g_bambino Posted November 19, 2008 Report Share Posted November 19, 2008 The British system was anything but tolerant. Having outlawed many things Celtic, such as language. Forced Anglification of many cultures. What made Canada tolerant was not a foreign system but born out of necessity. It has taken us over a century to become who we are. We changed because people realise, in part, that those they once hated or in the least distrusted could be likeable and trusting people. No, in this case, kengs is actually right. Suppression of the Celtic culture in the Scottish highlands took place before the Westminster system was fully formed, and the Brits Anglocised the Empire because they genuinely felt that it was an improvement for those under their influence. But they were also quite flexible in terms of accomodating local cultures and languages, at least in comparison to other colonisers such as France and Germany. Of course unique local factors aided in making the culture different in each region, but don't think it's simply coincidence that Westminster paliamentary government, the English language, and traditionally British sports have remained in use in many of what used to be British colonies, long after Britain could be accused of forcing it on them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 19, 2008 Report Share Posted November 19, 2008 Some more news regarding our military.Rented Helo's start working in Afgan. Rented helos. Canadian cyclone makes test flight. cyclone And new tracked APC maybe in the works Cv90 Some good news, for all of us. I don't know if you heard, but yesterday they bought 14 more Bisons and Cougars too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted November 19, 2008 Report Share Posted November 19, 2008 I don't know if you heard, but yesterday they bought 14 more Bisons and Cougars too. Aren't the Cougars ( the varient of the Grizzley, etc) relegated to the reserves? We trained with Grizzleys and Cougars back in the early 80s when they still had that new assault vehicle smell.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 19, 2008 Report Share Posted November 19, 2008 (edited) Aren't the Cougars ( the varient of the Grizzley, etc) relegated to the reserves?We trained with Grizzleys and Cougars back in the early 80s when they still had that new assault vehicle smell.. CJOB may have misspoke as I now realize that your right. Actually I think I misspoke. Edited November 19, 2008 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 19, 2008 Report Share Posted November 19, 2008 I think it may have been Buffalo and Ardvark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernThunder Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 I pride myself in not being a warmonger but a pacifist and a liberal but even I have to admit to shame about the shape of our military. It is vastly under funded. How can we afford to finance a larger military, without increasing taxes by a lot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donaill Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 I pride myself in not being a warmonger but a pacifist and a liberal but even I have to admit to shame about the shape of our military. It is vastly under funded. How can we afford to finance a larger military, without increasing taxes by a lot? That's hitting the million dollar nail on the head, with an $80,000 hammer. All being said, the solution is not an easy one. How can we claim sovereignty or a say on the world stage if we have no way to back up our claims? A start would be more people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 DND's solution......what do you think, can we afford it, what is our next step. the way ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 This Strategy is based on the Government's vision for defence as well as an extensive and rigorous analysis of the risks and threats facing Canada and Canadians in the years to come. Starting from the Government's clearly defined roles and level of ambition for the Canadian Forces, the Strategy identifies the military capabilities required to meet these objectives, which in turn determine where investments are most needed. I disagree that this strategy should follow the government's level of ambition. Like most Canadians I know personally, I don't trust the government as far as I can spit. Nor do I trust the industrial complex that stands to benefit from the military spending that following this strategy would entail. This strategy should be entirely driven from the bottom up and unfold according to the public's level of ambition. I don't think we should take a single step towards a Canada First Defence Strategy until such time as we have a plan to hold comprehensive public talks at the community level to determine exactly what this is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Ranking of some of our allies and others when it comes to percentage of GDP spent on defence 46 US 47 France 59 Australia 71 UK 77 Germany 85 Sweden 87 Norway 88 Italy 94 Netherlands 103 Denmark 118 Belgium 120 Spain 121 Japan 126 Canada We are 15th in total spending behind India, Australia, Brazil and Turkey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Can we ensure that weapons and military supplies is created domestically? Or will we out source this also and create a well armed but poor nation.?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Can we ensure that weapons and military supplies is created domestically? Or will we out source this also and create a well armed but poor nation.?? No we can't unless we want to become a major arms producing and exporting nation. Weapons are subject to the economics of scale just like any other manufactured item. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 No we can't unless we want to become a major arms producing and exporting nation. Weapons are subject to the economics of scale just like any other manufactured item. It's to bad that we need to export in order to make it viable. If that is truely the case. Nothing wrong with amassing weaponry - but it becomes a moral issue in the exportation of weapons that always leads to war and the harming of civilian populations. The difficulty that rears it's ugly head is economic dependance on weapons. As we saw with the Iraqi adventure - the Americans had to generate an artifical war in order to continue to enhance the economy (this always happens as a means of last resort by untalented leadership) - but - what takes place is that these types of enterprises become to complex to manage and are always a disaster because of the unpredictable human factor. The blow back that results, always comes back to haunt the dealers....you may be able to control a weapon but controlling the user is impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Ranking of some of our allies and others when it comes to percentage of GDP spent on defence46 US 47 France 59 Australia 71 UK 77 Germany 85 Sweden 87 Norway 88 Italy 94 Netherlands 103 Denmark 118 Belgium 120 Spain 121 Japan 126 Canada We are 15th in total spending behind India, Australia, Brazil and Turkey. Good, this is something we should be proud of. Its an indication that people like us and we have far fewer enemies which means our diplomatic and foreign policies are working. We should expand them so we can trim even more wasteful military spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Good, this is something we should be proud of. Its an indication that people like us and we have far fewer enemies which means our diplomatic and foreign policies are working. We should expand them so we can trim even more wasteful military spending. By that theory the poorest countries in the world are the most popular and have the best diplomatic and foreign policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Good, this is something we should be proud of. Its an indication that people like us and we have far fewer enemies which means our diplomatic and foreign policies are working. We should expand them so we can trim even more wasteful military spending. I don't understand your reasoning. What if we end up with only ONE enemy but he ignores our diplomats and he militarily outguns us? Perhaps you could explain in more detail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 I don't understand your reasoning. What if we end up with only ONE enemy but he ignores our diplomats and he militarily outguns us?Perhaps you could explain in more detail. That would be like asking a blind man to explain fuschia. Don' expect anything other than semi coherent hippy babble.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Spending 490 billion dollars on imported weapons and doubling the size of our armed forces is one way to do things, it isn't the only way ,just the most expensive.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donaill Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 The last time we let the military degrade we ended up in WW2. Now diplomicy would not have worked in that bit of history, nore would it have ended the genocide of so many Jews, Roma, Catholics (Yes there were Catholics masacred) and many others as well. Speak softly and cary a big stick. Diplomacy only works with people of reason and not with people bent on total destruction of another. We have also seen in various points in history opportunities for a diplomatic solution that were disregarded because of other polical reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Good, this is something we should be proud of. Its an indication that people like us and we have far fewer enemies which means our diplomatic and foreign policies are working. We should expand them so we can trim even more wasteful military spending. You mean they like us so much more than the Aussies, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes and Dutch? Dream on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted November 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 (edited) Good, this is something we should be proud of. Its an indication that people like us and we have far fewer enemies which means our diplomatic and foreign policies are working. We should expand them so we can trim even more wasteful military spending. Are you crazy? trim more wasteful military spending?? Its pathitic not anything to be proud of!! Our people in uniform would vomit if they read your post, they are using junk now and you want to cut them even more?? typical Liberal thinking .....you are the reason Liberals will never get in power again ever. What we need is to rearm Canada to the teeth and build our own weapon systems to create jobs! Wars are going to happen we might as well be prepared in case, Do you think the Chinese and Russians aren't planning for military conflict...lol? You had better wake up quick and realize the fantasy world you live in doesn t exist........Canada needs to be ready to defend ourselves and assist NATO in case of conflict ...this is even more important at a time when world economies are on verge of collaspe.... if anything history tells us this is when world conflicts are most likely to occur! If we were really smart we would build Nukes then people might take us seriously, sorry to say but if you have the Bomb people listen! Edited November 20, 2008 by wulf42 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Wulf we agree on many points but even I don't want to see Canada become "armed to the teeth", it's overkill. I would like to see the cf-18's replaced with something better like the raptors or better yet, a jet designed and fab'd in Canada. Along with a revamped Navy stocked again with Canadian built ships and subs. Not ot mention ground force armaments. All built in Canada. That would provide Canadians with jobs for decades and would work to reverse the tide of anti-nationalism we as Canadians seem to be adverse to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted November 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Wulf we agree on many points but even I don't want to see Canada become "armed to the teeth", it's overkill.I would like to see the cf-18's replaced with something better like the raptors or better yet, a jet designed and fab'd in Canada. Along with a revamped Navy stocked again with Canadian built ships and subs. Not ot mention ground force armaments. All built in Canada. That would provide Canadians with jobs for decades and would work to reverse the tide of anti-nationalism we as Canadians seem to be adverse to. Maybe that came out wrong...what i mean is give our Soldiers the best weapons systems available so they can do the job they are asked to do...starting with getting rid of those damn Sea Kings! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 Wulf we agree on many points but even I don't want to see Canada become "armed to the teeth", it's overkill. I would like to see the cf-18's replaced with something better like the raptors or better yet, a jet designed and fab'd in Canada. Along with a revamped Navy stocked again with Canadian built ships and subs. Not ot mention ground force armaments. All built in Canada. That would provide Canadians with jobs for decades and would work to reverse the tide of anti-nationalism we as Canadians seem to be adverse to. I just love how not knowing what you are talking about doesn't stop you from plunging in... for the record I would like to see made in canada jet backs, anti grav boots and death rays... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted November 20, 2008 Report Share Posted November 20, 2008 I just love how not knowing what you are talking about doesn't stop you from plunging in...for the record I would like to see made in canada jet backs, anti grav boots and death rays... Alright M.Dancer explain how what I would propose wouldn't keep Canadians in work for decades. One single ship takes over a year to build. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.