliott Verdon Verdon-Roe

Canada does what is expected of it at the international level. I do agree we could and should do more, and the question before us is Arctic Patrol ships. In this question I think we can and should do more to protect our sovereignty in the north. The north is a very difficult defense challenge. Those that think otherwise need to do a little research. Canada has the largest shoreline in the world. You get that by counting the shorelines of all those islands in the Arctic circle that we claim. There is the so-called Northwest Passage, a point of contention with our American and European friends. The there is the little thing called territorial waters which we lay claim to another 200 miles of. Now consider that navigation by either water or land is limited for major portions of the year. In the summer you have muskeg, in the winter ice. You can use the water in the summer and the land in the winter to travel on. Add up all of these little details and then imagine the military requirements of defense and see how complicated things get. We need literally hundreds of small shoreline bases all over the north, just to occupy and retain sovereignty of those islands and our massive coastline. All those locations need to be linked together somehow. It just gets worse the deeper you get into looking at it. The only way to defend all of it is with extreme high tech and big balls. All of it has to be paid for with huge sums of money. To return to the point we need patrol ships AND we need bases for all season, all weather aircraft. No need to mention you need power sources for these bases and food supplies. We are talking nation building sized efforts folks and that effort requires true vision and political will.

Afgan was first and UN sanctioned. Iraq was Bush going off the reservation and acting within a different coalition than the UN. Where were those WMD's finally found anyway?

You want to upgrade? Buy a few squadrons of V22's and create a gunship variant.

People have to be fed. You cannot stop farming and food production on large scale because the people of the world will starve.

War effort???? Food production is a necessary function if we are to survive. The hunter gatherer concept doesn't work well in the urban environment. Benny look up the Venus Project. There are ways to enhance our society.

What it is is a naturally occurring substance that rises and falls in cycles. There have been several cycles of warming and cooling on this planet and it appears we are now entering another one. So what? We need to adapt and change with our environment or be dominated by it. Its just that simple. There are numerous finger pointers and those that want to assign blame. The reality is that our existence has had impact on the environment, nothing new there. The other side of the coin is that the effects of human development come at the cost of excessive environmental degradation. Until recently this was not acknowledged, but it now is. Within the last few decades we have accumulated sufficient scientific knowledge to understand our biosphere to a much greater extent than ever before. We can now see the changes and with some degree of certainty predict the impact of trends from acquired data. With all due respect Benny, math is a concept that you need to consider when discussing anything to do with science.

All true, yet where is the working class? Are they unfit to represent?

Not at all. What I suggest is that we first come to some conclusions as to what role our armed forces will play before we decide on any specific procurement program. The world has a beat cop called the USA, and many are not pleased with that. Aside from that in my opinion large scale conflicts are unusual to say the least. What is more common is small scale engagements in urban settings. I think we need to consider the possible uses of our armed forces before we can determine any reasonable force composition.

I think you folks need to get a grip. Before we worry about what equipment to buy, we need to decide the role we want our military to take. We need a domestic and foreign policy defined prior to the purchase of equipment. This is a small nation that leaves a small international footprint, that must be considered.

I would love to see a real peoples representative get the top job. I want someone who has had to live like most folks to govern them. I want a team player. I have had enough of the lawyers running this country.

I almost hate to admit you are right. There simply wasn't any connection between the EI proposal and the election threat. If there really was then he could have called the question, but instead opted out for a little piece of saber rattling. I think it made him look bad actually.

Failing a conversion to an elected Senate, why not just let it die out? Don't appoint anybody and sooner or latter there will be nobody left there right?

Israel is a sovereign nation. It makes its own laws and has a voice and a seat at the UN. Their government does not support terrorism, but that cannot be said about the folks in Gaza or the West Bank now can it. As long as people choose to support terrorism they will remain targets for the rest of the world to hunt down and destroy.

Say what? What immorality do you speak of? You realize that Alberta is the bible belt of Canada right? Alberta will not soon see its citizens quit this great land. The Heritage we leave to our children amounts to about 14 billion now, but likely a few trillion inside of less than 50 years. As the world demand for oil continues to grow, we are assured a market for our production. Alberta has huge potential, far and away greater than most of this nation, and we are populated with a very independent minded group of citizens that take great pride in their province. WE don't try to hide, and we don't run away.