Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I see the Trudeau Government is "whipping out" a token force for NATO:

A serious step? :lol: I'm sure Putin is shaking in his boots.

So I take it, the Trudeau defense review is complete? Does that include a more than doubling of the defense budget to come close to reaching the pledged 2% of GDP spending as recently noted by President Obama?

No. It'd be nice if he was at least willing to buy them some trucks so they didn't have to walk, but that's probably asking too much.

Saw a thing in the paper about the reserves being downsized a couple of weeks ago. Then again they don't have the money to pay for training or ammunition anyway.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

  • Replies 700
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

No. It'd be nice if he was at least willing to buy them some trucks so they didn't have to walk, but that's probably asking too much.

Saw a thing in the paper about the reserves being downsized a couple of weeks ago. Then again they don't have the money to pay for training or ammunition anyway.

None of that maters, this is just Liberal window dressing, such a force could very well embolden Putin more if he actually desired to move on said Eastern NATO members.

So Trudeau went after Harper for "whipping out our Hornets" in the fight against ISIS, yet he is attempting to do the exact same thing in Europe with Putin?

Posted

You make out like this was Trudeau's idea. Your partisanship knows no bounds. We all, of course, know that Harper would have been there with bells on.

Posted

You make out like this was Trudeau's idea. Your partisanship knows no bounds. We all, of course, know that Harper would have been there with bells on.

Oh, Trudeau isn't responsible for his decisions? I'm sorry. I keep forgetting we're dealing with Liberals here.

So it wasn't Trudeau who decided to starve the military of funds and then send them overseas?

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

Oh, Trudeau isn't responsible for his decisions? I'm sorry. I keep forgetting we're dealing with Liberals here.

So it wasn't Trudeau who decided to starve the military of funds and then send them overseas?

It would be dishonest to pretend that Harper would have done anything different. He would have been there, and it is he that started the reprofiling of funds (he did it twice - he also had unspent money returned to the treasury), a practice the Liberals started (with good reason - the money can't be spent now on the projects it's allocated to).

Nothing has changed at DND in terms of funding or NATO commitments. If it has, show where.

Posted

It's also a reality that the US asked us to do this. I know that doesn't fit with your truth deficient narrative.

Posted (edited)

It would be dishonest to pretend that Harper would have done anything different. He would have been there, and it is he that started the reprofiling of funds (he did it twice - he also had unspent money returned to the treasury), a practice the Liberals started (with good reason - the money can't be spent now on the projects it's allocated to).

Harper was trying to bring the budget in balance in time for an election. Once the election was over that money would have been spent. Harper didn't starve the military of funds while it was in Afghanistan. Quite the contrary. It was Chretien who sent them to Afghanistan with lousy, rusted out gear.

Trudeau has already allocated the money to social welfare projects and has said he won't be buying anything for the military until at least after the next election. And he's making no guarantees then, either.

Edited by Argus

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

It's also a reality that the US asked us to do this. I know that doesn't fit with your truth deficient narrative.

What does that have to do with anything? Obama knew better than to ask Harper for anything given his multi year political bullshit about the pipeline. He didn't even dare come here because he knew it would come up. All Trudeau needed was a pat on the head and some flattery.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted (edited)

Trudeau has already allocated the money to social welfare projects and has said he won't be buying anything for the military until at least after the next election. And he's making no guarantees then, either.

That's blatantly untrue. Money was moved because projects are already delayed. That's the same reason Harper did the same in 2012 and 2014. Edited by Smallc
Posted

You make out like this was Trudeau's idea. Your partisanship knows no bounds. We all, of course, know that Harper would have been there with bells on.

I'm sure the deployment of Canadian troops overseas crossed Trudeau's desk.............as to "Harper would of done this", there is no evidence of that. The Harper Government had army centric training mission in both Eastern Europe and Iraq, the Trudeau government decided to expand them both well not increasing the budget.

Posted

Nothing has changed at DND in terms of funding or NATO commitments. If it has, show where.

Uh.....what about the deployment of a battlegroup to Europe? You know, what we're talking about.

Posted

What does that have to do with anything? Obama knew better than to ask Harper for anything given his multi year political bullshit about the pipeline. He didn't even dare come here because he knew it would come up. All Trudeau needed was a pat on the head and some flattery.

Are you saying that Harper would have, for the first time, turned down a NATO deployment?

Posted

Uh.....what about the deployment of a battlegroup to Europe? You know, what we're talking about.

Uh, you think that Harper would have said no? Did you live though the last 10 years?

Posted

It's also a reality that the US asked us to do this. I know that doesn't fit with your truth deficient narrative.

Its also a reality that the US asked us to conduct airstrikes against the Islamic State, yet Trudeau thought outerwise..............that doesn't fit with your truth deficient narrative......likewise, the President of the United States urging Canada to vastly increase defense spending

Posted

Uh, you think that Harper would have said no? Did you live though the last 10 years?

I have no idea, Harper's government sent limited resources to both Europe and the Middle East........I've seen zero indication that the previous Government would have embarked on a costly open ended (re)deployment of Canadian Forces to Europe...........

But of course, Harper is not the Prime Minister.

Posted

Its also a reality that the US asked us to conduct airstrikes against the Islamic State, yet Trudeau thought outerwise..............that doesn't fit with your truth deficient narrative......likewise, the President of the United States urging Canada to vastly increase defense spending

And yet, we're spending exactly what the Liberals promised, which is exactly what the Conservatives promises.

Posted

I have no idea, Harper's government sent limited resources to both Europe and the Middle East........I've seen zero indication that the previous Government would have embarked on a costly open ended (re)deployment of Canadian Forces to Europe...........

Well, as someone who supported Harper for most of his tenure, I can tell you that we would have went. Partisanship doesn't change reality.

Posted (edited)

And yet, we're spending exactly what the Liberals promised, which is exactly what the Conservatives promises.

Your point? The Conservatives (and the Liberals) never promised a costly open ended European vacation........yet the Liberals are doing exactly that.

Edited by Derek 2.0
Posted

Well, as someone who supported Harper for most of his tenure, I can tell you that we would have went. Partisanship doesn't change reality.

You're basing this on what? Not that it maters, because your go to distraction (But Harper did it!!!!!) is exactly that.

Posted

You're basing this on what? Not that it maters, because your go to distraction (But Harper did it!!!!!) is exactly that.

There's no distraction or excuse. I would have supported Harper when he said yes just as Isupport Trudeau saying yes.

Posted

Your point? The Conservatives (and the Liberals) never promised a costly open ended European vacation........yet the Liberals are doing exactly that.

At the request of our closest ally.

Posted

There's no distraction or excuse. I would have supported Harper when he said yes just as Isupport Trudeau saying yes.

There is zero indication Harper would have supported such a mission.

Posted

There is zero indication Harper would have supported such a mission.

So you don't support such a mission?

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      11,015
    • Most Online
      2,945

    Newest Member
    agackibal
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...