Why Harper Should Be P.M.

[wulf42]

This article says it all.....Canada needs a strong military because if it was up to the Liberals we wouldn t have a military at all, we need to be strong... what Russia just did to Georgia is proof how dangerous this world is...! there are many threats in the world emerging... China Russia even Venezuela!!.. Along with the U.S. we need to be ready to defend North America from any surprise attack from one or more likely a combination of the above for mentioned Countries .....there is a reason Russian warships are in Venezuela ....if Canada was smart we would also join the Nuclear club.... people tend not to mess with countries with Nukes ..sad but true!

May 12, 2008 | www.cbc.ca

The Tory government announced a 20-year, multibillion-dollar plan to strengthen Canada’s military, which includes the purchase of new aircraft, armoured vehicles, ships and helicopters, and a goal to expand the Forces to 100,000.

Referring to it as the “Canada First Defence Strategy,” Prime Minister Stephen Harper said the long-term investments in the military could reach costs of up to $30 billion.

“If a country wants to be taken seriously in the world, it must have the capacity to act. It’s that simple,” Harper said Monday at the Halifax Armoury, joined by Defence Minister Peter MacKay. “Otherwise, you forfeit your right to be a player. You’re the one chattering on the sideline that everyone smiles at, but no one listens to.”

Much of what was announced on Monday has been revealed before by the government.

“The newest thing about this announcement is that it is a long-term plan,” Harper said when asked by a reporter.

Harper said this strategy will focus on replacing some of the military’s core equipment fleets, including destroyers, frigates and different types of aircraft that will end their operational life over the next 20 years.

The plan will also seek to boost the strength of the regular Forces from 65,000 to 70,000 and the reserves from 24,000 to 30,000.

“Renewal of the Canadian Forces is the most pressing priority,” Harper said, adding the average age in the military is rising.

Harper said the plan will also improve surveillance of land and coastal borders, bolster support for civilian authority in the event of natural disasters, and provide security to major national events like the 2010 Olympics.

Harper said having a long-term plan for stable funding will create jobs and opportunities for tens of thousands of Canadians who work in the defence industry and communities with military bases.

Edited September 19, 2008 by wulf42

[cybercoma]

Harper said the plan will also improve surveillance of land and coastal borders, bolster support for civilian authority in the event of natural disasters, and provide security to major national events like the 2010 Olympics.

What a crazy idea: give our troops the necessary tools to do the jobs they've been asked to do.

[wulf42]

What a crazy idea: give our troops the necessary tools to do the jobs they've been asked to do.

Unforunately you can kiss that good bye if the Liberals get in!!! they want to " talk" with Al-Qaeda and all be friends...lol

[Smallc]

Unforunately you can kiss that good bye if the Liberals get in!!! they want to " talk" with Al-Qaeda and all be friends...lol

Thats not the Liberals. Thats the NDP.

[eyeball]

All I can say is unite the left and stop these paranoid maniacs.

[shelphs]

I agree that the Canadian military requires funding; however, I distrust that Harper and the Conservatives desire to use those funds to merely support and maintain the Canadian Military's established specialty: peacekeeping. That should be our focus.

By being fair, diplomatic, respectful of others, and most importantly, acting in accordance with reality, i.e., paying close attention to facts on the world stage, Canada will continue to support a friendly and liked Canada that has numberous allies. Friends and understanding is what's most important. Fear is not important, and Stephen Harper has been using fear to suggest that Canada needs a military similar to the States - it seems that that is the direction he's heading in.

Canada would only need such a force if we begin to act as the Republican Foreign Policy dictates it acts. This should naturally not happen. It would be bad for Canada and the world.

Furthermore, I am extremely concerned by the Conservatives' blatant disregard for empirical fact-gathering and fact-based decision-making.

Please view the two videos below. I'm sure you'll be surprised by the politics of the Conservative government. The videos' sources are cited as well, so if you disbelieve what you see and hear, please conform the facts and view the video and news article sources.

1.

Title: The Conservative Stephen Harper Government's Anti-Drug Strategy (information

for the 2008 Canadian election)

URL:

Sources: cited at http://shelphspolitics.wordpress.com/

(there were too many sources to cite to put them in the Description field under 'more info')

2.

Title: Stephen Harper and the Conservatives' Environmental Plan: Turning the Corner

(information for the 2008 Canadian election)

URL:

Sources: cited under 'more info' on the youtube URL above

[Topaz]

On june 19th 2008 the star printed( I printed it also) that defence plan to spend $490 BILLION over the next 20 years. This goes for military equipment, personnel and operations. There's a 1.5% increase for the defence budget to 30 bil. in 2027/28 from the currrent 18 Bil. $20 Bil for new planes, tanks and ships plus 15 Bil for transport planes, trucks and helicopters. It will take $250 BIL. to grow the Canadians Forces to 70,000 reg.forces and 30,000 reservists and keep it at that level. Why we are spending this money on the military, it said because of the global security and "at home" because of terrorists,drug smugglers, infectious diseases and 'foreign encroachments on Canada's natural resources" are all high on the list of threat the military is looking out for.

[DrGreenthumb]

I agree that the Canadian military requires funding; however, I distrust that Harper and the Conservatives desire to use those funds to merely support and maintain the Canadian Military's established specialty: peacekeeping. That should be our focus.

By being fair, diplomatic, respectful of others, and most importantly, acting in accordance with reality, i.e., paying close attention to facts on the world stage, Canada will continue to support a friendly and liked Canada that has numberous allies. Friends and understanding is what's most important. Fear is not important, and Stephen Harper has been using fear to suggest that Canada needs a military similar to the States - it seems that that is the direction he's heading in.

Canada would only need such a force if we begin to act as the Republican Foreign Policy dictates it acts. This should naturally not happen. It would be bad for Canada and the world.

Furthermore, I am extremely concerned by the Conservatives' blatant disregard for empirical fact-gathering and fact-based decision-making.

Please view the two videos below. I'm sure you'll be surprised by the politics of the Conservative government. The videos' sources are cited as well, so if you disbelieve what you see and hear, please conform the facts and view the video and news article sources.

1.

Title: The Conservative Stephen Harper Government's Anti-Drug Strategy (information

for the 2008 Canadian election)

URL:

Sources: cited at http://shelphspolitics.wordpress.com/

(there were too many sources to cite to put them in the Description field under 'more info')

2.

Title: Stephen Harper and the Conservatives' Environmental Plan: Turning the Corner

(information for the 2008 Canadian election)

URL:

Sources: cited under 'more info' on the youtube URL above

The conservatives and their supporters aren't concerned with pesky things like FACTS and SCIENCE. Harper BELIEVES he is right about everything, that GOD is on his side. He has FAITH that the world is only a couple of thousand years old and that if can just rid the world of sin, Jesus will return and present Harper with the seat at the LEFT hand of the Father. Then Harper can take over Heaven and refuse to co-operate with The father the son and the holy spirit, and usher a thousand year Harper dictatorship of heaven. Oh and only approved members of the press and select Angels will be allowed to question Harpers new COMMANDMENTS.

[JB Globe]

This article says it all.....Canada needs a strong military because if it was up to the Liberals we wouldn t have a military at all,

You know you're an enormous political hack when you have to blatantly lie in the opening sentence of your post. Please demonstrate how a Liberal government would completely dismantle the Canadian military as you claim. Also explain why, since they've been in power for most of the past 60 years, why this hasn't already happened.

we need to be strong... what Russia just did to Georgia is proof how dangerous this world is...!

Incidents such as the Georgian crisis are relatively rare in the world today.

there are many threats in the world emerging... China Russia even Venezuela!!..

You're overstating these "threats" in a manner that suggests paranoia.

China is not a military threat - they have no capacity to launch any sort of naval invasion of any nation besides Tawain - and with the new government in Tawain being more China-Friendly, relations there are the best they've been in decades. It's true that China is projecting it's power more than in the past, but you HAVE to expect that - China, like any other country, wants its influence in the world to reflect it's economic power. It wants to be able influence global systems just like the US does. China isn't expanding its sphere of influence to Africa because it wants to rule the world - it just wants to be on the same playing field as the US. And the only reason you should be terrified of that is if you can't stand to share the superpower table with anyone else. Besides, they need our oil, and won't go to war with a nation they've investing in to build oil pipelines.

Russia, while resurgent, is in no military or economic position to launch any sort of sustained military campaign against even a medium-sized country with an average military. Georgia is tiny and it's military is too. While a ship may have docked in Venezuela, most of Russia's northern fleet is sitting in dock, rusting. Their economy is as dependent on foreign investment as it is on oil - if it were to go to war, that would dry up (during the Georgia crisis new foreign investment came to a standstill, for example). Beyond strengthening our presence in the Arctic, I don't think we need to worry about Russia.

I won't even comment on Venezuela being considered a military threat to Canada - it's too ridiculous.

I'm willing to spend money on defending Canada, but the threats have to be REAL, not imagined. And I don't think there is any threat that's worth spending $500 billion on right now.

[Keepitsimple]

I agree that the Canadian military requires funding; however, I distrust that Harper and the Conservatives desire to use those funds to merely support and maintain the Canadian Military's established specialty: peacekeeping. That should be our focus.

By being fair, diplomatic, respectful of others, and most importantly, acting in accordance with reality, i.e., paying close attention to facts on the world stage, Canada will continue to support a friendly and liked Canada that has numberous allies. Friends and understanding is what's most important. Fear is not important, and Stephen Harper has been using fear to suggest that Canada needs a military similar to the States - it seems that that is the direction he's heading in.

Canada would only need such a force if we begin to act as the Republican Foreign Policy dictates it acts. This should naturally not happen. It would be bad for Canada and the world.

Furthermore, I am extremely concerned by the Conservatives' blatant disregard for empirical fact-gathering and fact-based decision-making.

Please view the two videos below. I'm sure you'll be surprised by the politics of the Conservative government. The videos' sources are cited as well, so if you disbelieve what you see and hear, please conform the facts and view the video and news article sources.

1.

Title: The Conservative Stephen Harper Government's Anti-Drug Strategy (information

for the 2008 Canadian election)

URL:

Sources: cited at http://shelphspolitics.wordpress.com/

(there were too many sources to cite to put them in the Description field under 'more info')

2.

Title: Stephen Harper and the Conservatives' Environmental Plan: Turning the Corner

(information for the 2008 Canadian election)

URL:

Sources: cited under 'more info' on the youtube URL above

Video 1 is interesting....it starts by saying that Conservatives will be tough on the drug trade but that fully two-thirds of all money will be spent on Prevention and Mitigation. Almost all of the video goes on to laud the merits on the Insite Harm Reduction site in Vancouver - the only one in North America - and a pilot program at that. Europeans consider Harm Reduction to be of minimal value and are backing away from radical programs like Insite. I find the Conservative approach to be classic compassionate Conservatism - tough on the bad guys and a helping hand to those who need it and want it. Unfortunately, our Charter of Rights prevents us from forcing people to go into rehab.

Video 2 starts out with John Baird pledging to reduce GHG by 20% from today's levels by 2020, largely through the use of intensity reductions - regulating the industry to start reducing GHG for each unit of production. The rest of the video shows Al Gore, pumped up with hot air, discrediting the intensity approach. I'll go with the steady and measurable approach to reducing GHG that the Conservatives have outlined.....it goes hand-in-hand with managing the economy - which pays for all our social programs.

Both videos are nothing more than left wing propaganda....criticize pragmatic, measurable approaches and laud feel-good programs like Insite and wooly-brained clap-trap like Kyoto and the Green Shift/Povert Reduction plan.

Edited September 20, 2008 by Keepitsimple

[wulf42]

The Liberal Goverment has done nothing to increase or rearm the military, here is what your Liberals did for the Military this was an article on the state of the Military back in 2005... Pathetic ...Canada's Soldiers deserve better and will get better under a tory Goverment period!!

September 29, 2005

Canada�s Military Not Ready to Defend Against Terrorists

Canada's Senate defense committee reports that the country's armed forces are woefully underfunded and totally unprepared to defend the country against the inevitable terrorist attack.

Report: Canada's military can't meet needs (AP)

Canada's military is "wounded" and the country's defense without the money to do its job properly, according to a Senate report released Thursday. The report laments the lack of resources and coordinated manpower to deal with a terrorist attack or natural disaster. "A hard, honest look at the facts has made it clear to the committee that the funding is simply not there to end Canada's sad era of military darkness," said the review of defense policy by the Senate Standing committee on National Security and Defense.

The report notes that of the C$12.8 billion (US$10.9 billion) the government promised over the next five years to beef up the Canadian Forces, only C$1.1 billion ($938 million) was earmarked for the first two years. This means the rehabilitation process won't get started until 2008-2009. "Even when the process does stutter to a start, it will remain vastly underfunded, primarily because the armed forces have been starved for money for so many years,"

The report notes Canada -- named by al Qaeda as one of five target nations deserving of an attack -- has done little since 9/11 to invest in anti-terrorism prevention. "Canada has an unenviable place on Osama bin Laden's infamous list of countries to be targeted. We may get lucky. But it's not a bet you'd want to make. "Despite the increasing complacency of most Canadians as the memory of 9/11 slips to the back of our minds, there is every likelihood that an attack will eventually occur on Canadian soil," the report said, yet noted that Canada ranks just 128th out of 165 countries in defense spending as a percentage of its gross domestic product.

Truly a shame. The Canadian Forces are well trained and professional but they operate in a political culture even more tepid on national defense than that which pervades Western Europe. They have the good fortune, however, of bordering a superpower that happens to be their strongest ally and trading partner.

Edited September 20, 2008 by wulf42

[kengs333]

I'll agree that the military needs more money once someone can provide me with evidence that Canada is really in direct threat of attack from a foreign country. There are only two or three countries that theoretically could invade Canada. In my opinion, the most logical of these invaders would be the United States, not Russia, because of its geographic proximity and its voracious appetite for resources. Russia comes second, but quite distant: people who think that the Russians are going to come storming over the arctic circle to get our resources are totally misreading the political outlook of the Russian leadership, and the fact that its much more practicle and easy to get what they want in the region to their south. A remote chance that China could do something in a few decades time once it becomes the superpower and perhaps wants to take preventative measures against North America and mete out the same kind of imperialistic punishments that the west has been doing so to them and the rest of Asia for such a long time.

I suppose there is also a chance of a fourth possibility; the creation of some sort of Islamic pseudo-state within Canada in the GTA area that becomes the homebase of islamic extremism on the continent.

[wulf42]

You know you're an enormous political hack when you have to blatantly lie in the opening sentence of your post. Please demonstrate how a Liberal government would completely dismantle the Canadian military as you claim. Also explain why, since they've been in power for most of the past 60 years, why this hasn't already happened.

Incidents such as the Georgian crisis are relatively rare in the world today.

You're overstating these "threats" in a manner that suggests paranoia.

China is not a military threat - they have no capacity to launch any sort of naval invasion of any nation besides Tawain - and with the new government in Tawain being more China-Friendly, relations there are the best they've been in decades. It's true that China is projecting it's power more than in the past, but you HAVE to expect that - China, like any other country, wants its influence in the world to reflect it's economic power. It wants to be able influence global systems just like the US does. China isn't expanding its sphere of influence to Africa because it wants to rule the world - it just wants to be on the same playing field as the US. And the only reason you should be terrified of that is if you can't stand to share the superpower table with anyone else. Besides, they need our oil, and won't go to war with a nation they've investing in to build oil pipelines.

Russia, while resurgent, is in no military or economic position to launch any sort of sustained military campaign against even a medium-sized country with an average military. Georgia is tiny and it's military is too. While a ship may have docked in Venezuela, most of Russia's northern fleet is sitting in dock, rusting. Their economy is as dependent on foreign investment as it is on oil - if it were to go to war, that would dry up (during the Georgia crisis new foreign investment came to a standstill, for example). Beyond strengthening our presence in the Arctic, I don't think we need to worry about Russia.

I won't even comment on Venezuela being considered a military threat to Canada - it's too ridiculous.

I'm willing to spend money on defending Canada, but the threats have to be REAL, not imagined. And I don't think there is any threat that's worth spending $500 billion on right now.

Okay you obviously are not up to date on the state of Chinas Military....not a threat? have you lost your marbles??....lol

if the U.S. considers them a grave threat i think maybe Canada should too! and as far as Russia goes it is rearming and spending on the Military like never before thanks to oil revenue...the Russian Bear was always a threat...they have a huge Nuclear arsenal and are developing new and more accurate weapons systems all the time....the American economy is in big trouble while countries like China and Russia are growing as well as forming military alliances with each other...not a threat ?? thank god your not in charge be would be screwed for sure!!

here is how much of a threat they are according to the pentigon!

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=06...;show_article=1

[wulf42]

I agree that the Canadian military requires funding; however, I distrust that Harper and the Conservatives desire to use those funds to merely support and maintain the Canadian Military's established specialty: peacekeeping. That should be our focus.

I agree with Peacekeeping role but again we need the weapons to do it...flying Sea Kings from the 50's- 60's and sailing old ships (H.M.C.S Preserver Commissioned 7 August 1970)

is not the way to do it!...Canada needs to modernize and arm to the teeth...like Harper said if your not well armed nobody in the world careless what you say ...you simply have no clout or importance!!

[DrGreenthumb]

Unfortunately, our Charter of Rights prevents us from forcing people to go into rehab.

Yes that pesky Charter of Rights is a real impediment to conservative policy isn't it?

The fact that conservatives think anyone needs rehab for cannabis just reinforces how out of touch with reality they really are. That's like putting someone in rehab for a cofffee "addiction".

How is this idea any different than forcing someone into REHAB over their use of alcohol or tobacco, or fatty foods for that matter? Who gets to decide who is within their rights as a responsible user, and who must be forced by the state into a re-education camp? I thought conservatives were supposed be in favour of the government not having this kind of power. The problem is Harper is not a real conservative , he is some kind of weird paternalistic authoritarian dictator, who stole the conservative name to cover up his REFORM party fundamentalism. Bible thumpers on a mission. Wolf in sheeps clothing?? Reform party Theo-con in a blue suit(or sweater vest).

Edited September 20, 2008 by DrGreenthumb

[Topaz]

I agree with Peacekeeping role but again we need the weapons to do it...flying Sea Kings from the 50's- 60's and sailing old ships (H.M.C.S Preserver Commissioned 7 August 1970)

is not the way to do it!...Canada needs to modernize and arm to the teeth...like Harper said if your not well armed nobody in the world careless what you say ...you simply have no clout or importance!!

UNLESS, you get a red-neck like GW that never seen war but on the TV and is set out to prove something to himself or the world!! Get enough of them as world leaders and you have a nuke war which very few will survive!

[shelphs]

Video 1 is interesting....it starts by saying that Conservatives will be tough on the drug trade but that fully two-thirds of all money will be spent on Prevention and Mitigation. Almost all of the video goes on to laud the merits on the Insite Harm Reduction site in Vancouver - the only one in North America - and a pilot program at that. Europeans consider Harm Reduction to be of minimal value and are backing away from radical programs like Insite. I find the Conservative approach to be classic compassionate Conservatism - tough on the bad guys and a helping hand to those who need it and want it. Unfortunately, our Charter of Rights prevents us from forcing people to go into rehab.

Video 2 starts out with John Baird pledging to reduce GHG by 20% from today's levels by 2020, largely through the use of intensity reductions - regulating the industry to start reducing GHG for each unit of production. The rest of the video shows Al Gore, pumped up with hot air, discrediting the intensity approach. I'll go with the steady and measurable approach to reducing GHG that the Conservatives have outlined.....it goes hand-in-hand with managing the economy - which pays for all our social programs.

Both videos are nothing more than left wing propaganda....criticize pragmatic, measurable approaches and laud feel-good programs like Insite and wooly-brained clap-trap like Kyoto and the Green Shift/Povert Reduction plan.

Propaganda. That's an interesting word, and since it has two meanings, I must first establish the definition you had in mind when you typed your response - though your tone is suggestive of the derogatory one, and if I am correct, then you have clearly missed the point of my videos.

The first meaning refers to the dissemination of ideas, facts, etc in order to propagate a doctrine, or belief; whereas the second meaning, though similar, is the dissemination of information in a selective way regardless of if it is misleading or dishonest.

My videos can be described as being propagandistic, for they do use select bits of information to express my belief that the Conservatives distort the truth and mislead the public. However, my videos are not misleading. They express actual events, and I cited my sources so that people can confirm the facts for themselves.

The purpose of the videos is to show how the Conservatives have undeniably ignored public opinion, empirical evidence, and attempt to/successfully mislead the public on the issues brought up in the videos.

[shelphs]

I agree with Peacekeeping role but again we need the weapons to do it...flying Sea Kings from the 50's- 60's and sailing old ships (H.M.C.S Preserver Commissioned 7 August 1970)

is not the way to do it!...Canada needs to modernize and arm to the teeth...like Harper said if your not well armed nobody in the world careless what you say ...you simply have no clout or importance!!

Yes, but the number of dollars Harper is throwing into the military is too massive to simply account for that. As a matter of fact, it seems to be in preparation for something. For instance, Tony Clement attended the XVII International AIDS Conference in New Mexico on August 5, 2008, and he said that safe-injection sites, which are a method of 'harm reduction' in the fight against drugs, are "harm addition." This was uncouth on his part and embarrassing to Canada. Firstly, he went to a conference that supports these measures and denounced them (some in attendance said Clement should not have attended if those were his views). Secondly, he denounces a method of harm reduction that has so much scientific backing. He appears uninformed, and he's unquestioningly contentious. Why provoke?

Well, if this is the reason for building up our military: so we can act like pompous school children - i want nothing to do with it.

And I've been wondering, if a whole bunch of money is being thrown into the military and taxes are being cut as well, how is our health care going to be funded? And don't say privatization. I don't think any Canadian wants that - and it seems like Harper may try to take us there. Maybe that's unfair to say.

[Smallc]

Yes, but the number of dollars Harper is throwing into the military is too massive to simply account for that. As a matter of fact, it seems to be in preparation for something.

Actually, much of the equipment we are getting will HELP with peace keeping. C17s, C130Js, C27Js (hopefully) Chinooks, tanks, heavily armoured vehicles, supply ships (hopefully), can all be used to assist in peacekeeping as well as SAR and natural disasters at home and abroad. . As an example, just look at what the HMCS St. John's is doing and what the HMCS Ville de Quebec just finished doing. Weapons of war like this can be very useful for keeping peace. Canada is one of a few nations that tries to keep peace and order in the world. All these tools will help us to do this.

[JB Globe]

Okay you obviously are not up to date on the state of Chinas Military....not a threat? have you lost your marbles??....lol

Perhaps you could explain to me what kind of threat China poses to Canada, and explain why they would carry out that threat. Because right now I'm looking at a military that has virtually no power projection outside if it's borders.

if the U.S. considers them a grave threat i think maybe Canada should too!

America has a global economic empire, we don't. America has and will continually go to war in far away places to protect it's interests, we've refused to tag along before (Vietnam, Iraq) and rightly so, as of right now I don't see how China poses a direct threat to us, or any of the homelands of our various close allies, so again - why are they a threat?

and as far as Russia goes it is rearming and spending on the Military like never before thanks to oil revenue...the Russian Bear was always a threat...

Again - Russia has no power projection to launch any sort of sustained attack in North America, and it's highly unlikely it's going to attack Europe - because that's the main market for it's oil.

here is how much of a threat they are according to the pentigon!

What a surprise that the pentagon thinks China's military is a threat - after all, that would mean the US gov't would have to give them more money to fight this threat.

Look, the only threat China really poses is to America's dominance as the world's lone superpower. They have no plans to invade any nation, and don't look like they're positioning themselves to - and that's the key here. The issue is not China is improving it's military - ANY nation who came into a whack of dough would do that (US and Canada included) but is China positioning itself for some sort of attack (not defense, but an attack?) And all signs point to no, or inconclusive.

Of course, sabre-rattling and military buildup on our side might end up becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, it may look like to China that we're planning to go to an inevitable war with them, which of course would cause them to build up even more and . . . Then we have an arms race.

[wulf42]

Yes, but the number of dollars Harper is throwing into the military is too massive to simply account for that. As a matter of fact, it seems to be in preparation for something. For instance, Tony Clement attended the XVII International AIDS Conference in New Mexico on August 5, 2008, and he said that safe-injection sites, which are a method of 'harm reduction' in the fight against drugs, are "harm addition." This was uncouth on his part and embarrassing to Canada. Firstly, he went to a conference that supports these measures and denounced them (some in attendance said Clement should not have attended if those were his views). Secondly, he denounces a method of harm reduction that has so much scientific backing. He appears uninformed, and he's unquestioningly contentious. Why provoke?

Well, if this is the reason for building up our military: so we can act like pompous school children - i want nothing to do with it.

And I've been wondering, if a whole bunch of money is being thrown into the military and taxes are being cut as well, how is our health care going to be funded? And don't say privatization. I don't think any Canadian wants that - and it seems like Harper may try to take us there. Maybe that's unfair to say.

I don t think Harper is up to anything as far as attacking other countries...we simply do not and will never have the manpower to do

any such thing...the build up is two fold first to defend Canada...including our Artic.....if our national security is threatened we have to have the modern weapons...ie Surface to air Missiles....Modern fighter aircraft...modern well armed ships...and a well armed Ground Force...........we don t need alot of military....Canada only has 30 million or so people so we can never be on a par with the U.S. but we can heavily arm what we have so we can protect Canada against any threat...........other Countries will take us more seriously...........Unfortunately i was in Europe last year in Britain and i was talking to some people and one guy made a joke.." oh you guys have a military?" he meant no harm but if that is the impression the rest of the world has of us...what does that say about Canada.....the Americans think we only care about two things Beer and Hockey....Canada has to have an effective powerful military otherwise we should stay off the world stage stay home and sip our Timmys..drink our beer and watch Hockey!

[wulf42]

Perhaps you could explain to me what kind of threat China poses to Canada, and explain why they would carry out that threat. Because right now I'm looking at a military that has virtually no power projection outside if it's borders.

America has a global economic empire, we don't. America has and will continually go to war in far away places to protect it's interests, we've refused to tag along before (Vietnam, Iraq) and rightly so, as of right now I don't see how China poses a direct threat to us, or any of the homelands of our various close allies, so again - why are they a threat?

Again - Russia has no power projection to launch any sort of sustained attack in North America, and it's highly unlikely it's going to attack Europe - because that's the main market for it's oil.

What a surprise that the pentagon thinks China's military is a threat - after all, that would mean the US gov't would have to give them more money to fight this threat.

Look, the only threat China really poses is to America's dominance as the world's lone superpower. They have no plans to invade any nation, and don't look like they're positioning themselves to - and that's the key here. The issue is not China is improving it's military - ANY nation who came into a whack of dough would do that (US and Canada included) but is China positioning itself for some sort of attack (not defense, but an attack?) And all signs point to no, or inconclusive.

Of course, sabre-rattling and military buildup on our side might end up becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, it may look like to China that we're planning to go to an inevitable war with them, which of course would cause them to build up even more and . . . Then we have an arms race.

China is well on its way to becoming a world power....they are becoming a major player on the world stage....your right China likely has no plans to attack anyone....but it has always had its sights on Tiawan and in recent years has been building up a huge Naval Force...and yes i know far away from Canada...but lets look at reality, if America runs to Tiawans defence which of course they will...how long do you think before Canada gets drawn in....same with Russia they look at the West as the threat they don t distinguish between the U.S. or Canada..just the west...and Russia's Military is ramping up slowly but surely again they likely don t want war but lets say Georgia had been a member of Nato which they likely some day will be, we would have been obligated to fight against Russia with all the other Nato countries....and one more important fact is to remember WE are in Nato so if a another Nato country is attacked we are obligated to defend that country...but to do that we have to have a strong military with a strong support behind it such as Logistical support.....Nobody wants a war ....nobody wanted a war back on Sept 3rd 1939 but look how that turned out....... my point is North America has to be ready for anything and we can t just sit back and leave it to the U.S. to protect us...which is exactly what we have been doing for many years....Canada has to make a choice pull out of Nato keep off the world stage and keep our mouth shut and Hope the Americans can prevent us from being force fed to learn Russian or arm ourselves well enough so other countries think twice about any attack on North America or any other Nato country.....Hitler could have been stopped but Europe was so hell bent about not going to war or showing any kind backbone that it only encouraged Germany to more daring efforts ....well todays world is full of Hitlers!

Edited September 20, 2008 by wulf42

[Peter F]

This is hilarious! The more we spend the safer we are.

from Wulf's post nr11 of this thread:

there is every likelihood that an attack will eventually occur on Canadian soil," the report said, yet noted that Canada ranks just 128th out of 165 countries in defense spending as a percentage of its gross domestic product.

military expenditures 2000

from CUA world factbook 2000

U.S.A.

Military expenditures - dollar figure: $276.7 billion (FY1999 est.)

Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 3.2% (FY1999 est.)

Canada

Military expenditures - dollar figure: $7.4 billion (FY97/98)

Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 1.2% (FY97/98)

Wow! all that military sure saved the USofA from terrorists!

Edited September 21, 2008 by Peter F

[Peter F]

double post

Edited September 21, 2008 by Peter F

[wulf42]

This is hilarious! The more we spend the safer we are.

from Wulf's post nr11 of this thread:

military expenditures 2000

from CUA world factbook 2000

U.S.A.

Military expenditures - dollar figure: $276.7 billion (FY1999 est.)

Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 3.2% (FY1999 est.)

Canada

Military expenditures - dollar figure: $7.4 billion (FY97/98)

Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 1.2% (FY97/98)

Wow! all that military sure saved the USofA from terrorists!

lol.................well a well armed Russian tug boat fleet could take us out now.....lol

Maybe if we had a strong military instead of an aging Sea King fleet we might have something...the only threat a Sea King offers is to those poor bastards that fly it!