Sabre Rider
-
Posts
202 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Sabre Rider
-
-
Correct...during much of WW2, ethnic Serbs allied themselves with Britain/Canada, but in 1999, Canada bombed the crap out of them. Go figure....
As I said, todays friend maybe tomorrows enemy and todays enemy maybe tomorrows friend. To think otherwise is foolish. Which is why I just shake my head when I hear people say "America is our friend and would never invade us". That may well be true today, but who knows what tomorrow will bring.
-
Aren't Chinooks also known as gunships? Canada is buying 12 of those.
No, the CH-47 Chinook is a fair sized medium twin rotor transport helicopter and is ill suited for the gunship role. They have been around in one variant or another ever since the Vietnam War. They are good at hauling troops or artillery pieces around in protected airspace, however because they are large, slow and relatively sluggish when compared to true helicopter gunships, make excellent Triple A (anti-aircraft artillery) targets. In the gunship role they would be blown out of the sky in job lots. We would be better retrofitting some of our existing Griffins as gunships then pushing the Chinooks into the role.
The CF had a fleet of nine CH-47C's back in the 80's while I was serving, but they were sold off to I believe to Norway in the mid '90 and the two squadrons flying them were disbanded. The new fleet of sixteen CH-47F's are not expected to be in service until 2013 and in the meantime Canada has bought or will buy 6 used commercial (civilian) CH-47D's in 2009 as a stop gap measure.
F'ing pathetic if you ask me.
-
We need only design and implement a defensive strategy for three sides of our nation, all of which involves shorelines, with an added bonus of ice in the north. The forth side being the USA, and given the fact that there is no defense against nor needed on that front we are able to save a great deal on land defense.
In this you are being a bit narrow sighted and forgetting one of the major lessons of history and that is "Today's friend and ally can and most likely will become at some point your enemy and foe and that today's enemy and foe will become your friend and ally."
Consider the history of Germany, France, Italy, Russia, England, the US, Canada, Turkey and Japan.
During the Napoleonic Wars, England, Canada although still not an independent nation yet, Russia, and Germany were allies against France which The US later allied itself with when it invaded Canada.
Fast forward to 1853 and the Crimean War, France and England were allied with Turkey against Russia.
During the First World War, Japan and Italy were allies with England, France, Canada, Russia and later the US against Germany and her ally Turkey.
During the Second World War, Japan and Italy sided with Germany against the Allies.
During the Cold War, Italy, Japan and half of Germany were again good allies and friends and our former ally during WWII Russia was now the enemy.
Also during the inter-war years between 1918 and 1939, the US Army developed its Plan Crimson as part of its Plan Red. Plan Red plotted out a war against the UK and its Empire/Common Wealth and Plan Crimson plotted the invasion and annexation of Canada. These plans were the most updated and gamed plans within the US Military College during that period and were gamed right up to 1939. Actual military exercises were conducted in preparation for the invasion. US Army bases were strategically located near to the border in order to provide: area's to concentrate troops, launch the attack and to provide logistically support of the invasion. Many of these bases were not closed until the 1980's.
Whether or not the US would of actually implemented Plan Crimson is a matter of debate. As it turned out, other events in the world change the whole dynamic and US attention was forced elsewhere. However, it should be noted that nations rarely act because of altruistic reasons, but rather they act in what they believe to be in their best interest, even it that means taking the territory and resources of another nation.
Today and for the foreseeable future, the US is a good friend and ally of Canada, however what is to say that will always be the case? If events in the world demand it and the US sees the invasion and annexation of Canada is in its best economic or political best interest or the only way to save the Union, then she will invade. That is the cold hard reality of geo-politics and economics.
So it would be wise for Canadian military and government leaders to plan accordingly and develop a military that would offer a credible deterrence against any and all hostile actions from all quarters, including from south of the 49th. And the US should also consider and plan accordingly to deal with a threat from our side of the border, because it is entirely possible that we peace loving Canadians might one day decide to make a grab for the US.
Such is the nature of the world.
-
Governments in Canada have shown very little attention or interest in the needs of the military over the past thirty years. And Harper's Conservatives have not been much of an improvement over that.
You are correct for the most part but have made one major error in your statement, that the "Government in Canada have shown very little attention or interest in the needs of the military over the past thirty years". The sad fact of the matter is, that no Canadian Government since Confederation has shown any interest in the Canadian military and apparently the Canadian people and taxpayers are quite happy with this situation. Sure many Canadians decry about the sad state of our military and say that the Government MUST DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT IMMEDIATELY!!! But there is always a rider in those public demands, that whatever the Government does to improve the lot of the CF, it must not raise taxes nor mean that those demanding changes actually have to serve. In other words, as long as it doesn't personally affect them in their pocketbooks or easy life, the people of Canada are all in favour of having a bigger, stronger and more versatile Armed Forces.
Canada is rather unique in that we were protected from threats by other major powers. Up until the turn of the 20th Century, Canada's sovereignty was protected in the most part by the Royal Navy. When the RN announced it was pulling out of Canada, we suddenly faced a crisis, there was no one available left to protect us from the threat from the US and from the Imperial German Navy.
In 1914, the BC Government of the day actually bought two submarines from a Washington Shipyard that were built for the Chilean Navy who had default on payment. Till those subs arrived, the only protection the BC coast had from marauding the Imperial German Merchant Cruisers known to be steaming in the Pacific was the clapped out Armoured Cruises HMCS Rainbow and patrols from the Japanese Imperial Navy, which was an ally during the First World War. The subs, named HMCS C-1 and HMCS C-2 were turned over to Canadian Naval personnel and BC Government representatives in great secrecy in fear that the US Navy would suddenly appear and seize the vessels.
After WWI, Canada had built up an impressive field army and air corp however its naval force was still vastly under manned and shipped, even the C-1 and C-2 were paid off after transferring from Equimalt BC to Halifax around wars end due to their diesel engines being burned out. However the majority of the WWI field army were hostilities only militia units which were disbanded at wars end and the troops demob'ed.
The inter-wars years were to become known as the Militia Colonel Era. During this period holding a Colonel's rank in the Militia pretty much guaranteed you a seat in Parliament. It didn't matter if the unit only had a strength of under 100 members, the thing that mattered was that you were its Colonel. This was strictly a political maneuver and did not translate into better funding or conditions for the regular Military or the Militia, indeed one of the best ways to lose favour with your party was to push for more money, equipment and manpower for the army or navy.
By the time WWII started, the Canadian military of WWI had been gutted and when hostilities broke out, the population cried out "Where's our Army and Navy?" To which the politicians said, "Well you didn't want to fund them, so we let them shrink to almost nothing."
But one of the things about Canadians and its relationship with their military back then is, that during times of conflict we come together as a nation and man up as required. And like in WWI, Canada built up a world class Army, Air Force and Navy. Indeed by wars end, the RCN was the third largest navy in the world and the RCAF was also in the top five.
But again once the crisis was past, we turned our backs on the military and allowed it to whether away till it became a mere shadow of its former self. Although during the 1950, Canada still had a fairly strong military, especially its navy and air forces. One of the things most people don't know is that for a period during the 50's before the advent of ICBM's, Canada fielded the only all weather jet fighter interceptors available to NATO, the venerable CF-100 Canuck.
But by the 60's we fell back into the old pattern of disregarding the CAF as it had become to be known as and allowed Ottawa to drastically cut back on its funding and manpower size. The Black Watch Regiment was just one of many units with long histories and hard won battle honours to be disbanded.
During the late 70's even more funding cuts were made, till Reserve units were only allowed one paid parade/training night per week and during the summer, units stood down apart from a two week training exercise. Also, our CF-5's were mothballed and never replaced and their squadrons disbanded. The navy has lost two of its three supply ships, along with the carrier HMCS Bonaventure in the early 70's. The navy also lost its air wing along with it Tracker aircraft. Replacements for our age helicopter fleet have been slow in coming, the CF-18's purchased back in the early to mid 80's are expected to continue in service for at least another 10 to 20 years.
During all this, we have been very quiet about it and when ever Ottawa does announce a major spending programme to support the CF, all you hear is howls of outrage about taxes, taxes and taxes. We as a people do not truly support our military in any meaningful manner. Sure we line the bridges on the Route of Hero's when our fallen come home, and we wave our little flags and salute. And between November 1st to 11th, we were poppies in Remembrance but that's about it. If asked to actually sign up and serve or pry open our pocketbooks, we repel in abject horror.
No matter what Government is in power, be they Liberal, be they Conservative or be they whatever, they will continue to ignore, under-fund and disregard our military, not because they don't care, but because we as a people want them to. The blame lays firmly with us, not the Government of today nor the Governments of the past. We allowed it to happen and just didn't give a damn.
-
They changed the name of the "swine flu" to H1N1 because the pork producers in North America were screaming bloody murder that no one was touching pork. Well, you may not catch pig flu from eating pork BUT you can get pig flu from "touching" a pig and all this came from one pig?????
The H1N1 virus is the same virus that caused the Spanish Influenza pandemic of 1918 and apparently mutated into what we now mistakenly call "Swine Flu". The current stain is interesting:
The 2009 flu outbreak in humans that is widely known as "swine flu" is due to a new strain of influenza A virus subtype H1N1 that was produced by reassortment from one strain of human influenza virus, one strain of avian influenza virus, and two separate strains of swine influenza virus. The origins of this new strain are unknown, and the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) reports that this strain has not been isolated in pigs.[2] It passes with apparent ease from human to human, an ability attributed to an as-yet unidentified mutation.[3] This 2009 H1N1 strain causes the normal symptoms of influenza, such as fever, coughing and headache.There is a lot is misinformation and sensationalizing going on in the media right now about the potential pandemic, and the pork producers were well in their rights to scream bloody blue murder. Again from the same site:
Direct transmission of a swine flu virus from pigs to humans is occasionally possible (this is called zoonotic swine flu). People who work with pigs, especially people with intense exposures, are at risk of catching swine influenza. However, only about fifty such cases of direct infection have been recorded in the medical literature since the middle of the 20th century. Importantly, eating pork does not pose a risk of infection. However, swine flu can very rarely pass from humans to human. In humans, the symptoms of swine flu are similar to those of influenza and of influenza-like illness in general, namely chills, fever, sore throat, muscle pains, severe headache, coughing, weakness and general discomfort.As for the OP's original post, sadly there are some frightened tiny dicked people in this world such as Michael Savage and apparently poster JerrySeinfeld who have nothing better to do then to spew venom and hatred towards those that are "different" from them. As I said, they are frightened tiny dicked individuals who are best ignored.
-
There is a growing suspicion that a U.S. owned factory farm near Mexico City is responsible for this three-headed mutated virus. If this turns out to be true, will Americans take the blame for creating this pandemic, and causing death and suffering in Mexico through their negligence?
Doubtful, after all they didn't take the blame for the Spanish Flu pandemic at the end of WWI. Though thought to have originated in Asia, it mutated into its killer strain in the US. First recorded cases were in US Army camps in Kansas. As US Dough Boys went overseas to fight in the trenches, they brought along with them a silent killer, what was to become known as the Spanish Flu.
From 1917 the flu first struck in Europe, however due to concerns about moral at home, it was under-played. In Spain, which was not at war at the time, the effects and virulence of the flu strain was reported in the media, hence the name Spanish Influenza. Just an interesting piece of history.
-
You have got to be kidding me.
Nope, sounds about right for Alberta, it is after all our most "American" Province.........
-
Well really who cares.........the Pals are nothing more than terrorist's for the most part anyway, anything Israel does to them they bring on themselves! Their problem!
yup, I guess it is, just like it the woman's problem she got raped coz she was wearing a sexy short skirt, must of brought it on to herself eh?
-
And where in this article does it state that Israel intends on removing the blemish of Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank?
The "blemish of Palestinians" eh? How genocidal of you.
-
Not true anymore. The Border, Being Erika, The Guard, Flashpoint, and several new upcoming series...all being played on US networks and all very popular.
Having given up on TV over a year ago I am not aware of these programmes. Are they Canadian progammes set in Canada or are they programmes produced in Canada by US networks and set in the US the way Fox's X-Files was for the most part filmed in Vancouver but never set in Canada?
-
Here's a radical idea CTV (and Global), how about producing some programming that we would be interested in watching instead of feeding us constant never ending stream of US pablum? I find it amazing that damn near every nation in the world can produce interesting home grown TV programming and Canadian producers can't. I guess it is just cheaper and easier to piggy back on signals from NBC, ABC, CBS and Fox then to actually go out and create something uniquely Canadian, for that we have to rely on the CBC.
-
Your right they are my words, pluck from his sentences formed to create a picture of a helpless little girl...one that should have been dressed in a prom dress and dating the boy next door....so while those are my words i did not conjure up that same image.... instead of the image she should be remembered as a soldier, yes a 100 lb soldier with 40 lbs of kit and equipment on, armed with a C-7A2 rifle doing something she loved to do, something she excelled at doing, serving her Nation...
Perhaps the rifle remark was filled with some Testosterone, but it does not translate into you must have a set of nuts in order to serve your nation....Canada does have serving female soldiers in all of thier Combat arms trades, including Infantry, Armoured Corps, Arty, and Combat Engineers...they also serve in the Airforce flying Combat CF-18, and serve on Combat ships, with one exception Subs, due to limited quaters....there is no failure in that except we as a nation except anyone interested in defending thier nation....
But your suggesting that the entire project is a failure, perhaps they've captured all the women that where interested in performing those tasks....perhaps the rest of the military also has as many as they can capture....So while the 2 % mark may look like a failure to many who want to twist it into that...i see it as an opportunity for those that chose to serve, a chance to do so....or are you again'st that ?
Canadian Combat arms consists of Infantry, Armoured Corps, Arty corps, and Combat Engineers....each componet is thrown together into a battle group, and each one will see direct enemy action at one piont on the battle field.....
Yes, it can , those women are serving thier Nation in the Jobs they chose to do, the jobs they wanted to do....and they are doing it as well or better than thier male counter parts....OR they would not be doing it....because lives are on the line...why is it so hard to believe that a women can do the job as well as a man....keep in mind there are lots of 100 lb men given the same chance....
Recruiting is not the problem, it's training them thats the problem not enough instructors....Recruiting can only recruit what the training system can train, as it is there are up to a year or more back logs in the training cycle.....
I don't profess to speak for all in the forces, but i just spent 7 long,hard, dusty months in Afghan, and iteracted with dozens of women, in all trades and not once did i have any problems because someone was a women....So when the metal meets the bone it is the counter view we should be all concerned with, not a bunch of numbers , not some old Archaic attitude, these women have put just as much into this mission as thier male counter parts or more just to remain even..
Like i said before this is my view, and my view only and while it may not be supported across the forces by every soldier, it is policy and it is law...and it is enforced thru out the chain of command without question...every soldier will be tried on thier own merits....unless you got something your not sharing....
Once again your Data on Ground combat forces is incorrect....current there is American and british women serving with thier Armoured , Arty forces, within the IDF there is Women serving with thier Arty and Armoured forces....if you'd like i can send pictures....in fact Janes used to have a complete spread on an entire female IDF tank crew testing out the new Merkarva 4....They have currently no Women serving with the Infantry, or Spec forces....
Ground combat in todays termilogy includes Infantry, Armoured, Arty, Combat Engineers, Attack helo, fighter A/C, pretty much any one that will enter the battle space, and yet with the exception of the Infantry there is women serving in all those that you listed...and yet these same countries also hire on women to perform as mechanics medics clerks etc etc in most cases fighting right next to the very soldiers they themselfs are not allow to become....
Todays battle space in Afghan starts at the front gate, which includes that other 12 % of women in the military you've mentioned making up the support trades needed for the Front line guys to get the job done, from bullets to beans, to fuel all delivered on those roads you hear so much about....all of that is done with a mixed crew, not intentional, just soldiers doing thier jobs be it man or women....
I guess to sum it all up, you should ask these guys that prepare all this facts and figures if they've breached a door with a female soldier, or have they meet any of our female soldiers, and did they once have a problem that could not be sorted out....I invite any of those suits down to the RCR lines and to soldier with one of our female soldiers for a day...that should put to rest any concerns about having front line soldiers as women...they are there because they want to be...cross them and you'll find yourself on the floor holding on to 2 grape fruit sized testicles....
I guess it's bad enough just trying to serve your nation, and everything that goes with that, but top off all that with being a women no frig'in thanks....you need to see it through my eyes and see a soldier....because when it comes to this level it's the only thing that counts...
+1
-
The Canucks swept the Blues in four. WTF!?!?!?!?!!? Is Neil Macrae going to have to eat crow live on the Brother Jake Show come the final?
-
The Viet Cong were guerrilas, operating in stealth, never choosing to engage the enemy except from ambush and with superior local numbers. And they still took casualties which were far higher than the Americans.
I don't know what the casualty rates are for the Gurkhas, but knowing the British and their history, I'm going to suggest they were thrown out there as cannon fodder to soak up fire. That doesn't mean they weren't good soldiers, for they had the same fearless attitude as the early British armies did, when they were basically made up of criminals, drunkards, and riff-raff. The Brits threw them at the considerably more civilized French and the French, by and large, got torn apart.
That being said, men are simply, physically hardier than women. True, if you're just driven to the battle, then lay in a ditch shooting a gun size and strength means little. If, on the other hand, you have to haul a hundred pound pack up a mountain, march all day through the hungle and then fight someone, I'm fairly confident a bunch of men of average size would fair considerably better than a bunch of women.
You know very little about the history the of Army of Lord Wellington nor of the Gurkha Regiment. The British Infantry during the Napoleonic Wars was the finest Infantry of its day. Where as the French would advance in column of march, the British would face them in line, hence the term thin red line, and by dint of their superiour training and rate of fire, devastate the French. The British Army of the early 1800's were one of the very few that actually trained their troops using live ammunition before sending them out onto the field of battle.
As for the Gurhka's, there are arguably the toughest and finest soldiers in the world. During the Falkland War, the British would let it slip that the Gurhka's were going to attack a certain strong point, the Argie conscripts holding that point would usually bugger off asap rather then face the Gurhka's. To this day, the Gurhka Regiment is considered to be an elite force within the British Army and they are not squandered as "cannon fodder".
As for men being "hardier" then women, the day a man gives birth or barring that passes a whole watermelon through his anus without dropping dead from the labour and pain is the day I will believe you. I've served with women in the past and for the most part that were just as capable and hardy as their male counter-parts, able to ruck up, hump the miles and lay down fire as required.
-
While sad, is her death any sadder than the death of a father, son, or brother?
-k
The simple answer to that is no, a lose is a lose no matter the age, gender, ethnicity, religion, political leaning or even sexual orientation od a Canadian Service person. When one is lost, a family grieves, a unit mourns and the nation bleeds.
-
Back in the 80's when I was in, women were just starting to make inroads into traditionally non-female trades including combat arms. This was especially true within the Reserves, where due to a lack of "man" power, women had to "man" up to fill the ranks. Most were capable, some were more then capable, some even exceeded their male counter-parts and others sadly broke. They had to face hostility, and yes even sexual harassment...but they did the bloody job and for the most part did it bloody well. Apart from a few very rare cases, I never had to worry about the women in my section anymore then I did about the males. The girls I had the honour of serving with blazed the trail for our young women in uniform and they have earned the right to be called Soldiers.
-
My Skydaddy can beat up your Skydaddy..........all religious arguments are now neatly summed up in one easy to understand statement.
-
Good thing too. They're much too hard to ride when you're dead.
A friend told me he saw three bikes riding in December and one of them was a Harley Davidson. I quickly corrected him in that he had actually seen two bikes and a tractor.
Can you guess by my nickname what I ride? Here's a hint, VF45S
-
I think it's around 1 in 7 in Ontario and I can't remember the number for Canada, but it's high. Almost 500K jobs in Ontario and almost 100K jobs in Alberta are very closely linked to the industry.
I don't drive anymore, preferring to either ride my motorbike or take the bus when it snows. Actually since breaking my arm walking to a bus this past December, I've haven't even been riding. However, even the motorcycle world is showing the pains of this economic slow down/recession/depression (everyone can choose their own option) and Harley Davidson, a brand I would never be seen dead on let alone ride (then again, I don't like cruisers no matter who makes them) is also facing major financial problems. They have had to cut back on their work force, shut down and consolidate operations and plants and issue bleak projections for the coming year. Apart from their product mix being basically aimed at 40+ somethings with large disposable incomes, most of HD's financial woes came about because they forgot what industry they were actually in, that being the making and selling of motorcycles. They started up their own financing arm and much like GMAC putting the boots to GM in North America, HD's financing arm has knocked the stuffing out of the motorcycle arm. It's not looking good.
-
Moreover, I am not the least optimistic that something like separation can be acheived peacefully.
Especially in the US. The last time Texas tried to leave the Union, it came up a right cropper.
-
I've read that in the US 1 in 4 jobs are related directly or indirectly to the automotive industry, however in am not sure what the Canadian figures are. That being said, allowing two of the big American 3 fail would dramatic and far reaching negative percussions throughout the entire highly integrated North America economy, and that includes Mexico.
I've noticed that the most vocal attacks are generally aimed at the unions, however the unions have been making concessions to companies for quite awhile now, including a two-tiered wage structure that allow the Big 3 to pay new-hirers less then the old hands, much the same deal that the Supermarkets cut with their unions years ago. But no one has mentioned the impact that these concessions and wage cuts have had on the local economies as a whole. Less income means less taxation revenue, less consumer spending and less investments into RRSP's and the like. Meanwhile, the Big 3 upper management and Board members live the life of Reilly and continue to ignore the basics of producing quality products that give the consumer value for their money.
-
Resurrection is the very foundation of all Christianity.
It is the proof, the power and the promise.
Thanks be to God.
not a Christian, but enjoy anyways.
-
And yet, here you are to defend Tamil terrorists and those who support them. Why is that again?
Excuse me? Where in the hell did I say that? How in the hell did you infer that from anything I have written on the subject? Did I not state very clearly that "A terrorist is a terrorist no matter what their cause or body count is"?
Nor do I. So what is your point?Read the above...sheesh...some mothers do have them don't they?
Almost all terrorism today is Islamic based. I am not blind to the manipulations and behaviours of governments, nor to the misery that can sometimes cause. But that is not the subject here. The US is not flying airplanes into buildings, nor is it kidnapping children and putting rifles in their hands, nor blowing up markets and pizza parlors. Bringing up the US training of Latin American police forces from the sixties as an excuse for terrorism today is a cop-out and a pathetic excuse for refusing to judge the behaviour of the Tamil community who support these people.Sorry mate, but the School of the Americas is still alive and kicking however it has been rebranded as the "Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation", basically the same crap but different label.
Communities will support those groups that they identify with and agree with, be they Irish, Jewish, Islamic, Christians, Tamils, Iranian, Iraqi, Kurdish, Basque, Serb, Chechnyan or what have you and they will funnel funds and arms to them. Its always been that way and it always will be that way. Case in point, my cousin was in the bomb disposal unit of the Royal Corp Of Engineers during "The Troubles" and disarmed more then a few Provo Bombs only to find them made of C4 explosives with US Army markings that had somehow mysteriously and magically made its way to Belfast.
And while the US does not fly planes into buildings they do drop bombs and fly cruise missiles into houses, weddings, and what have you in order to take out a target regardless of "collateral damage" and if that is not a definition of terrorism I don't know what is. As for not kidnapping and arming children to fight, sorry again mate, but while the US may not do this directly, it does support those that do with arms and funds. Call it proxy terrorism if you will.
Sadly in you narrow world view, the only terrorism and terrorist that bear watching and being dealt with are those who are Islamic, Arabic or some other weird and scary "Darkie". So what was Timothy's body count again?
-
Nor, in all likelihood, do you see yours.
What the moral relativists like you don't seem to comprehend, and cannot for an instant accept, is that there is a difference between the terrorists we have had, and still have to a small degree in the West, and the terrorists of the Muslim world. The difference is an order of magnitude degree in brutality and violence. More people are killed by Islamic terrorists every year than have EVER been killed by western terrorism, going all the way back to the beginning of the IRA provos. When it comes to killing and brutality, the Tamil Tigers are the NHL while the IRA - they were maybe your local high school peewees.
Actually you are the moral relativists Argus, not me in that I make no distinction between terrorist, to me a terrorist is a terrorist no matter what their cause is or have large or small their body count is.
I see no difference between Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City and those that flew airliners into the World Trade Center. Both used violence and terror in order to further their political goals. The same can be said of the IRA and even the right-wing Zionist group, the Irgun who blew King David Hotel on 22 July 1946 during the British Mandate of Palestine. Then there is the case of the Olympic Park Bomber, Eric Robert Rudolph who as a member of the white supremacist Christian Identity movement exploded bombs that killed two and injured 150 people. His main targets after the Olympic Park bombings were Abortion Clinics and Gay Bars. His stated goals, to stop the holocaust of abortion and to end the gay agenda. His method to reach these goals, terror.
Then there is state sponsored terrorism which most major powers have used, including the US. The US ran the so-called "School of the Americas" which trained many of the security forces of some of the most vicious regimes in Central and South America which used terror tactics to subdue their populations, quell dissent and stay in power. Then there is the case of Libya's involvement of the downing of Pan Am Flight 103.
Terrorism is simply just another tool of the body politic. Depending on how it is wielded and by whom it can either be effective as in the case of the Israeli Zionist and arguably the Prov IRA or in can be ineffective as in the case of AQ so far. To be blind to all aspects of terrorism and simply focus on Islamic terrorism is myopic at best, and dishonest at worst.
Canada's flawed military policies
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted · Edited by Sabre Rider
Armed they maybe, but gunship they are not. True helicopter gunships are a completely different breed. Helicopters such as the original AH-1 Huey Cobra and its upgraded variant the Super Cobra, the AH-64 Apache, the EC-665 Eurocopter Tiger, the Agusta A129 Mangusta and the interesting Russian Kamov Ka-50 Black Shark and Ka-52 Alligator. These are true helicopter gunships.
The idea of mounting weapons on troops carrying helicopter dates back to the Korean War and it was the Soviets who took that concept to its ultimate form with the famous Mi-24 Hind. This helicopter attempted to merge the best aspects of both transport helicopters with those of a true gunship and when it first appeared, took the world by storm. However Afghanistan proved the concept to be basically erroneous and the Soviets operated Hinds as either dedicated non-troops carrying attack helicopters or as dedicated non-attack troop carriers.