Argus Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 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 That, of course, is grossly misleading, and you know it. But then that's how Liberals roll. 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
Big Guy Posted July 20, 2016 Author Report Posted July 20, 2016 You aren't at the adult's table, old man. You're drooling in the corner with your onion soup and yelling at shadows while the adults largely ignore you. A response expected from a pouting adolescent trying to get the attention of adults. Shoo, go away. Go play. 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 20, 2016 Author Report Posted July 20, 2016 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. I still cannot see which ministry is going to be favored by the JT administration. Recent moves to exchange Harper ambassadors for JT choices seem mild (except for Israel where a pro-Netanyahu ambassador has been replaced by a career impartial diplomat) and some old embassies are going to be reopened. But these changes are more political than financial. If you see a preference of one mininstry over the other (Foreign Affairs - Defence) then please point it out to me. 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 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 Every day in the last six months. The Liberals are wrong on a lot of things just like the Conservatives before them. They're also right on a few more things, IMO. Quote
Army Guy Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 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 #6No what is misleading is the fact your justifying our military strength via the total dollars spent on it. And disregarding the major issues that DND is having. it is comparing apples with oranges....each military spends and accounts for it's expenditures differently. for example rate of pay per member, annual infra structure expenditures, equipment expenditures, there are to many variables to account for. On top of all that most of those countries have already made those expensive equipment decisions, and do not have a equipment deficit such as DND, along with major infra structure deficits, training deficits....it all had to be taken into consideration. Not to mention our purchasing operating procedures which need to be rebuilt from the ground up. along with how, when and why we spend our funding....Our the entire budget is based on one fiscal year, with all surplus being returned if depts. can not spend them in time, current spending regulations prevent funding being spent in such a short period time....which then in turn creates a mad rush by all governmental depts , to spend their funding on anything , normally garbage or things it does not need in order that they're budget is not reduced the next year.....multi Bils are waste on this practice... So a lot of things have to change before you can start saying were number 6, because if number 6 looks like we do, then I hate to see number 10 or 20..... 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 20, 2016 Author Report Posted July 20, 2016 Our coalition continues to create more martyrs and potential suicide bombers: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/07/led-air-strikes-kill-21-civilians-syria-160719045329897.html "At least 56 civilians, including 11 children, were killed in air strikes on the Tokhar area in the northern city of Manbij in the Aleppo governate on Tuesday, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Ten others, including four children, were killed in coalition strikes on the village of Hamira, in the southern suburbs of Manbij." Some more "acceptable collateral damage"? Just what is our association with this coalition doing for Canada other than to make us a target for retaliation terrorism? 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.
Army Guy Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 (edited) Your not speaking out again'st our governments actions or policies are you Big guy....And hear I thought you were a patriot, who could not stand the fact that some one may or may not like our governments actions.....But I guess you sir, have special status..... these are your quotes are they not....I guess your not such the patriot you thought you were, in fact kind of makes you a hypocrite does it not... Patriotism is not selective based on which political party is currently in charge of the nation, it is in supporting any and every government which is in power at the time. have been on this planet and a citizen of this wonderful nation for over 70 years and am proud of Canada. I am proud of the way it is organized, I am proud of the this democracy which is the envy of the world, and I am proud of the freedoms which I am allowed. Edited July 20, 2016 by Army Guy 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 20, 2016 Author Report Posted July 20, 2016 Your not speaking out again'st our governments actions or policies are you Big guy.... And hear I thought you were a patriot, who could not stand the fact that some one may or may not like our governments actions.....But I guess you sir, have special status..... these are your quotes are they not....I guess your not such the patriot you thought you were, in fact kind of makes you a hypocrite does it not... In your eyes, looking through your prism, it may. I see you cannot tell the difference and I have no intention of trying to convince you of anything. I also do not like what I see as your worsening aggressive and derogatory attitude towards me. I have stated my position and will stand behind it. I have nothing to add. 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.
Argus Posted July 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 In your eyes, looking through your prism, it may. I see you cannot tell the difference and I have no intention of trying to convince you of anything. I also do not like what I see as your worsening aggressive and derogatory attitude towards me. Gee, you're offended by him pointing out the intellectual bankruptcy of your own accusations? You claim he isn't patriotic because he questions government decisions, yet have no issue claiming yourself a patriot while questioning government decisions. Its a good thing you aren't trying to convince anyone of anything for aren't very good at it. 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 20, 2016 Report Posted July 20, 2016 In your eyes, looking through your prism, it may. I see you cannot tell the difference and I have no intention of trying to convince you of anything. I also do not like what I see as your worsening aggressive and derogatory attitude towards me. I have stated my position and will stand behind it. I have nothing to add. It seems to be your favorite go to statement, "looking through your prism" as I see it I'm not the only one who is looking through a prism.....I am as passionate about the cause I back, as you are about yours, but in defending mine, you have attacked my character, and have mistaken that passion for this nation as being unpatriotic....It was not me, who put you on this merry go round, it was you, with your posts..... "And I am the one being aggressive and derogatory"....go figure....I did not make you print those posts sir, that was all you, you had the chose of responding or not....but what can one say about hypocrites..... No need to respond to this post, as I'm no longer interested in anything you may have to say. 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.
Charles Anthony Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 Folks, Avoid personal attacks. Quote We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
Smallc Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-army-pulls-anti-tank-missiles-out-of-storage-as-tensions-increase-with-russia We have TOW missiles again, so, that's good for the anti tank part I was worried about. Now we just need some actual air defense that doesn't have to be mounted on a jet or a ship. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-army-pulls-anti-tank-missiles-out-of-storage-as-tensions-increase-with-russia We have TOW missiles again, so, that's good for the anti tank part I was worried about. Now we just need some actual air defense that doesn't have to be mounted on a jet or a ship. I like this part.... It is not clear why such missiles were removed from service in the first place if they are so critical to how the army operates. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Smallc Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 I like this part.... It is not clear why such missiles were removed from service in the first place if they are so critical to how the army operates. I agree, that's a pretty damning quote. Quote
cybercoma Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 That, of course, is grossly misleading, and you know it. But then that's how Liberals roll.Tell me, when you split the bill at a restaurant do you split it as a percentage of everyone's income or do you just divide it up? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 I agree, that's a pretty damning quote. Damning against this Government's "reprofiling" of funds for DND...........the Army retired/mothballed the obsolete (wire guided) TOW's in their inventory several years ago, to be replaced by the newer wireless TOWs......the army was even conducting its initial live fire trials earlier this year.......then this Government decided the Army no longer needed anti-tank missiles(and heavy machine guns and mortars) because the previous Government purchased the army several hundred grenade launchers. None the less, from reports out of the Syrian civil war, TOWs bounce off the latest Russian armor the Syrians have........This Government, sending the army to counter the "Russian threat", should equip the army with the tools they need to even attempt to slow (notice not stop) a Russian tank army.....in this case, if the countries we're going to defend (Estonia, Lithuania etc) can afford the modern Javelin anti tank missile, so to could Canada. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 I like this part.... It is not clear why such missiles were removed from service in the first place if they are so critical to how the army operates. It should be clear.......this government "moved forward" the money required to purchase and maintain such systems. Quote
Smallc Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 Damning against this Government's "reprofiling" of funds for DND...........the Army retired/mothballed the obsolete (wire guided) TOW's in their inventory several years ago, to be replaced by the newer wireless TOWs......the army was even conducting its initial live fire trials earlier this year.......then this Government decided the Army no longer needed anti-tank missiles(and heavy machine guns and mortars) because the previous Government purchased the army several hundred grenade launchers. Evidence? Quote
Smallc Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 It should be clear.......this government "moved forward" the money required to purchase and maintain such systems. Most of the money moved forward was moved forward for the same reasons as 2012 and 2014 - ship and aircraft procurement is delayed and or behind schedule. Quote
Smallc Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 That, of course, is grossly misleading, and you know it. But then that's how Liberals roll. It's grossly misleading to refuse to acknowledge that we spend the 6th most in NATO, and to pretend we're actually 23rd. Quote
Smallc Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) . Edited July 21, 2016 by Smallc Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3466590/The-moment-Syrian-rebels-fire-60-000-American-missile-4-5million-Russian-tank-missile-WINS.html Seems like it did it's job, even in the face of reactive armour. Ahhh no......reread your link. There is a reason the Americans (and Europeans) started developing replacements for the TOW and HOT missiles decades ago......and its not because they felt they could still do the required "job".........I'm sure in the certain circumstances a Panzerfaust or even a recoilless rifle could "do the job" Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 Most of the money moved forward was moved forward for the same reasons as 2012 and 2014 - ship and aircraft procurement is delayed and or behind schedule. So? This Government's "not a cut" took away the infantry's only anti-armor tool........they were testing them earlier this year in Gagetown.....and they've since put them in storage per the article you cited. 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.