Army Guy Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 It appears, according to sources, that the CDS advised that we take this role. How else do you interpret him seeing it as an opportunity? Perhaps Gen Vance see that with out any missions or operations on going one of the sure fire methods to secure extra funding is to be involved....scraps from the big table are better than nothing....But this funding comes at a cost dead soldiers.....something many Canadians are good with.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Smallc Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 Perhaps Gen Vance see that with out any missions or operations on going one of the sure fire methods to secure extra funding is to be involved....scraps from the big table are better than nothing....But this funding comes at a cost dead soldiers.....something many Canadians are good with.... Apparently the CDS is good with dead soldiers too. Opportunity, right? I know several military members who don't share your dim view of the current shape of the forces. Apparently, the CDS is among them. BTW, we already do sit at the big table. We have the 6th largest budget in NATO. Quote
Army Guy Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 As to your last colorful but distasteful comparison, I am very comfortable as to my attitude towards my country and have no intention or need try to convince others of my patriotism. I support my country, my government, proud of being Canadian and will continue to do so and defend it when I see it disrespected. It was your intention to question mine though, because you think that I am showing disrespect towards this government,past governments along with it's citizens through questioning how we as a nation treat our soldiers....I here I thought we lived in a democracy, with freedom of speech and others.....But instead of you debating the topic you attack me, and question my patriotism....like wanting a defense department that does not put undo risk to it's soldiers is a taboo topic.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 You owe it to Canadians. That is the choice that you made. That is the choice you seem to question in every one of your posts. If you don't understand him questioning your patriotism, you should probably go back and read your own words. Your right Smallc I do owe it to Canadians, I owe them all the good and all the bad, which is my point, but all you want to here is the good, no one wants to here about the bad, I guess I should just shut up and be grateful for what I have is that your message here. Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 Apparently the CDS is good with dead soldiers too. Opportunity, right? I know several military members who don't share your dim view of the current shape of the forces. Apparently, the CDS is among them. BTW, we already do sit at the big table. We have the 6th largest budget in NATO. I'm sure the CDS is looking at the big picture, and what is best for the institution, and balancing that with whats best for the nation. a tough choice, but i'm sure he is not good with a few dead soldiers...But given the circumstances perhaps the risks are worth the rewards....Ironic that we as a nation have placed him in that situation... As for my dim view, nothing I have not presented facts to back it up with....facts that you yourself have either ignored or written of as rants on my part....it does not change the situation the forces are faced with, nor everything that has been published in the media already....and while you see roses, I smell shit..... http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-defence-spending-brian-stewart-1.3242611 And I am positive if you sat down with the CDS and asked the question 'If he could do anything for the military what would that be, I am sure it would have a long list of things that need to be corrected, or looked at TODAY... http://www.defenseone.com/politics/2015/06/nato-members-defense-spending-two-charts/116008/ In 2015 Canada rates 22 and out of 29 NATO countries. http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/15/news/nato-spending-countries/index.html http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nato-commander-trump-comments-1.3559234 Canada signed on to meeting that target in 2006 but has not reached the goal. Canada's spending comes in at one per cent of GDP, or roughly $20 billion a year, a figure that some have argued is too low to sustain a modern military force. Only five other countries of the 28 in NATO spend less. Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Argus Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 I suggest that you limit yourself to issues within the scope of your questionable reality. Leave adult issues to adults. There is maturity and then there is senility. I think you confuse those, as well. Quote "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
Argus Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 I think you'd better read the quote again. It was General Vance that suggested we take the leadership role. General Vance says whatever he's told to say. Quote "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
Argus Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 You owe it to Canadians. That is the choice that you made. That is the choice you seem to question in every one of your posts. If you don't understand him questioning your patriotism, you should probably go back and read your own words. So you believe in the Turkish model of democracy, too? Unstinting, unhesitating support for anything the leader says, does wants or wishes? And you call that patriotism? You don't know the meaning of the word. Quote "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
Argus Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 I know several military members who don't share your dim view of the current shape of the forces. That sounds like one of those internet "Some of my best friends are Jews" statements. Quote "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
Army Guy Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 A soldier that serves in the Princess Patricia's Light Infantry (PPCLI), one of the most revered and respected infantry units of the past century, has told me that they are allocated only 49 rounds for the entire training year due to budget cuts. The PPCLI's service in World War I and II and Korea and thereafter is what legends are made of. Yet now they train with less than 50 bullets a year. Another unit that has paved the way for Canadian freedom and democracy is that of the Royal Canadian Regiment or the RCR. 1 and 3 RCR are posted to Petawawa, Ontario. 1RCR was a mechanized infantry unit until recently when it began training as a light infantry unit again. This was not a tactical decision but a budgetary one. The maintenance and upkeep of the LAVIII vehicles is too much for the unit and has caused their fleet to be grounded. If you go to the base you can see the LAVS sitting there under piles of snow. Recent wars have shown that mechanized infantry has been proven to be essential to modern warfare. So what is the root cause of this? I think there are three major flaws that are contributing to this downward spiral. The reason that the Canadian Forces is having such a hard time retaining and recruiting troops is because of budget cuts, the state of the equipment, and the knowledge that if you are injured on the job you will not be properly taken care of by Veterans Affairs. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/bruce-moncur/canadian-forces_b_6407088.html http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/jonathan-wade/canadian-army-reserve_b_9839984.html http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/02/02/canada-military-ill-prepared-to-resume-mantle-as-world-s-peacekeeper-report_n_9137354.html http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/bruce-moncur/veterans-affairs-canada_b_7142772.html Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Big Guy Posted July 19, 2016 Author Report Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) There is maturity and then there is senility. I think you confuse those, as well. I have no doubt that is the way you think. That is why I have no use for the way you think. Stay at the childs table and let the adults converse over the meal they choose to share. Edited July 19, 2016 by Big Guy Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Big Guy Posted July 19, 2016 Author Report Posted July 19, 2016 It was your intention to question mine though, because you think that I am showing disrespect towards this government,past governments along with it's citizens through questioning how we as a nation treat our soldiers....I here I thought we lived in a democracy, with freedom of speech and others.....But instead of you debating the topic you attack me, and question my patriotism....like wanting a defense department that does not put undo risk to it's soldiers is a taboo topic.... Yes, we have freedom of speech. You have the right and freedom to criticize the way that you believe our politicians are treating the military. I have the right and freedom to criticize your criticism. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Smallc Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 So you believe in the Turkish model of democracy, too? Unstinting, unhesitating support for anything the leader says, does wants or wishes? And you call that patriotism? You don't know the meaning of the word. Patriotism and doing the will of the people go hand in hand. I said nothing about the government. Quote
Smallc Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 In 2015 Canada rates 22 and out of 29 NATO countries. As a percentage of GDP. In total, we spend $20B, the 6th most in NATO. Quote
Army Guy Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 Yes, we have freedom of speech. You have the right and freedom to criticize the way that you believe our politicians are treating the military. I have the right and freedom to criticize your criticism. Absolutely... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted July 19, 2016 Report Posted July 19, 2016 As a percentage of GDP. In total, we spend $20B, the 6th most in NATO. And that would mean what exactly.....that all those sources are false....or that NATO has asked most to spend 2 % of our GDP.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Argus Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 (edited) Patriotism and doing the will of the people go hand in hand. I said nothing about the government. Yes, you actually did. Your problem is, like most Liberals, you believe the Liberal party IS Canada, and whatever the Liberal party wants is what Canada wants and whatever is good for the Liberals is good for Canada. Or at least, if it's not you aren't going to care. Edited July 20, 2016 by Argus Quote "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
Argus Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 Absolutely... Yes, it's perfectly acceptable for fat, smug liberals who have never known danger or want and can't imagine ever doing so to criticize people who put their life on the line for their country and question THEIR patriotism. After all, they cheer for Canada in the Olympics, so that makes them patriots. Quote "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
Argus Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 And that would mean what exactly.....that all those sources are false....or that NATO has asked most to spend 2 % of our GDP.... You won't get him to say anything more. He's spouting the current Liberal talking point and he won't vary from that. Quote "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
Smallc Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 Yes, you actually did. Your problem is, like most Liberals, you believe the Liberal party IS Canada, and whatever the Liberal party wants is what Canada wants and whatever is good for the Liberals is good for Canada. I'd encourage you to point out where I said what you claim I did. Quote
G Huxley Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 Looks like the last time Obama came to Canada he gave JT a nudge that has seen fruition for the USA: http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/canada-steps-up-with-a-new-nato-committment/ Canada has made 2 new commitments: About 500 troops into Latvia. I believe this is a mistake. It is clearly not needed and serves only to send some kind of lame message of NATO solidarity. Neither Latvia, nor any of the Baltic States (or Poland) are in any danger of invasion. Some pundits use Crimea as an example but Crimea had a population where most of the population identified more with Moscow than they did with Kiev. Hear anybody from Crimea complaining about Russian “domination” these days”? Additional and continuing sending of money into Afghanistan (about 100 million a year). America is complaining that it is pouring $1 billion a year into Afghanistan and the other nations should help contribute. The USA broke it so it should fix it. Why should Canada pay for aggressive and faulty American foreign policy? Besides, what does NATO have to do with Afghanistan? Which member of the alliance was attacked and thereby forcing the others to come to their aid? This is a move of JT that I disagree with. At least he is getting Canadians out of the way of fire being aimed at the USA. The sooner we develop a foreign policy which allows the USA to pay the consequences of its actions the sooner Canada we can direct our funds to our benefit. Fully agree. I saw through Obama's speech for exactly what it was: a call for Canada to provide military welfare to our neighbours down south. Quote
Smallc Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 More like a call for Canada to province military welfare to Europe, so the US doesn't have to provide quite as much. Quote
?Impact Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 I just looked through the latest NATO defence expenditure report. The one generalization I can make is that over the past 7 years only three countries made significant increases (Turkey, Hungary, and Norway), and one country made massive decrease (USA). Most of the others were fairly flat line. Quote
Smallc Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 (edited) And that would mean what exactly.....that all those sources are false....or that NATO has asked most to spend 2 % of our GDP.... As a percentage of GDP they're right - we spend one of the lowest amounts, right with Spain. What's misleading is that we've passed Spain it total spending, and are now #6 Edited July 20, 2016 by Smallc Quote
Argus Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 I'd encourage you to point out where I said what you claim I did. Every day in the last six months. Quote "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
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.