Wild Bill Posted February 18, 2012 Report Posted February 18, 2012 Just a point it doesn't actually need to be replaced, take for example Costa Rica who doesn't have a military. Being next door to the biggest super power in the world after China and their ally means that we will be well defended. Since our airforce cannot resist the US airforce in a full invasion it really has no role really. I'm surprised you don't see the flaw in your argument. We went through that before, when the Liberals had gutted our military so severely. On the world stage, Canada was often a laughingstock! We were looked upon as deadbeats, who sponged off America. To many countries, that made us America's stooge, since we were dependent on them. When we were called upon to help in UN peacekeeping operations, we were the guys who sent the supply ship - the canteen, in other words. Sure, we sent our F-18s to Kosovo, but the electronics and IFF equipment on them were so obsolete that our communications were not secure from the enemy and our planes could not be reliably identified as friendly. They could have been shot down by friendly fire. So we were relegated to the "housekeeping" missions, in non-critical roles. The "big boys" did the real fighting. Make no mistake about it, the perception of Canada as no longer an influential player on the world stage was very strong and we are only slowly rebuilding it now. Sure, we are influential for our food shipments to poor nations but support from Bangladesh is not the same as sitting on the Security Council. Why do you think we are not on the Security Council now? Some like to say its because we've offended some Islamic fundamentalist nations by being too close to America. Well, if America looks after our defence what are they supposed to think? However, there's an easier explanation. We are just too small and weak for anyone to care! Apparently, you would have us work to become even more so. Somehow, I don't think that will work out quite like you think. Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
punked Posted February 18, 2012 Report Posted February 18, 2012 First no one has cut OAS, and second, I promise you that the Liberals did/would/were going to do all of those things. When have I ever disagreed that the Liberals and Conservatives are the same party with different colours SmallC? Quote
punked Posted February 18, 2012 Report Posted February 18, 2012 Not really. Look at what they're doing with the civil marriage act. Pretty pragmatic and centrist. Look at this pragmatic and centrist government making new rules from those who want to get divorced. I am surprised this pragmatic government thinks of gay couples as "SEPARATE but equal". Come on Smallc I know these guys gave you a huge tax cut but is it really worth your progressive values you use to have? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/bill-to-close-loophole-in-same-sex-marriages-creates-double-standard/article2342275/ Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 18, 2012 Report Posted February 18, 2012 did the libs muzzle scientists ? did the libs make it so you had to rely on fundraisers and donations to make money for your party? did libs axe the long form census.. these were not centrist moves Quote
-TSS- Posted February 18, 2012 Report Posted February 18, 2012 I think having a system like in Canada, or in the UK for that matter, whereby the PM can call an election at a whim or whenever the polls look good, gives an unfair advantage to the government. I'm not saying that having fixed-term parliaments whereby elections only take place on a certain date, no matter how serious a political crisis is going on, would be a better system but something in between those extremes. There should be a chance for an early election but that should not be a light-hearted decision. Quote
fellowtraveller Posted February 18, 2012 Report Posted February 18, 2012 I disagree. If you look at the individual policies emerging they dont ocuppy the same space at all. I do agree that the CPC does occupy much the same space as the Liberals used to own: the centre. And another thing- not only have the CPC moved left, the Canadian electorate have acknowledged that the fuzzy social democrat model beloved of the Liberals as vested by Trudeau senior is increasingly unaffordabke. So in a sense, the elctorate has moved right independently of any part. And guess who they ran into there? Quote The government should do something.
Smallc Posted February 19, 2012 Report Posted February 19, 2012 When have I ever disagreed that the Liberals and Conservatives are the same party with different colours SmallC? Well, you responded to what I said...and that was what I said. Quote
Sa'adoni Posted February 19, 2012 Author Report Posted February 19, 2012 (edited) I'm surprised you don't see the flaw in your argument. We went through that before, when the Liberals had gutted our military so severely. And... the flaw in your logic is that our military wasn't used for defending Canada over that entire period and the gutted military could have done it just as well as no military since there was no invasion.. On the world stage, Canada was often a laughingstock! We were looked upon as deadbeats, who sponged off America. To many countries, that made us America's stooge, since we were dependent on them. They still are. Canada can barely field one division 5000 men and stay operational. They use the same 3 ships for all their overseas operations often in rotatation. You have some sort of "image" of Canada's military I'm not aware of. US home land security is bigger than the combined Canadian forces and paramilitary/police. When we were called upon to help in UN peacekeeping operations, we were the guys who sent the supply ship - the canteen, in other words. Sure, we sent our F-18s to Kosovo, but the electronics and IFF equipment on them were so obsolete that our communications were not secure from the enemy and our planes could not be reliably identified as friendly. They could have been shot down by friendly fire. Why should we be fighting the UN's wars? UN IS AN ORGANIZATION OF PEACE NOT WAR. So we were relegated to the "housekeeping" missions, in non-critical roles. The "big boys" did the real fighting. Make no mistake about it, the perception of Canada as no longer an influential player on the world stage was very strong and we are only slowly rebuilding it now. Sure, we are influential for our food shipments to poor nations but support from Bangladesh is not the same as sitting on the Security Council. LET THE SECURITY COUNCIL DO SECURITY OPERATIONS, CANADA ISN'T INVOLVED IN THAT IT SHOULDN'T BE PAYING FOR THEIR WARS! Why do you think we are not on the Security Council now? Because we don't represent as a country that is nice, and Canada is a US puppet vote. The US wants to limit Canada so it can dominate it more. Some like to say its because we've offended some Islamic fundamentalist nations by being too close to America. Well, if America looks after our defence what are they supposed to think? However, there's an easier explanation. THE US DOESN'T NEED OUR HELP, and WE SHOULDN'T BE FIGHTING THEIR WARS OF OFFENSE AND INVASION. We are just too small and weak for anyone to care! Apparently, you would have us work to become even more so. Somehow, I don't think that will work out quite like you think. Canada's defence policy will not be greatly enhanced by debt spending for 50 stealth attack aircraft and a bunch of expensive boats. It is a policy of bombing and blockade it is not a defence policy, it is an offence policy. Canada needs a total rethink of its defence policy and productive use of the Canadian forces. It is just a waste of tax payer dollars the way it is being pursued, and it will only cost more money down the road. Defence is defence not offence. Defence Spending does not equal defence benefit. Good spending is good for benefits bad spending is not. Mexico for instance has a military twice the size of canada for about $50 per capita, Canada is spending somewhere between $300 and $3000 per capita. (the $3000 figure is based on forward projected spending allocated today that is money the current government is spending from future governments defence budgets ex. they are spending the budgets of the next 10 years of defence spending on todays purchases removing future purchasing ability - these purchases today will be worth less 5 years from now when technology has made the current purchases obsolete) Take for instance the f35 project - it is already a decade old technology. The naval ship building program doesn't incorporate even modern technologies in their designs. They are basically throwing away money on equipment that is barely feasible for todays needs if even feasible for the needs today - it will not reflect tomorrows needs - unless you say that we don't need arctic capable aircraft in 2020 because there will be no arctic by that point, and when they leave service in 2040 we will be a tropical location. IF anyone thinks their stealth or other tech will be "useful" even after 5 years of service they are out of touch. The only use they are at that point is attacking countries that don't even have equipment that can transport them to Canada... The project made a little sense a few years ago when the timeline and costs somewhat reflected the 2000 costs and timeline, now it is being pushed back further and further at higher and higher costs. THe project is 4 years behind on delivering a decade old technology. It will already be out of generation by the time it is deployed. 20 years old by the time it is being flown and Canada will be stuck with 20 year old technology for another 20 years. http://blogs.canada.com/2012/02/16/f-35-spiral-dive-puts-rcaf-fleet-size-in-doubt/ Canada needs its own program, developed by Canadians for Canadians, built in Canada, and by people who arn't about money but about making an aircraft within budget constraints. Edited February 19, 2012 by Sa'adoni Quote
eyeball Posted February 20, 2012 Report Posted February 20, 2012 On the world stage, Canada was often a laughingstock! We were looked upon as deadbeats, who sponged off America. To many countries, that made us America's stooge, since we were dependent on them. Now we're dependent on China. Way to go team. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Wild Bill Posted February 20, 2012 Report Posted February 20, 2012 (edited) And... the flaw in your logic is that our military wasn't used for defending Canada over that entire period and the gutted military could have done it just as well as no military since there was no invasion.. Why should we be fighting the UN's wars? UN IS AN ORGANIZATION OF PEACE NOT WAR. LET THE SECURITY COUNCIL DO SECURITY OPERATIONS, CANADA ISN'T INVOLVED IN THAT IT SHOULDN'T BE PAYING FOR THEIR WARS! Canada needs a total rethink of its defence policy and productive use of the Canadian forces. It is just a waste of tax payer dollars the way it is being pursued, and it will only cost more money down the road. Defence is defence not offence. Defence Spending does not equal defence benefit. Good spending is good for benefits bad spending is not. Canada needs its own program, developed by Canadians for Canadians, built in Canada, and by people who arn't about money but about making an aircraft within budget constraints. Man, you just don't seem to understand cause and effect! We need our own program, built in Canada? We could never afford it! This isn't 1939 where almost any country can set up a factory to make Lee-Enfield rifles! No, that ship has sailed long ago. Modern equipment needs a large infrastructure to produce weapons and materiel. How would you like your taxes tripled to pay for it? We no longer have such infrastructure and would have to produce it from scratch! We are lucky that we will be using engineering blueprints developed by our NATO allies to build our own ships. We no longer could afford to design things ourselves. Engineers and their labs don't come for free and you can't erect a useful new engineering institute in a weekend. As for aircraft, Diefenbaker killed that industry when he axed the Arrow. What you are really saying is not that we should develop our own. In the real world, if we did it your way we would have very little at all! As for the rest of your argument, we will just have to agree to disagree. It is obvious that you don't support a Canadian role as a peacekeeper, for your arguments would mean that we had no effective armament to enforce any peace! You speak only of our own defence. That would mean no ability to help defend others. Reading your words gives me mental pictures of Ruanda massacres everywhere, forever! That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. Since I don't share it we have little to talk about. Edited February 20, 2012 by Wild Bill Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
PIK Posted February 21, 2012 Report Posted February 21, 2012 I'm thinking we'll see some Mulroney majority seat numbers for Harper. With the new seats , yes we will. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Sa'adoni Posted February 21, 2012 Author Report Posted February 21, 2012 (edited) Man, you just don't seem to understand cause and effect! We need our own program, built in Canada? We could never afford it! You are wrong. It would cost atleast 20% less than buying US planes. Most of the f35 costs were R&D bloat. There is nothing new on the f35 so why the many billions on R&D this time around, for a made in Canada aircraft? The US did this with our avro for its Jet fighters. This isn't 1939 where almost any country can set up a factory to make Lee-Enfield rifles! Thats right today almost any country can set up factories for fighter jets. The rest is just Naysaying you bring nothing but the realization that Canada doesn't have money for the f35 either. It makes far more sense to keep the debt in Canada amongst Canadians than border to give money to Americans in the tune of billions. Comeon lets just order 1 and make some clones. Iran got a stealth drone for free... Israel is getting rebates. Canada should go it its own. Edited February 21, 2012 by Sa'adoni Quote
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.