Harper's Tough Talk on Defense and Russia is just empty words

[Argus]

What a wonderful way to treat new members. Some things don't change.

The new member in question deserved it. If you insist on posting angry gibberish without a hint of supporting evidence you get what you deserve.

[Argus]

Ok this once I will explain "out of context" means you use only what you want to use to make an unbalanced comment rather than quoting the whole text.

Posting here means you have to defend every part of what you write. If you can't do it, g'bye.

That you have immigration issues is hardly relevant. Tons of people want to bring their relatives over. And while I have little respect for our current immigration or refugee system I also don't see it as something designed to allow anyone in a given war zone, or even a nation involved in wars or unrest, to come to Canada.

[alexmac]

Argus buddy I am afraid you will have to figure out those questions on your own bro. As far as ranting...well if the truth hurts then maybe you should check out why and not follow blindly. I write to the people we hired in Ottawa as they work for us but as I see many just bend over the table and say I like it and that is something I will never do.

[Argus]

Argus buddy I am afraid you will have to figure out those questions on your own bro. As far as ranting...well if the truth hurts then maybe you should check out why and not follow blindly. I write to the people we hired in Ottawa as they work for us but as I see many just bend over the table and say I like it and that is something I will never do.

The point is that when you make a statement here it's incumbent upon you to back it up. You don't say someone is a crook and is raping Canada and not provide anything more than that. And I don't even LIKE Harper!

There was nothing in that letter you posted about a refugee or immigration issue so I assume you simply wrote about Ukraine. Baird's reply sounded fine to me. I can inform you that a huge number of people write to their MPs in Ottawa every day about immigration issues, mostly about people they want to bring to Canada. You're hardly unique in being dissatisfied. But then, it would not be possible to satisfy everyone.

If it were up to me Canada would retarget its immigration to Europe instead of bringing in people without the education, job skills, or cultural values which make them a poor match for Canada, but I don't get to make those decisions.

As far as 'following blindly' I STARTED this topic. You might want to read the original post I made.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Argus

[alexmac]

I did back it up , I called him a thief and that he is a liar and is going to go down in Canadian history as the worst leader yet.

In the house of commons they may have to use the word "honorable" but respect is earned not bestowed , I do not respect the man or the party.

When I last checked this was a free country and freedom of speech was still valid or are you trying to change that. Oh you may want to read the changes they made in the last budget with all the add ons....you might be interested to see how many freedoms we are about to lose and that my young friend is up to you to read as I already have. Also read the members statements from the past 7 months then you will understand why I am saying all this.

Also you assumed wrong the letter was cautioning them on starting a free trade deal with Ukraine...check out the date.

[Argus]

I did back it up , I called him a thief and that he is a liar and is going to go down in Canadian history as the worst leader yet.

Making a statement of fact requires some evidence. Supplying that evidence is 'backing it up'. You have failed to do that.

Also, calling him names is against the rules here.

When I last checked this was a free country and freedom of speech was still valid or are you trying to change that.

I'm explaining the rules to you here. Calling people names is against the rules, that includes calling Harper names. As far as freedom of speech goes you can' call someone a thief without evidence or you'll get sued in real life.

Oh you may want to read the changes they made in the last budget with all the add ons....you might be interested to see how many freedoms we are about to lose and that my young friend is up to you to read as I already have. Also read the members statements from the past 7 months then you will understand why I am saying all this.

This is all just general ravings without any specifics or citations to back it up.

[Derek 2.0]

No one expects Liberals to give a damn about defense or the military. We expected better of a 'conservative' government.,

Then again, this isn't really a conservative government, now it is.

The form of “Conservatism” to which you apparently subscribe; drastic increase in defence funding, a xenophobic immigration system, eugenics/forced abortion of disabled fetuses, the banning of privately owned firearms etc. is fortunately not electable within Canada…..maybe the Wiemer Republic….but not Canada.

None the less, reductions to Government spending and in this case, targeted spending with DND, coupled with the top-down review, ongoing, to redefine what role and direction the forces should take, is a conservative approach………pissing money away on a broken system is not.

[Argus]

The form of “Conservatism” to which you apparently subscribe; drastic increase in defence funding, a xenophobic immigration system, eugenics/forced abortion of disabled fetuses, the banning of privately owned firearms etc. is fortunately not electable within Canada…..maybe the Wiemer Republic….but not Canada.

I think the word you're searching for, Derek, the kind of conservatism you fear is called 'conservative'.

Your sneering insinuations aside, I haven't advocated eugenics, and my only demand of immigration is it produces the best new citizens we can get.

But the accusation of Nazism are something I'm used to from diehard lefties, and aside from your fetish about firearms you're clearly very much on the 'progressive' side of this progressive conservative government, so I can see your outrage and indignation that I'd advocate more money for defense and suggest bringing in immigrants whose cultural values are similar to ours.

Perhaps people like me need to restart a Reform party and leave you and the other progressives with your little rump junior liberals still trumpeting how true blue you are while you spend us into the ground on circuses and social programs.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Argus

[Argus]

The interesting thing about this report is the astonishing suggestion that Canada ought to decide what it needs and wants to do with its military, and then apply sufficient funds to do it, as opposed to simply cutting funds haphazardly without a thought about the effect. Of course, DND sneeringly rejected it. DND has been Ottawa's most incompetently run department for most of my life. Personally, I think we should fire everyone over the rank of major, or tear the whole thing down and start over.

“Ignoring defence requirements based on what the outside world looks like and not doing anything about it, is tantamount to a delinquency of one’s government duty,” the report concluded.

“Fiscal pressures are leading to cuts to defence, based more on the balance sheet than on what a nation wishes to do in the world. For Canada, cuts to capability, delay or elimination of procurements, or reduction in readiness are imposed without the benefit of a foreign policy and defence review to articulate our national interests.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/09/03/john-ivison-dnd-brass-tenaciously-do-nothing-in-face-of-warning-over-canadian-military-disarray/

[Derek 2.0]

I think the word you're searching for, Derek, the kind of conservatism you fear is called 'conservative'.

Your sneering insinuations aside, I haven't advocated eugenics, and my only demand of immigration is it produces the best new citizens we can get.

But the accusation of Nazism are something I'm used to from diehard lefties, and aside from your fetish about firearms you're clearly very much on the 'progressive' side of this progressive conservative government, so I can see your outrage and indignation that I'd advocate more money for defense and suggest bringing in immigrants whose cultural values are similar to ours.

Perhaps people like me need to restart a Reform party and leave you and the other progressives with your little rump junior liberals still trumpeting how true blue you are while you spend us into the ground on circuses and social programs.

If you consider your unelectable political beliefs “intelligent”, I very much hope you and any other extremists do leave the party, so as to be further marginalized in the fringes where you belong…….thankfully, the vast majority of the electorate’s views don’t align with your perverse world views.

[Derek 2.0]

“Ignoring defence requirements based on what the outside world looks like and not doing anything about it, is tantamount to a delinquency of one’s government duty,” the report concluded.

“Fiscal pressures are leading to cuts to defence, based more on the balance sheet than on what a nation wishes to do in the world. For Canada, cuts to capability, delay or elimination of procurements, or reduction in readiness are imposed without the benefit of a foreign policy and defence review to articulate our national interests.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/09/03/john-ivison-dnd-brass-tenaciously-do-nothing-in-face-of-warning-over-canadian-military-disarray/

The report fails to put the horse before the cart…….It’s contention that DND is in disarray (and has been since the late 1960s) is very correct, but pouring money into a broken system, without a proper direction defined first, only ensures a more expensive disarray……….

A new “White Paper” on defense is needed first, a roadmap that also shares a general consensus between both the Conservatives and Liberals, so as to ensure a multigenerational transformation can be seeded and allowed to grow through changes of Government to allow a semblance of stability.

Only once this is achieved, should increases to funding be granted….

With that said, I do agree fully with its contention that DND is plagued by significant bureaucratic bloat, coupled with politically motivated largess, namely real estate and driven procurement……in these areas the report is bang on.

[Moonbox]

Ok this once I will explain "out of context" means you use only what you want to use to make an unbalanced comment rather than quoting the whole text.

The whole text didn't need to be quoted, and as per the forum rules we're asked to only quote what's necessary.

Saying I've quoted you out of context suggests that your meaning wasn't clear without the accompanying text, or that I misportrayed it and attributed it to a different topic. Your statement that I quoted, however, was unequivocal. You said:

"I do not support any party as they are all crooks and Harper will go down in history as the biggest so far."

What part of that statement is even remotely unclear to the casual reader? There's little/no room for interpretation there, so the quote was completely contextual. Oops!

Also rhetoric is what our PM does and by blindly supporting that does not make you or anyone else right , but then again it would seem that the country is full of people who believe what this government tells them....BLINDLY...with no grounds or facts and that is dangerous.

What you're doing here is suggesting that anyone who disagrees with you is stupid/foolish/ignorant. Not only is this a childish approach to political debates, you're also being hypocritical. You mention needing 'facts' to support your positions, but you suggested that Harper's campaign was financed by Putin's friends with no facts backing that up. Additionally, campaign financing rules make it pretty much impossible for Russians or Russian companies to have had any impact on Harper's campaign finances, so your statement is foolish on two counts.

4 years ago this government was negotiating a trade deal with the criminal Yanukonvict in hopes that by sending money to the crooks there that they would see the light and change...sounds like Chamberlain when he came back from talking with Hitler.

Ah, there it is, the ultimately fallacy, the pinnacle of incompetent arguments! Godwin's Law fulfilled! That sure didn't take you very long. When Harper negotiated minor trade deals with the elected Yanukovych, that was JUST like Chamberlain giving Czechoslovakia to Hitler, right!? It takes a special type of intellect to make that comparison.

So when I talk it is from experience and knowledge and if that does not fit into your realm well to bad but please learn and read before replying again it would go a long ways to knowing what is actually going on.

While you may have more experience with Ukraine than I do, you appear to have very little experience making rational arguments. You're very obviously speaking from an angry personal bias rather than facts and reason.

Edited September 5, 2014 by Moonbox

[Argus]

If you consider your unelectable political beliefs “intelligent”, I very much hope you and any other extremists do leave the party,

LOL! That's EXACTLY what the old liberals in charge of the Progressive Conservatives said!

Unelectable? This is the refrain of the Progressive Conservative "Nothing matters but being in power". You stand for nothing. You accomplish nothing. You have no plans, no policies, no ideas, no values. You just want to be in power to be in power. You're a bunch of Chretienites!

When Harper is booted out, what will his legacy be? Can you come with anything at all? Anything?

The reason for a political party is to develop policies and ideas you belief are right for Canada, and then convince the electorate to support those polices.

Clearly that means you need a leader with at least a modicum of charisma, of course, which you don't have. So you've settled on polling to find out what you think people want, and then offering it to them -- EXACTLY like the Liberals.

so as to be further marginalized in the fringes where you belong…….thankfully, the vast majority of the electorate’s views don’t align with your perverse world views.

The vast majority of the electorate hate you and your party and everything it fails to stand for. They find your party mean spirited, vindictive, and paranoid. When it was seen as at least moderately capable economically, and there were no reasonable alternatives, they bit their tongues and voted for them, but that's no longer the case on either side. Harper's economic record is not enviable, and Trudeau presents a change from the meanness of Harper people have grown tired of.

As to your belief that only the 'fringes' support the conservative ideals Stephen Harper and Preston Manning used to espouse, well, that also is part and parcel of the inbred world of the Progressive Conservative zealot. It's what destroyed the party before, and what will destroy it again. Look at you now, spitting mad, raging, because I dared to complain how Harper struts and pretends to admire the military even while slashing its budget. Like the party he's built, you can't abide any criticism, and your instant response is to go into full bore assault mode against whoever has disagreed with you.

I'm not fond of Trudeau, but even I am willing to admit he sounds and looks like a breath of fresh air compared to the meanness and empty promises of the progressive conservatives.

[Argus]

With that said, I do agree fully with its contention that DND is plagued by significant bureaucratic bloat, coupled with politically motivated largess, namely real estate and driven procurement……in these areas the report is bang on.

Too bad the Conservatives didn't do something about that sometime in the last decade, eh?

[Derek 2.0]

As to your belief that only the 'fringes' support the conservative ideals Stephen Harper and Preston Manning used to espouse, well, that also is part and parcel of the inbred world of the Progressive Conservative zealot. It's what destroyed the party before, and what will destroy it again. Look at you now, spitting mad, raging, because I dared to complain how Harper struts and pretends to admire the military even while slashing its budget. Like the party he's built, you can't abide any criticism, and your instant response is to go into full bore assault mode against whoever has disagreed with you.

The ethos spouted by the early days of the Reform party were not electable, and doubly so, those with shared views such as yourself, being a cancer to any mainstream political party……..Canadians, by and large, are centrists, and extremist vitriol spewed by people like you (or from the extreme left) will never be elected by a centrist populace……..as such, this is why your desired form of governance is only found in despotic regimes.

This is why the lunatic fringe, is found on the fringes of society and not the mainstream.......

[Derek 2.0]

Too bad the Conservatives didn't do something about that sometime in the last decade, eh?

The institutional changes required at DND will require decades to implement…..it is clearly easier to destroy something, as was done during the middle to late 1960s, then it is to rebuild something.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Derek 2.0

[Argus]

The ethos spouted by the early days of the Reform party were not electable, and doubly so, those with shared views such as yourself, being a cancer to any mainstream political party……..Canadians, by and large, are centrists, and extremist vitriol spewed by people like you (or from the extreme left) will never be elected by a centrist populace……..as such, this is why your desired form of governance is only found in despotic regimes.

This is why the lunatic fringe, is found on the fringes of society and not the mainstream.......

And can you suggest a single thing I've said which can honestly qualify as either "fringe" or "lunatic"

I'm reminded of how Obama campaigned on a public health care option, yet after he was elected his chief of staff did an interview about his new health care plan in which he sneered contemptuously at the idea of public health care, as if was an absurd idea despite the fact every poll has shown Americans want it.

Your anger and outrage is simply over the fact that I remind you that your party stands for nothing, and that it is nothing more than a continuation of the Chretien government in terms of ambition and accomplishment.

Health care? Harper has done nothing to prepare for an aging population. Native affairs? Nothing. Reforming the military? Nothing. Environmental issues? Nothing. Inter-provincial trade? Nothing. He's paid back not one cent of the debt, but raised it higher. He's tinkered slightly with law and order issues, but many of his bills have been struck down by a Supreme Court largely made up of his own appointees. As for open government, it is to laugh. The man who cried for open government is running the most secretive and paranoid government in Canadian history. The Conservatives crouch over the government like Gollum with his ring "Mine! Mine!" they hiss, looking around with paranoid, suspicious eyes! "No one can touch my preciousssss!"

And the reason Harper has accomplished nothing is because he won't go near anything that might be controversial or complicated, like reforming health care or native affairs. His single-minded fixation is on retaining power at any cost - even if he hasn't got the balls to do anything with it.

And here you are, a member of the Gollum party, hissing at me furiously. What a joke.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Argus

[Argus]

The institutional changes required at DND will require decades to implement…..it is clearly easier to destroy something, as was done during the middle to late 1960s, then it is to rebuild something.

Decades? Then perhaps they should have started a decade ago. They've done nothing. Harper started out swaggering about what a great supporter of the military he was, but once the institutional malaise started embarrassing him he shunned the military. Too much trouble.

[Derek 2.0]

And the reason Harper has accomplished nothing is because he won't go near anything that might be controversial or complicated, like reforming health care or native affairs. His single-minded fixation is on retaining power at any cost - even if he hasn't got the balls to do anything with it.

And here you are, a member of the Gollum party, hissing at me furiously. What a joke.

Do you eat an apple in one bit? As I’ve already stated, your extremist dogma would never be adopted by any party that hoped to one day govern, you can’t legislate from the fringes……….

[Derek 2.0]

Decades? Then perhaps they should have started a decade ago. They've done nothing. Harper started out swaggering about what a great supporter of the military he was, but once the institutional malaise started embarrassing him he shunned the military. Too much trouble.

The required transformation, if it was then defined, could not have been adopted well energies were focused in the deserts and mountains of Afghanistan……

[Army Guy]

Perhaps what Canada needs is for an organization like W-5 to do a full one hour piece on the state of todays DND, from cover to cover, it's people , it's equipment, and what DND provides the tax payer..... Not many Canadians know much about this topic, nor do they care.....I think if they knew the status of it's military today it would make them sick....or atleast more interested.....i think we owe it's present and past serving members atleast that....

DND is not just sick, but in my opinion is in terminal condition....and like it has been said here alot of band aids have been applied but the problem has not been addressed.....we 've been wondering around the desert for years with no clear direction given...

I agree with alot of Argus pionts, he is frustrated, as are DND's members who are now starting to leave in larger numbers, myself included, passing on the torch to the next generation, that has no direction or focus....Like my father said once before he retired, leaving the Military is like pulling your hand out of a bucket of water.....your departure makes little difference.

I also agree with Dereck, this will not happen over night.....but what needs to be done is Canadians need to agree there is a problem and come up with a solution.....

[Argus]

Do you eat an apple in one bit? As I’ve already stated, your extremist dogma would never be adopted by any party that hoped to one day govern, you can’t legislate from the fringes……….

I'm still waiting to hear you back up your accusation that I'm on the fringes, or that my positions are 'extremist'. You seem to have forgotten my polite request there. I'm going to continue to issue it. Do please show me what 'extremist' positions I hold.

And if you aren't going to govern according to any particular principals, ideology, or vision, why govern at all? Why are the conservatives in power if not to implement conservative policies?

And again, you can't point to any accomplishment after eight years in power. You don't think that's pathetic?

[Argus]

The required transformation, if it was then defined, could not have been adopted well energies were focused in the deserts and mountains of Afghanistan……

Bullshit. The enormous issues of leadership and responsibility have been clearly known for decades. The bureaucrats back in Ottawa, both the civilians and the ones with crowns on their shoulders are far more concerned with their little empires and their personal careers than with the well-being of the military. Recruitment is an unmitigated disaster. Procurement is a joke. The tooth to tail ratio is far too long. We have too many bureaucrats and not enough spear carriers, and far too many senior officers. And that's been the case for decades.

And NOTHING has been done to resolve or improve any of it. You sound like a bureaucrat making excuses.

[Big Guy]

...

DND is not just sick, but in my opinion is in terminal condition....and like it has been said here alot of band aids have been applied but the problem has not been addressed.....we 've been wondering around the desert for years with no clear direction given...

...

I agree that it is time that the USA and Canada both take a serious look at and review their foreign policies. It seems to have no direction or reason to it. A decision has to be made as to what criteria has to be applied to consider who/what is an enemy, what will be the form of combat in the future (if any), do we try to match the USA armaments or complement them, how much we are prepared to spend on the DND. Most important, a process that triggers Canadian involvement in a conflict. Do we get involved only when our Canadian security interest are in danger?

I would like to see something like the Powell Doctrine officially established for Canada.

The Powell Doctrine states that a list of questions all have to be answered affirmatively before military action is taken by the United States:

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7. Is the action supported by the American people?
8. Do we have genuine broad international support?

We cannot afford to keep getting into the USA (Canada - me too) poorly planned wars.

[Army Guy]

I think a new white paper , more to the piont a realistic white paper would address most concerns....I don't think we as a Nation have the military might to actually make any significant contribution, again'st a well armed enemy....we had a really tough time with putting boots on the ground for an insurgency....so getting involved in say Ukraine would be a small contribution. i think right now we only have a company of paras in poland....

Problem with white papers is they only address short term and can be replaced with a newer verision on the next election....what needs to happen i think in my opinion is something needs to be placed in law, something that states min and max troops levels, and a long term plan for our military laid out and each party forced to follow that plan....I'm not even sure if that is possiable but every 4 years the plan changes then changes again once the new CDS takes over...

But as long as the people remain distant towards the military, nothing will change....the public needs to be well informed, it needs to pay more than lip service to our defence needs, not just DND but to the 1/2 dozen of other depts that form our defence network.....

Sticking our heads in the sand "and mumbling we have no threats" or let the US handle it , is just asking for trouble.....