Charon

if you are using the military to advance a political agenda, then that's an abuse of power. Ask Peter McKay about that. It was using war to advance politics by other means in Europe. The humanitarian Marshall Plan finished dashing it to the ground.

So the military is a way of projecting politics on others? I thought we were supposed to be a peaceful democracy here. Clausewitz is neat and all, but war and politics is a nasty combination. See what happened to the Prussian dream in the 20th century.

Agreed.

Thanks Bonam for the down to earth common sense. TimG That's funny I thought we were talking about defending Canada here. I didn't know our military covers Taiwan's defense as well. I sure hope Taiwan is paying us for the favour.

Keep believing Dion and Ignatieff have the same draw as Trudeau.

Wow don't wake up to the fact the Liberals are on the upswing with Trudeau. Not that I like the Liberals particularly, but you're in for a pretty mean surprise.

The U.S. had a decent Navy, albeit with many obsolescent ships. It's army and airforce were very weak at the beginning of the 2nd world war. My point is that the only 'Chinese aggression,' is in your paranoid imagination, and that its a far better use of resources to help the millions who are dying and can be saved then to have a multi-billion dollar anatomical I mean military size competition with the Chinese.

I'm sure you'd rather have scientists working for Monsanto, BP and other corporations dedicated to fouling the environment for profit.

Yes, the U.S. Navy were a little more wise about putting their Battleships into danger after that. Unlike the British who lost the Repulse and the Prince of Wales soon after.

Jacee exactly. The PCs were classical conservatives, and they weren't a bad party. The Unite the Right movement hijacked the PCs by making them promises that they would retain some level of independence, but then assimilated them under the new conservative banner. The man behind it was Peter Mackay. I can't remember who it was who talked about that, but he was a former PC MP who like you say was really fed up with what happened.

Japan proved those ships were essentially osbolete in the era of aerial bombs through their attack. Actually the British had already showed that at Taranto, which the Japanese were emulating. You're still stuck in the 1st half of the last century. Its the 21st century now. Japan's paranoid militarism, which didn't work, is similar in thinking to the paranoid militarism you guys are advocating for Canada. I'm about as worried about China (Japan's former enemy) attacking Canada as I am of kangaroos jumping over the moon. I wish you could actually bet money on these things I'd bet 100 to one odds against it. Clearly a scenario with such little realistic likelihood of happening is not worth shelling out billions of public funds which could actual alleviate real problems like mass starvation, famine, and the AIDs epidemic, which rather than in the realm of paranoid fantasy land is a real problem which kill millions every single year.

When I say Conservatives I'm referring to Neo-Conservatives like the Canadian Conservative Party and their followers since they make up the majority of those who claim the title of Conservative in Canada. Classical Conservatives are a near extinct breed, and you're more likely to encounter them in the Liberal party than any other party in Canada with people like Paul Martin.

Because they thought the US carrier fleet, (which was not obsolete) was there, which it normally was, but that day was out to sea.

Derek L: If you don't believe that world war 1 era fleet was obsolete. Look at what happened at Pearl Harbour. It was utterly decimated by aerial torpedos. Derek L: "As you just quoted that 1735 bil was spent on militaries around the world....even the US does not spend more than half of that. " Actually the US does spend more than half of that. If you add the cost of its current wars, its black budget, its military budget etc. It well exceeds that. You folks are stuck in the militaristic mentality of the 1st half of the 20th century. We all saw what that led to, worldwide militaristic lunacy and the deaths of millions heaped upon millions. The days of global third generational warfare are over. Its the 21st century now. Millions of people can be saved from starvation and death simply by helping them rather than hoarding weapons to benefit war profiteers and being paranoid about each other.

Bollux. If that's true how come Solarcity down in the states is installing panels for free and then charging people a lower rate for them? This was the reality in the 19th century. Now the people of planet get their resources from a myriad variety of resources. Now why do Conservatives want us permanently frozen in the 19th century. Oh yeah because conservatives want us to return to feudalism with them as our feudal masters of the middle ages. Speaking of Neanderthals and Science. Let's see what Stockwell Day Conservative Party Member and former Prime Ministerial candidate said about Science and who from 1978 to 1985, Day was assistant pastor and school administrator at the Bentley Christian Centre in Bentley, Alberta. His school taught the Accelerated Christian Education curriculum. A lunatic right wing evangelical brain washing program that shouldn't have seen the light of day in Canada. "There is scientific proof that the world is about 6,000-years-old and that early man co-existed with dinosaurs. " - Stockwell Day member of the Conservative Party of Canada, and former Prime Ministerial candidate from Alberta.

Most of that big fleet you're talking about were relics from the first world war and for all intents and purposes were practically obsolete by the 2nd. And the rest my friend is called Monday morning quarter backing. Since its not the 1930s, but the 21st century, the reality now is more than a little different than it was in 1934.

Too bad for John Mccain that he didn't know how to use google before vetting his vice candidate.

And you seriously think Korea would try to invade Japan? The Conservative mentality is much the same as the Imperial Japanese uber militaristic paranoia. Japan despite being a militaristic monster in world war 2 still got swatted down in only a few years by the States, while the States had barely built up their military at all in the 1930s. So that example right there shows how futile an ultra paranoid militaristic society arming itself to the teeth based on fantastic scenarios of cross Pacific conflict really is.

The oil sands is a massive cesspool for the environment which is extremely fragile. There's no point in underplaying it or saying if the Chinese are doing it we must as well help trash the planet anyway. And then the conservatives sold much of the tar sands to the Chinese, under the Nexen deal and put in force a new program whereby 5000 Chinese 'guest workers,' will help speed up coal production in B.C. to ship to China and burn off there, so they can't even use that card with a straight face.

You can make plastic from plant oils if you really want. That said I'd actually prefer petroleum to be used for plastics than simply burnt away into thin air. At least you're making something durable and useable out of the former.

And where are the Japanese now? They spend some of the least per capita on their military in the world and have one of the strongest economies, despite having very few natural resources. The Imperial Japanese in the 30s is a perfect example of how dangerous it is to allow government be taken over by the militarists and war profiteers. They utterly decimated their society based on their paranoia, hubris, and arrogance.

That's silly one can compensate for the other. If there's not much Sun, then there will probably be wind. Let's say 90% of energy was being generated from one or the other I wouldn't mind non renewables making up that 10% energy to keep things flowing smoothly. That of course would be the opposite from now which is about 90% non-renewables (except in cases of hydro-electric) vs 10% renewables. The solution is not to just throw the baby out of the bathwater, and give up all hope for action which the oil companies their minions, followers and investors so desperately want to happen that they are spending billions of dollars every year to try to convince the public that renewable energy is less efficient, when it is far more efficient.

They are wasting their time with the armed icebreakers. That doesn't mean we should follow suit: Well that's better than 1735 stolen before it got to the people isn't it?

PIK: Solar is now more efficient than conventional resources. There is a company in the States called Solar City, which for free installs solar panels at one's home, and then charges one a lower rate. For Canada wind, is probably a better option. Wind is highly efficient, its renewable, and we have tons of it and it leaves 0 nuclear waste unlike the Nuclear Plants in Ontario which are incredibly expensive on top of that. Just because only a small amount of energy is currently being generated in Ontario is a testament to the lack of political will for renewable energy, not it being ineffective.