bush_cheney2004 Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 ...As for deterring an invasion by possessing nukes it seems to be working for everyone else so far I don't see why it shouldn't work for us. When you say Canadians won't actually use them, that's just your fear speaking. Nope....didn't work for Israel.....and didn't work for the UK (Falklands). Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 Nope....didn't work for Israel.....and didn't work for the UK (Falklands). Hey if we had a big fat nuke - you would respect me in the morning. That did not come across as expected - sorry... Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 Hey if we had a big fat nuke - you would respect me in the morning. That did not come across as expected - sorry... I doubt it....we only respect the will to use it. Japan was so convinced. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 I doubt it....we only respect the will to use it. Japan was so convinced. Japan was an experiment and the misplaced phoney Christian guilt resulted in giving them 50 million a day for 20 years that had the effect of destroying GM. Quote
Wilber Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 That's the problem. Until a significant majority of Canadians can determine precisely what role if any, that we want our military to have with regards to our foreign policies, our forces should be brought home in their present shape and kept here. Canadians have proven twice now that they can mobilize one of the world's biggest armies on fairly short notice if and when they recognize a real need. More importantly though we also know when to stand our armies down until the need arises again. Balls, it takes years to bring on major weapons systems. What would you suggest in the meantime, slingshots? During WW2 you could build a fighter aircraft in a matter of days, a frigate in a couple of months. Now it takes months to build the aircraft and more than a year to build the ship and that is with production already up and running. Do you think the Germans are going to just whip us up a bunch of Leopard 2's at the drop of a hat? Not to mention the cost. In 1944 a P-51 cost about $51,000. A new F/A-18E is around 40 million. I don't know what a Leopard II MBT is worth these days but I'm pretty sure you won't find one for anywhere near the $34,000 a WW2 Sherman cost. This of course if you could even get them because in the case of a full mobilization, our allies will likely be involved in the same war and their own military's will come first. In which case we will be lucky to get their obsolete cast offs to equip our own people. The democracies in general and Canadians in particular also proved twice that when they had to mobilize these armies, initially a lot of people got killed unnecessarily because they went to war, inexperienced, not properly trained and poorly equipped. In short, they got the crap kicked out of them because their opponents were ready and they were not. Fortunately they were able to recover but at great cost. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Army Guy Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 That's the problem. Until a significant majority of Canadians can determine precisely what role if any, that we want our military to have with regards to our foreign policies, our forces should be brought home in their present shape and kept here. Canadians have proven twice now that they can mobilize one of the world's biggest armies on fairly short notice if and when they recognize a real need. More importantly though we also know when to stand our armies down until the need arises again. Stop right there, foreign policy is set by elected officals....and has been for years now....Canada does have foreign policies as does every country like them or not they are there.... Another myth we will raise an army when we need it...i live that shit everyday....today it takes months to produce a truck, tank, years to produce an aircraft, lets not talk about ships....so we should be ready well after the conflict is over....The next war is come as you are, if your not ready, then prepare to speak russian or whom ever the bad guy of the day is.... If Russia is so nonchalant about using nukes then why haven't they, ever? You know what your problem is, you soldiers are trained to see bogeymen at every turn and so you do. You're trained to be somewhat paranoid in your outlook and as a consequence you don't trust Canadians to recognize when gearing up for war is the right thing to do. That alone should be reason enough for any civilized population to keep its armed forces on a very short leash and a very strict diet. They have not used nuks, but does that change thier doctrine, no....but they have used chemical warfare across the globe... YA your right, to much training....to many deployments where we get to see first hand mother russias play book, but hey whom am i to tell you about the effects of a Thermal nuc blast and it's effects, if never seen one in person, but i have studied alot of data...and when i say that one does not have to smell shit to know it stinks....a NUK wpn is mans most potent , deadly wpn ever devised....and for a peace loving person it surprises me to find you advocating our ownership... Your right i don't trust Canadians to recognize when to gear up for anything....check your history tell me how many regular force army personal where on the pay role prior to WWI and WWII....then ask yourself this question, who is going to train all these civilians when we do decide to mobilize.....and if they are all training then who is holding the line....and if holding the line is priority then who is training guys like you....perhaps you'll be thrown on the line with no training sort of on the job training...like happened in WWI....good boys paid the price with there lives....but hey what the hell , a small pension payout, engrave a few names on a statue what does it cost the tax payer....let me ask you eyeball what is your life worth to you....So if it is your believes to keep us on a strict diet, and i'm handing out rifles to the new recruits/ replacements....i'll ask you, hows that diet working for you now ? on the line "pte" we're attacking next.... If you are not going to atleast have a miliarty capable of defending or securing or coming to the aid of Canadians, then people like you should have the balls to say...Army guy we don't need you any more, and send us all home....instead of leading us on , with i support you, i beleive in what you do, we'll get you some funding.......save us the agony of lossing good people in conflicts you don't even read about.... As for deterring an invasion by possessing nukes it seems to be working for everyone else so far I don't see why it shouldn't work for us. When you say Canadians won't actually use them, that's just your fear speaking. IS it.....How many out there would agree to the use of Nuk wpns, in or out of Canada....we can't even agree on military funding, let alone nuk wpns....and then your going to ask if we can use them...shit we get a knot in our shorts when we mishandle or rough up a few terrorists....imagine wiping out entire cities of millions.....in one push of the button....Anyone....nothing but crickets......anyone.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 How do you even know Canadians want you to 'play' with the big boys? We as a G-8 nation, have responsabilities....not all Canadians are happy with someone else paying our defense bill, and then when we go out at night we cut them to pieces...it's time for Canada to grow up...and atleast pay our own way.....to do that we need to play with the big boys....or stop pretending we are big boys.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Oleg Bach Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 Why is it that immigrants that come from war torn corrupt nations never sign up in the Canadian military - All I see on the front page are naive white dead Christian faces?...Is it because the immigrants know that war is a rich mans game and we don't. The miltary must be upgraded and perhaps some of our domestic guys from the hood who are skilled with small arms should inlist - forceably. Quote
Army Guy Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 Why is it that immigrants that come from war torn corrupt nations never sign up in the Canadian military - All I see on the front page are naive white dead Christian faces?...Is it because the immigrants know that war is a rich mans game and we don't. The miltary must be upgraded and perhaps some of our domestic guys from the hood who are skilled with small arms should inlist - forceably. I've been asked this question many times, check those names that have paid the price or are serving this nation now, and you'll soon change your mind....there from around the globe..... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
eyeball Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 ...or stop pretending we are big boys.... Now you're talking. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
wulf42 Posted November 24, 2008 Author Report Posted November 24, 2008 (edited) They have not used nuks, but does that change thier doctrine, no....but they have used chemical warfare across the globe...YA your right, to much training....to many deployments where we get to see first hand mother russias play book, but hey whom am i to tell you about the effects of a Thermal nuc blast and it's effects, if never seen one in person, but i have studied alot of data...and when i say that one does not have to smell shit to know it stinks....a NUK wpn is mans most potent , deadly wpn ever devised....and for a peace loving person it surprises me to find you advocating our ownership... Your right Army Guy! i too have seen how the Russians like to play and its brutal even their training for units like Spetnaz would never be allowed in the West because they are so brutal, I also agree that Nuclear weapons are horrible i wish the damn things were never invented they would end the human existance on this planet, but having said that isn't that even more reason to arm ourselves with Nuclear weapons to some extent since we know the other guy has them?...the Russians are brutal and would attack us at the drop of a hat except for the fact the Americans and Nato would blow them off the planet with their ICBM'S. If we were to put Nuclear ICBM'S up north it would even be a greater deterrent against Russia.... they would know our missiles would hit Russian Cities even sooner than the Yanks. Make no mistake the Russian bear is the enemy we should prepare with a Nuclear deterrent like it or not. Edited November 24, 2008 by wulf42 Quote
eyeball Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 So, while we're on the subject of the enormous cost of defending ourselves just think about how much its going to cost Russia or China to invade us. Isn't there some general rule of thumb that says it costs 3 or 4 or 5 times as much to mount an offense as it does to defend yourself? In today's economy? Its just plain nuts to think its even feasible. The days of invading entire continents are so far long in the past its not even worth considering. There is only one direction from which ANY invasion could ever conceivably come from and it certainly isn't going to be from the North, East or West. An invasion by aliens from outer space is more likely. The only reason for having an army of the type that 450 billion could buy is so we can go play with the big boys and that's increasingly becoming a real big problem in more and more Canadians minds all the time, which is really good news. Perhaps this global economic crisis' silver lining is that overseas military adventures and their budgets will be harder and harder to justify. OTOH we'll probably pick a fight with someone as an excuse to stimulate the economy. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Smallc Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 We as a G-8 nation, have responsabilities....not all Canadians are happy with someone else paying our defense bill, and then when we go out at night we cut them to pieces...it's time for Canada to grow up...and at least pay our own way.....to do that we need to play with the big boys....or stop pretending we are big boys.... As much as we kick ourselves, we do have the 15th largest military budget on earth. We also are one of the few nations that can project force around the world. My point is, no, things aren't ideal, but they aren't as bad as we always make it sound. Every country could spend more, including us, but what would we have to give up to have it? Quote
Wilber Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 So, while we're on the subject of the enormous cost of defending ourselves just think about how much its going to cost Russia or China to invade us. Isn't there some general rule of thumb that says it costs 3 or 4 or 5 times as much to mount an offense as it does to defend yourself? In today's economy? Its just plain nuts to think its even feasible. The days of invading entire continents are so far long in the past its not even worth considering. Not if you win. Losing is far more expensive. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
eyeball Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 As much as we kick ourselves, we do have the 15th largest military budget on earth. We also are one of the few nations that can project force around the world. My point is, no, things aren't ideal, but they aren't as bad as we always make it sound. Every country could spend more, including us, but what would we have to give up to have it? Its a question of what we stand to gain by striving to have the 10th or 8th largest military budget. Even then we'd be lucky if we managed to be the 45th largest army in the world. Pffft...a complete waste of resources in other words. I'd rather we invest $450 billion on a Space Tether or Elevator. If we're that determined to save the planet from ourselves the best thing we could do is try to reduce our need for its resources. OTOH we won't need nukes when we can just drop asteroids on the people we don't like. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
eyeball Posted November 24, 2008 Report Posted November 24, 2008 Not if you win. Losing is far more expensive. Win/lose...what, against who and when, where, why and above all else, how? What about a draw or a tie? How about if we just refuse to play? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Donaill Posted November 25, 2008 Report Posted November 25, 2008 Win/lose...what, against who and when, where, why and above all else, how?What about a draw or a tie? How about if we just refuse to play? That would be tough. That would require asking the overly ambitious, the meglomaniacs, the extremists and other nutbars to play by the rules. I believe someone once tried that with Adolph Hitler and was soundly proven that there would not be peace in our time. Quote
eyeball Posted November 25, 2008 Report Posted November 25, 2008 (edited) Ah yes, the old ghost-of-Hitler card. Boo! There's no reason to think this old dog can hunt anything anymore - two counterfactual arguments support why, a. if the countries around Germany had possessed nukes when Hitler rose to power he would have been reduced to heat energy before he'd have a chance to even stamp his silly little feet. b. if North America had left Europe to settle its differences on its own in the so-called 1st world war, its just as likely the 2nd would never have been necesarry. If people are going to keep throwing what-ifs around its perfectly legitamate to throw around what might-have-beens, I bet the military engages in counterfactual analysis of old battles and wars all the time. Edited November 25, 2008 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Donaill Posted November 25, 2008 Report Posted November 25, 2008 So you want modern day instances where military intervention could have helped? The masacre of Serbs in the early 90's, the masacre of Kurds by Turkey, the masacre of Kurds by Sadam, the problems in Rwanda. Military intervention may not have solved the problem out right but it could have prevented many innocent people from being slaughtered by arses. It bewilders me when people moan and groan about the military or the police but also are the same types to moan and groan when neither is around when needed. There is a price to pay for being totally passive. That is a price I am not willing to pay. Quote
Wilber Posted November 25, 2008 Report Posted November 25, 2008 Win/lose...what, against who and when, where, why and above all else, how?What about a draw or a tie? How about if we just refuse to play? WWI was the "war to end all wars" Dream on. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
blueblood Posted November 25, 2008 Report Posted November 25, 2008 Ah yes, the old ghost-of-Hitler card.Boo! There's no reason to think this old dog can hunt anything anymore - two counterfactual arguments support why, a. if the countries around Germany had possessed nukes when Hitler rose to power he would have been reduced to heat energy before he'd have a chance to even stamp his silly little feet. b. if North America had left Europe to settle its differences on its own in the so-called 1st world war, its just as likely the 2nd would never have been necesarry. If people are going to keep throwing what-ifs around its perfectly legitamate to throw around what might-have-beens, I bet the military engages in counterfactual analysis of old battles and wars all the time. a. Strike 1 their own population would suffer from radiation poisoning/deaths, then there was this little thing called the a bomb not being invented yet b. Strike 2 Germany was attacking North Americans, hear of the U-boat attacks of WW1? Hear of the Lusitania? Newfoundland was still a british colony at the time and Canada had obligations to the British Empire. c. Strike 3 Insane people should never be allowed to rule, militaries serve that purpose Your out Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
White Doors Posted November 25, 2008 Report Posted November 25, 2008 I'm reading a book out called 'Contact Charlie' - I'd recommend it to anyone who would like to have a birds eye view of what is going on in Afghanistan. Quote Those Dern Rednecks done outfoxed the left wing again.~blueblood~
Army Guy Posted November 25, 2008 Report Posted November 25, 2008 Your right Army Guy! i too have seen how the Russians like to play and its brutal even their training for units like Spetnaz would never be allowed in the West because they are so brutal, I also agree that Nuclear weapons are horrible i wish the damn things were never inventedthey would end the human existance on this planet, but having said that isn't that even more reason to arm ourselves with Nuclear weapons to some extent since we know the other guy has them?...the Russians are brutal and would attack us at the drop of a hat except for the fact the Americans and Nato would blow them off the planet with their ICBM'S. If we were to put Nuclear ICBM'S up north it would even be a greater deterrent against Russia.... they would know our missiles would hit Russian Cities even sooner than the Yanks. Make no mistake the Russian bear is the enemy we should prepare with a Nuclear deterrent like it or not. Like i said before, a nation that owns nuks, must show the world that it is willing to use them in there defense....Canada does not have that reputation, nor williness to use the worlds most deadly wpn created.....there are many other reasons for not owning a nuk, once used there is no going back, what ever conflict there is or was will be widen, there are very few nations on the planet that one could nuk and not effect dozens of other nations....so how do you explain to those countrys which now have thousands of thier citizens dying of radiation piosoning.... we had to it was our only means of defense....we where to cheap to buy conventional forces....as they press buttons of thier own....and now we have a foreign army on our shores and a few of our major cities lay in ash, and tens of millions dead.... It is not a matter of who can hit who first, Russia and many other nations have a vast array of launching systems, some that can be over our defenses in less than 15 mins after launch....our north is open territory, Russia spec forces have already explored our north, that is well documented.... Teams could take the over the ice route and knock out what ever defenses we have taking away your ability to strike with nuk wpns if based in the north ....then what....Canada's military today does not have the equipment to respond with force in our own artic....and with the cuts you propose to have a nuk wpns programs we will never have conventional ground forces needed to defend our nation, or aid it in time of crises.... Say like a major earth quake in victoria BC.....thousands would die before we could get help in to assist....and who would we have to blame....no one but our selfs....because of a few dollars....come on.... A nuk wpns program would cost our nation more than it could imigine....for a wpn we have no intention of using, as it would be the start of the end...so no one is going to press that button, i don't care who's at the gates....i'd rather spend the rest of my days doing the goose step, or in some siberian gulag than die a slow painful death from radiation piosoning..... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted November 25, 2008 Report Posted November 25, 2008 As much as we kick ourselves, we do have the 15th largest military budget on earth. We also are one of the few nations that can project force around the world. My point is, no, things aren't ideal, but they aren't as bad as we always make it sound. Every country could spend more, including us, but what would we have to give up to have it? Yes we do but not all military budgets are created equal, Our budget is divided amoun'st many different things, the entire Afgan mission comes out of it, national planning and preparness dept is funded out of it, and many other things....which means when it comes down to dollar and cents spent on equip or pers the 25 th ranked country may actually get more out of the dollar.... Eyeball: I'd rather we invest $450 billion on a Space Tether or Elevator. If we're that determined to save the planet from ourselves the best thing we could do is try to reduce our need for its resources. Just a second ago you where willing to spend double that on a nuk wpns program that would not work..... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted November 25, 2008 Report Posted November 25, 2008 White doors: I'm reading a book out called 'Contact Charlie' - I'd recommend it to anyone who would like to have a birds eye view of what is going on in Afghanistan Good book, i got another for you, a buddy just sent me, It's about 2 RCR tour out of Gagetown NB.... Called Kanadar tour" the turning piont in Canada's Afgan mission" written by Lee Winsor,David Charters,Brent Wilson.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.