Our military, and how it has been treated by governments past and pres

[WestCoastRunner]

Probably, except we'd also likely proceed from there with a more aware and skeptical populace and less emboldened politicians.

At the very least, it would awaken the next generation. My young adult kids have absolutely no understanding of the military and conscription etc. They have not given it a second thought. Our children need to be made more aware of these military issues and Canada's role.

I think Canada has lost the way with the next generation. I can assure you that my daughter and husband would absolutely forbid their very young sons to be conscripted in any war and would vote out any politician that suggests this.

We have a new generation that thinks differently and a younger PM. It will be interesting to see what kind of role Canada takes on in the future. I know for a fact that my kids and their friends love JT and his stance.

[eyeball]

I know I see that too. I still think Justin Trudeau is the most naive PM we've ever had. Beyond getting elected I really haven't got a clue what his stance is. At least with Harper we knew exactly what we were getting even if we didn't know why or how or for whom.

He's against war but also for it, he's for legalizing things but not decriminalizing them. He's a classic mushy Liberal.

As has been pointed out many times the day to day differences between liberals and conservatives (as opposed to Liberals and Conservatives) are so minor as to be moot. I suspect the differences are even less obvious to the enemies we're making in the world.

[WestCoastRunner]

I know I see that too. I still think Justin Trudeau is the most naive PM we've ever had. Beyond getting elected I really haven't got a clue what his stance is. At least with Harper we knew exactly what we were getting even if we didn't know why or how or for whom.

He's against war but also for it, he's for legalizing things but not decriminalizing them. He's a classic mushy Liberal.

As has been pointed out many times the day to day differences between liberals and conservatives (as opposed to Liberals and Conservatives) are so minor as to be moot. I suspect the differences are even less obvious to the enemies we're making in the world.

Let's hope that JT is given time to find his place. I really believe that he will be a great leader for Canada.

[Army Guy]

Not sure what you are on about here. I never made any such claim. And you're the one cherry picking numbers by only counting certain roles. That would be like me deriving stats on fishing fatalities from a set that only included fisherman who fished in huge storms.

The statistics are clear... being a Canadian soldier is safer than being an average Canadian civilian.

This discussion is about Canadian soldiers how were either injured or killed in the Afghanistan conflict.....and them not getting the help they need....."You" decided to take this down another rabbit hole by introducing this statement, That being a soldier is a much safer environment than being a Canadian Civilian.....You go on to introduce a source that uses the time frame from 1974 until 2006.....which hardly covers the period of time we were originally talking about The Afghan conflict.....Instead proves nothing other than the fact that during those years of peace time, it was safer being a soldier than a regular civilian.....So it is moot.....you then carry on with other comparisons which are more dangerous...to which I said that was not what the topic at hand was about.....

Still following me ....you continue to brush off the facts that our AFGHANISTAN vets are not being treated fairly by using some job comparison and the danger they face.....As for my numbers being cherry picked....yes they where, it shows that being a Canadian Infantry soldier during the Afghanistan conflict was a lot more dangerous than being a regular Canadian citizen.

Where the facts and stats are also clear....1 out of every 4 infantry men and women were wounded or killed in this conflict....those numbers become more diluted when compared to the entire Canadian military numbers, and yet they are much higher than any....and i'll repeat this so there is no misunderstanding "Any" regular Canadian citizens occupation.....

It was you who set out the conditions of what is more the definition of "dangerous" by solely counting the deaths occurred while carrying out their occupations.....

All you have to do is the math.....and it clearly spells it out....

[Wilber]

Okay Wilber I get it, you support the war, without any questions.

Do you see what I just did there?

This thread is about supporting the people we sent there and came back broken as a result, not about whether I support a war. You obviously only support people on your terms according to your ideology.

[eyeball]

Let's hope that JT is given time to find his place. I really believe that he will be a great leader for Canada.

We can always hope but I think Canadians are in for a big disappointment myself.

[eyeball]

This thread is about supporting the people we sent there and came back broken as a result, not about whether I support a war. You obviously only support people on your terms according to your ideology.

Yes my support is definitely a lot more conditional. Why shouldn't it be, tradition or patriotism? Meh

Edited March 12, 2016 by eyeball

[WestCoastRunner]

This thread is about supporting the people we sent there and came back broken as a result, not about whether I support a war. You obviously only support people on your terms according to your ideology.

That's not my take on this thread.

[WestCoastRunner]

We can always hope but I think Canadians are in for a big disappointment myself.

I'm a JT fan. I don't think I'll be disappointed.

[Wilber]

Yes my support is definitely a lot more conditional. Why shouldn't it be, tradition or patriotism? Meh

Ya, you would take it out on the people who suffered and died doing what this country asked them to do just because you are pissed off at the government. Classic blame the victim.

[Wilber]

That's not my take on this thread.

Did you read the OP?

[eyeball]

Ya, you would take it out on the people who suffered and died doing what this country asked them to do just because you are pissed off at the government. Classic blame the victim.

I'd take it out on and blame the people who've insisted on fighting an ignoble war on behalf of ignoble allies and who've spat on anyone who thought doing so was wrong.

[eyeball]

Soldier's Heart

It's a concept in progress, defined as the result of taking part in or witnessing something of consequence that you find wrong, something which violates your deeply held beliefs about yourself and your role in the world. For a moment, at least, you become what you never wanted to be. While the symptoms and causes may overlap with PTSD, moral injury arises from what you did or failed to do, rather than from what was done to you. It's a sickness of the heart more than the head. Or, possibly, moral injury is what comes first and, if left unattended, can congeal into PTSD.

Given the moral and cognitive dissonance this stupid war is steeped in a memorial would be a real insult to anyone suffering the above.

[Wilber]

I'd take it out on and blame the people who've insisted on fighting an ignoble war on behalf of ignoble allies and who've spat on anyone who thought doing so was wrong.

Like many, I am conflicted about this war. I don't like the idea of becoming involved in foreign wars more than most other people and I don't know whether our contribution will prove worthwhile because ultimately the Afghanis will have will have to do it themselves. I also wonder what will happen to all those people (women and girls in particular) who want nothing more than what we believe to be basic rights, if the Taliban manages to drag them back into the medieval darkness they imposed before we went. For at least trying to make a difference at great personal cost to themselves, our military has my gratitude and respect.

Edited March 13, 2016 by Wilber

[Topaz]

I bet if we had all the info of other countries, I say, they may not be looking after their soldiers any better than Canada, which I believe should have top rated care. After listening to one program out of the US, I say Canada is doing a better job than the US, of course, they have more injured soldiers and at one time their vet hotline for help had over 800,000 calls in one day, probably repeat calls because they couldn't get a live person to talk too.

[jacee]

I just was reading some of the recent status updates in particular the one on the liberals canceling or side lining the war memorial. and the outrage it has caused....

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/afghan-war-memorial-in-limbo-as-liberals-roll-back-perceived-tory-militarism

As a military veteran of that conflict I wanted to share a few thoughts....

Is this really the best way we can honor our Afghan vets, by building something out of stone , putting a few names on a wall that most will not even know or care about. That most vets will never see in the first place. If I had a choice between this wall, or using that funding to really help our vets that truly need it then I vote for the latter.....

I agree with Army Guy.

I'd like to see soldiers who died remembered publicly in their communities, as they were in the past:

Not to glorify war, but to remind us that when we allow our politicians to send soldiers into war, some of them WILL die, maybe someone you know personally, somebody's kid, brother, a child's father.

However, I don't think we need a National memorial. That money and more should be put into programs to help soldiers and families still suffering the effects of wars we're not sure we should have sent them to.

.

Edited March 13, 2016 by jacee

[poochy]

Someday under a sky of sunshine and lollipops everyone will choose to be nice to each other.

[Cl Le]

I truly feel sorry for the brave men and women of our military , they deserve so much better than a Liberal government run by Trudeau Jr . His comment regarding ISIS spoke volumes " We are not at war with ISIS. " Pretty sure Justin has us covered Canada , his new friend Ban Ki Moon is going to write ISIS a sternly worded letter letting them know how much Canada does not approve of mass murder , slavery , rape , public be-headings and destruction of historic sights . Ban Ki Moon is the master of nasty letters , ISIS will be perfectly willing to accept a full surrender on Trudeau's terms . Those Liberals and the UN sure have the world figured out. Stay strong military , the Liberals are getting the boot in 2019 !

[Queenmandy85]

Canadians do not want a viable military. I have yet to meet anyone willing to pay for a rebuilt Canadian Armed Forces, or make the commitment that would entail. I've spent years advocating having a defence policy capable of defending this country and advancing our interests but the voters will not support it.

[jacee]

Canadians do not want a viable military. I have yet to meet anyone willing to pay for a rebuilt Canadian Armed Forces, or make the commitment that would entail. I've spent years advocating having a defence policy capable of defending this country

From whom?

and advancing our interests

How?

Where?

.

[eyeball]

Why?

The only direction any remotely possible invasion could come from would be the same that our defenders would. Our interests have got it made in the shade. We're like a Great Blue Heron colony nested around an Eagle's nest whose inhabitants we can depend on to keep all the other eagles away. It's an imminently practical defence strategy that's so natural its almost organic and notwithstanding the odd unwary nestling from time to time it won't cost us a dime.

Heck we could even stoke resentment amongst quarrelsome people abroad and then sell them the weapons they need to prosecute them with.

Win, win, win.

[nerve]

As unlikely as Fenian Invasion 2.0 is, militaries exist because war could happen, and does happen.

I think it is incredibly niave to simply say, oh we'll never be attacked no need for self defence training.

The real question should be.

What does Canada need a military for.

This isn't a realization that helicopters arn't needed on ships because its the Navy.

This is not a but Canada is at peace, why hire soldiers? Tra la la la la. It is a wonderful day in Peace Land.

I think what Canada really needs is to liberalize access to use of force and have more outreach like Poland.

If we have infantry from militia volunteers this frees up tax dollars for higher tech advanced purchases such as vehicles, and advanced sensors and communications. It also provides a larger base to draw professional solidiers from. The reserve is good, but some people may like to help but not be committed to the government but rather committed to the public

https://www.google.ca/search?site=&source=hp&q=invade+canada&oq=invade+canada&gs_l=hp.3..0l3j0i22i30l2j0i22i10i30j0i22i30j0i22i10i30j0i22i30l2.203.1935.0.2141.14.14.0.0.0.0.152.1327.10j4.14.0....0...1c.1.64.hp..0.13.1179.0.K4uho3hynyY

Edited April 15, 2016 by nerve

[bush_cheney2004]

...The only direction any remotely possible invasion could come from would be the same that our defenders would. Our interests have got it made in the shade. We're like a Great Blue Heron colony nested around an Eagle's nest whose inhabitants we can depend on to keep all the other eagles away. It's an imminently practical defence strategy that's so natural its almost organic and notwithstanding the odd unwary nestling from time to time it won't cost us a dime.

Oh...it's natural alright...including the part where the eagles eat the blue heron's eggs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMknkH9LqV4

Edited April 15, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

Oh...it's natural alright...including the part where the eagles eat the blue heron's eggs:

is that the eagle's bullshyte creed that "might makes right"? Of course, Article 5 busts your cutesy lil' analogy, doesn't it? On the other hand, given that kind of nest rattling, perhaps the blue heron might choose to seek the cover of that 2-headed eagle - yes?

.

[eyeball]

Oh...it's natural alright...including the part where the eagles eat the blue heron's eggs:

They don't eat them all and it's a scientific fact that heron populations benefit from their strategy.