Is this a lie? "Liberal defence policy forecasts that by 2025, annual defence spending will rise to $32.7 billion"

[Dougie93]

Just look what they are doing to Vice-Admiral Norman, the Liberal Party of Canada is literally trying to destroy him, just for doing his job and trying to save the RCN.

That's what happens if you, if try to defy Liberal Party of Canada disarmament by stealth.

Edited January 13, 2019 by Dougie93

[Army Guy]

I agree 100 % the liberal part has a long record of bending DND over a table, they also have a long record of converting CDS into politicians like the one we have now. he stood by and let all of that happen, and Royal no less. But then again one can not forget the Harper cons and all their broken promises.  

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

I agree 100 % the liberal part has a long record of bending DND over a table, they also have a long record of converting CDS into politicians like the one we have now. he stood by and let all of that happen, and Royal no less. But then again one can not forget the Harper cons and all their broken promises.  

Yeah, Johnny Vance has disappointed me.  Not that he wasn't always a political operator, but he didn't  just stand by, he threw Norman under the bus so fast Norman didn't even know what hit him.

[Dougie93]

And btw, it's not just DND, the whole government is like this, but nobody ever questions their allegiance.  

Instead of asking me why I have no allegiance to this mafia state, why don't you ask them why they have no allegiance to our Queen? 

 I have a constitutional right to call a mafia state a mafia state when it is operating like a mafia state, and I got HM's signature on that.

And I got a constitutional right to advocate for self determination to withdraw from a mafia state because it is operating as a mafia state, and I got the Queen's signature on that one too.

But destroying an honorable man who is also your VCDS,   to prevent him from defending your state as he is sworn to, on behalf of a Maritime Mafia?

Now that sounds more like treason to me.  Did HM sign off on that?  Can't she how she could have.

I mean, wake up, these people you have allegiance to, are operating totally lawlessly, they are illegitimate, not just morally,  they don't have a signature from our Queen.

Now, If you have a country where the government and its sycophants simply have to invoke the Reb Menace and everybody rallies around them,  even though they are a criminal mafia of kleptocrats, but everybody just looks the other way?  

Isn't that Russia?

Edited January 13, 2019 by Dougie93

[Argus]

14 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

Just look what they are doing to Vice-Admiral Norman, the Liberal Party of Canada is literally trying to destroy him, just for doing his job and trying to save the RCN.

That's what happens if you, if try to defy Liberal Party of Canada disarmament by stealth.

Well, don't look now, but the Liberal honcho who started it has just resigned "for family reasons" but more likely because more embarrassing revelations about his close ties to the Irvings are likely to come out as the trial progresses and the backroom boys in the party want to distance themselves from him.

[Dougie93]

5 minutes ago, Argus said:

Well, don't look now, but the Liberal honcho who started it has just resigned "for family reasons" but more likely because more embarrassing revelations about his close ties to the Irvings are likely to come out as the trial progresses and the backroom boys in the party want to distance themselves from him.

Yes, because Mary Henein is a pit bull and now she's after them and they are scurrying like rats, and she'll probably get Norman off, but it won't solve the larger problem.

[Dougie93]

I mean, this is still mission accomplished for the Liberal Party of Canada; "don't mess with us, because we can make serious trouble for any of you through our police state, even if you get off, the legal bills alone will wreck your life".

So they have the forces entire chain of command cowed into not upholding their oaths in the face of the Liberal Party of Canada mafia state, same as all despotic states do, Russia, China, etc

Edited January 13, 2019 by Dougie93

[Zeitgeist]

10 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

And btw, it's not just DND, the whole government is like this, but nobody ever questions their allegiance.  

Instead of asking me why I have no allegiance to this mafia state, why don't you ask them why they have no allegiance to our Queen? 

 I have a constitutional right to call a mafia state a mafia state when it is operating like a mafia state, and I got HM's signature on that.

And I got a constitutional right to advocate for self determination to withdraw from a mafia state because it is operating as a mafia state, and I got the Queen's signature on that one too.

But destroying an honorable man who is also your VCDS,   to prevent him from defending your state as he is sworn to, on behalf of a Maritime Mafia?

Now that sounds more like treason to me.  Did HM sign off on that?  Can't she how she could have.

I mean, wake up, these people you have allegiance to, are operating totally lawlessly, they are illegitimate, not just morally,  they don't have a signature from our Queen.

Now, If you have a country where the government and its sycophants simply have to invoke the Reb Menace and everybody rallies around them,  even though they are a criminal mafia of kleptocrats, but everybody just looks the other way?  

Isn't that Russia?

Your comments are ridiculously treasonous.  You basically have no loyalty to your countrymen.  I guess you could try to get a job in the Queen's security detail, except that you wouldn't get the job because you won't defend the Queen's subjects.

[Zeitgeist]

16 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

The breaking point for me was the Somalia Inquiry, I didn't serve in the Airborne and I understood the problems there, but that wasn't the point, the point was they blamed everything on the lowest ranks and then when it came time to examine the negligence of the chain of command, they promptly shut it down.

So they throw you under the bus to save their careers was the message to me.  Again, message received.

Sounds like Abu Graib

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Sounds like Abu Graib

Sort of, what happened was the Airborne Regiment was directed by its chain of command to stop local Somali's from infiltrating the camp to steal things.  They couldn't do that simply by putting up a concertina wire fence, so they fell back on their training and began to execute aggressive domination of the battle space by ambush and taking prisoners.

However, they had been given a drug called mefloquine by the chain of command, which was known to incite psychotic behavior, and they were caught up in the hyper aggressive rage aspect of that, thus all heck broke lose in the prisoner detention area

[Dougie93]

To wit, "there are no bad soldiers, only bad officers" ~ Napoleon Bonaparte

[Dougie93]

On 1/10/2019 at 2:35 PM, Queenmandy85 said:

The only country capable of invading Canada is the USA. That is unlikely to happen in the near future. For this reason, the Canadian electorate is opposed to having a viable military. I have always advocating having a viable military, but I am realistic enough to know I am in a tiny minority. A viable military is one that is able to defend our borders and destroy the enemy without having to rely on an outside help. Hence, the CAF nee nuclear weapons.

NATO's conventional forces exist as a trip-wire. If the Russians invade, NATO personnel will die and that will trigger an all out nuclear response. It really doesn't matter how many troops are stationed there or whether they are equipped with chieftain tanks or centurions. They are there as a warning sign. "Attack us and we all die." (Mutual Assured Destruction.)

That is the most viable defence policy for Canada. Build enough strategic nuclear weapons that any potential invader will "read the sign." 

As for Dougie's apocalyptic view of national unity, Quebec separation will lead to internal violent instability which will lead to the government of Quebec to request assistance from the Canadian military. I refer you to the OAS insurgency in Algeria after its separation from France. But this is a topic for another thread.

NATO tripwires are rhetorical, no evidence whatsoever that to spring a NATO tripwire incites an immediate escalation to countervalue thermonuclear exchange, quite the opposite in fact, which is why the Russians are probing NATO right now.

And there's nothing apocalyptic about de-Confederation, quite the opposite there as well, as absent the Liberal Party of Canada and associated CBC propaganda arm asymmetrical dictatorship, the Canada's sub confederated de facto Dominions (who actually deliver all the services relavant to your lives, Ottawa simply confiscates the taxes for the purposes of a failed "equalization' regime) would be much healthier, wealthier and wiser without it, and would have vastly better national security as a result, still within the Commonwealth under the British Crown, with the exception of the Republic du Quebec.

Edited January 13, 2019 by Dougie93

[Argus]

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

Sort of, what happened was the Airborne Regiment was directed by its chain of command to stop local Somali's from infiltrating the camp to steal things.  They couldn't do that simply by putting up a concertina wire fence, so they fell back on their training and began to execute aggressive domination of the battle space by ambush and taking prisoners.

However, they had been given a drug called mefloquine by the chain of command, which was known to incite psychotic behavior, and they were caught up in the hyper aggressive rage aspect of that, thus all heck broke lose in the prisoner detention area

Let's not forget they also asked local elders what to do and the elders looked at them like they were simpletons and said "Just kill them."

[Dougie93]

For example if the balloon goes up tomorrow on the Suwalki Gap, the Canadian Enhanced Forward Presence Battle Group at Camp Adazi outside of Riga Latvia, will simply have to make it to the Polish border before the 1st Guards Tank Army closes the trap at the frontier of Kaliningrad, or be evacuated somehow past the Russian Baltic Fleet by sea, or otherwise, it will simply have to be abandoned behind the lines.  

Then I would expect a NATO 1st Army Headquarters to be established on the Vistula at Warsaw, led by the American Supreme Allied Commander Europe.

Whether the Kremlin would return our prisoners to us after would be a function of where things went from there.

Edited January 13, 2019 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

9 minutes ago, Argus said:

Let's not forget they also asked local elders what to do and the elders looked at them like they were simpletons and said "Just kill them."

Which obviously, with the Airborne Regiment bound by national and international law and the laws of armed conflict could not do lawfully, absent direct participant in hostilities armed and dangerous, which the teenagers who were trying to break in to steal their walkmans and whatnot, did not meet the threshold of.  And you certainly couldn't beat them to death once secured as prisoners.  But again, the Regiment was suffering from a mania incited by giving them drugs which made the crazy.

Edited January 13, 2019 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

Put simply, they had been poisoned, by their own chain of command.

[Dougie93]

6 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Your comments are ridiculously treasonous.  You basically have no loyalty to your countrymen.  I guess you could try to get a job in the Queen's security detail, except that you wouldn't get the job because you won't defend the Queen's subjects.

Monarchy is the state of loyalty to a hereditary aristocracy led by a monarch.  In such states your binding obligation is to a single person embodied.

Loyalty to a state of "countrymen" is called res publica, or a republic, which I do not live in and have never taken any oath of allegiance to.

Bear in mind, in classically liberal free states, a citizen cannot be charged with treason except by what oaths they have actively undertaken to the state.

Canada by rendered judgement of the SCC does not require oaths of allegiance from private citizens.

The only oath I have undertaken which binds me still, is to the Commander-in-Chief at Buckingham Palace with no Canadian Confederation betwixt us.

Obviously HM's security detail is entirely for the protection of HM, against any and all comers, foreign and/ or domestic.

Thus, not treasonous in anyway whatsoever, quite the opposite in fact, in my upholding classical liberal limited government conservatism in defence of the British Crown in North America.

Edited January 14, 2019 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

See this is the result of the Cultural Marxists of academia particularly the education faculties erasing the central narrative of Canadian history in order to be able to run a nanny socialist welfare gulag to their own interests, so you've got Canadians (this one claiming to be a post-grad IIRC) not even understanding the fundamental nature of the state they are actually living in, be that Confederation or the House of Windsor.    They don't know that Confederation is not the only option, and they don't know that they are living in a political legal entity called a monarchy rather than the Americans which Canadians are want to emulate, who live in a republic.

Reason being that if Canadians realized the truth of it, they also could decline to live in a nanny socialist welfare gulag and instead aspire to be real countries rather than a fake country mafia state.

[eyeball]

On 1/9/2019 at 4:03 PM, Army Guy said:

Just another liberal lie, to shore up some support from the military. And we fall for the same thing every year....

I fail to see how you could go wrong selling War Bonds. It should be a snap if people are this gullible.

[Dougie93]

Stop falling for it, stop and turn into the opponent, advocate for no military spending at all, because it is $20+ billion a year that the Liberal Party of Canada is confiscating from you to funnel to entrenched interests such as Irving, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and British Aerospace Enterprises.

I even own Lockheed Martin, but I'm willing to take the hit, stop funneling money to me, when you don't actually have a warfighting military, not even close, so it's just corporate welfare.

[Zeitgeist]

4 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

Monarchy is the state of loyalty to a hereditary aristocracy led by a monarch.  In such states your binding obligation is to a single person embodied.

Loyalty to a state of "countrymen" is called res publica, or a republic, which I do not live in and have never taken any oath of allegiance to.

Bear in mind, in classically liberal free states, a citizen cannot be charged with treason except by what oaths they have actively undertaken to the state.

Canada by rendered judgement of the SCC does not require oaths of allegiance from private citizens.

The only oath I have undertaken which binds me still, is to the Commander-in-Chief at Buckingham Palace with no Canadian Confederation betwixt us.

Obviously HM's security detail is entirely for the protection of HM, against any and all comers, foreign and/ or domestic.

Thus, not treasonous in anyway whatsoever, quite the opposite in fact, in my upholding classical liberal limited government conservatism in defence of the British Crown in North America.

Uh no, you're loyal to Canada's Governor General, the Queen's representative in Canada.  The Queen is a figurehead like the GG.  She is a symbolic head of state.  The Royal Family is a symbolic family that represents continuity of the state/people.  There's no power there.  The Queen serves the people and can only nullify parliament if it acts against the wishes of the people.  If you would prefer to join the British forces, feel free.  The republic has its own challenges, as Roman history demonstrates, as relates to the multiple competing forces, from the Tribunes to the Equestrians to the Senate, and so forth.  There are different ways of running a republic.  Ask China!

[Zeitgeist]

4 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

See this is the result of the Cultural Marxists of academia particularly the education faculties erasing the central narrative of Canadian history in order to be able to run a nanny socialist welfare gulag to their own interests, so you've got Canadians (this one claiming to be a post-grad IIRC) not even understanding the fundamental nature of the state they are actually living in, be that Confederation or the House of Windsor.    They don't know that Confederation is not the only option, and they don't know that they are living in a political legal entity called a monarchy rather than the Americans which Canadians are want to emulate, who live in a republic.

Reason being that if Canadians realized the truth of it, they also could decline to live in a nanny socialist welfare gulag and instead aspire to be real countries rather than a fake country mafia state.

I'm surprised at your assertions.  Even Trump admires Norway.  Canadians pay taxes and provide programs for the public because they are popular and valuable.  It's a choice by the people.  The most successful countries in the world make very similar choices.

[Dougie93]

Nope.   The Queen of Canada actually owns Canada, says so right in the Constituion, it is the Viceroy who is the ceremonial head of state, the Queen is the de jure head of state.

The power of the Queen is expressed through Parliamentary Supremacy, the GG doesn't have any legislative nor executive authority at all.

It's laughable how ignorant you are about your own country, when you fancy yourself to be a hyper patriot. 

But this is why the Americans, who are republicans, and are taught how their country works,  laugh at Canadians and call Confederation a Fake Country, who knew?

 

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I'm surprised at your assertions.  Even Trump admires Norway.  Canadians pay taxes and provide programs for the public because they are popular and valuable.  It's a choice by the people.  The most successful countries in the world make very similar choices.

Norway is much more successful pound for pound than Canada is, to include a per capita GPD of $75,000 USD to Canada's $45,000 USD, so 50% richer than Canadians.

But that is because Norway is unified ethno-state not a failed state Confederation which does not work, never did work, and isn't going to work, resulting in the crippling of the Canadian economy and democracy,

Has nothing to do with ideology, it's all about failed state Confederation, if you got out you can run things like Norway does if you can get the votes, but you'll never get it done in dysfunctional zombie Confederation.

[Zeitgeist]

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Nope.   The Queen of Canada actually owns Canada, says so right in the Constituion, it is the Viceroy who is the ceremonial head of state, the Queen is the de jure head of state.

The power of the Queen is expressed through Parliamentary Supremacy, the GG doesn't have any legislative nor executive authority at all.

It's laughable how ignorant you are about your own country, when you fancy yourself to be a hyper patriot. 

But this is why the Americans, who are republicans, and are taught how their country works,  laugh at Canadians and call Confederation a Fake Country, who knew?

 

The Queen doesn't own an iota of Crown land.  It's a term to describe nationally held land.  The Queen cannot use it for private purposes nor for the  UK.  Your knowledge is extremely superficial.