Harper: Defending Canada's Sovereignty?

[tml12]

http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=0cc1a6...04708ce&k=87796

Harper says a Conservative government would better be able to police Arctic waters. I realize that there is an underlying military motive here but seriously, even NDP voters must admit that our waters are being trespassed on and used by foreign countries and we neither have the tools nor the technology to stop them.

Can anyone really say this is a bad idea? I think it is about time Canada's sovereignty is defended...

[cybercoma]

http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=0cc1a6...04708ce&k=87796

Harper says a Conservative government would better be able to police Arctic waters.  I realize that there is an underlying military motive here but seriously, even NDP voters must admit that our waters are being trespassed on and used by foreign countries and we neither have the tools nor the technology to stop them. 

Can anyone really say this is a bad idea?  I think it is about time Canada's sovereignty is defended...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think it's time we militarize Canada so we can defend our ideals and freedom, instead of relying on a nation whom our current government just loves to bash.

[August1991]

This is not a topic I know that much about - and I know there are military types who take this stuff seriously, and know a heck of a lot more than I do.

But ignorance is no excuse for not wading into a debate.

Like most Canadians, my knowledge of the north amounts to looking down at it from about 10 km while flying to another continent. It's big. Lotsa snow. Empty. Low scrub. Rather enchanting. It seems to me that three icebreakers are not going to assure Canadian sovereignty over an area as large as the Canadian north.

Wouldn't we be better off spending the money on something else? Transport planes to get Canadian soldiers to foreign disasters? Coast guard vessels and helicopters to intercept foreign fishing trawlers, or save drowning sailors?

If Canada suffered some natural catastrophe (earthquake, flood), what good would icebreakers in the Arctic do? It's not as if three icebreakers are suddenly going to stop Russian or American submarines going where they like.

[Leafless]

tml12

You wrote- " Can anyone say this is really a bad idea."

I am surprised Mr. Harper would even contemplate this being an issue as Canada firstly must aquire a military before even considering such an option.

I'd leave this one to Paul Martin.

[Biblio Bibuli]

I know there are military types who take this stuff seriously, and know a heck of a lot more than I  do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dilettantes, that's what the American military heavyweights call these Canadian military types.

You know, I think that what we want to do in Canada is to spend on our military only so much so as to semi-satisfy the Americans. And if the Americans want us to spend it on policing the Arctic waters, so be it!

[Argus]

This is not a topic I know that much about - and I know there are military types who take this stuff seriously, and know a heck of a lot more than I  do.

But ignorance is no excuse for not wading into a debate.

Like most Canadians, my knowledge of the north amounts to looking down at it from about 10 km while flying to another continent.  It's big.  Lotsa snow.  Empty.  Low scrub.  Rather enchanting.  It seems to me that three icebreakers are not going to assure Canadian sovereignty over an area as large as the Canadian north.

Wouldn't we be better off spending the money on something else?  Transport planes to get Canadian soldiers to foreign disasters?  Coast guard vessels and helicopters to intercept foreign fishing trawlers, or save drowning sailors?

If Canada suffered some natural catastrophe (earthquake, flood), what good would icebreakers in the Arctic do?  It's not as if three icebreakers are suddenly going to stop Russian or American submarines going where they like.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's a matter of adding moral and legal weight to arguments when it comes time to deciding whether certain waters and areas are ours or not. If it gets to a court, the fact we have no military units there, no people living there, and not only don't patrol there but don't even have the capability of patrolling there, well, it will carry weight. I think the big worry is that with global warming, and the receding ice caps, certain waters up north are going to become more navigable, and perhaps there are resources below them as well. It behooves us to show the flag from time to time. No one expects us to be running down nuclear subs with icebreakers, but we had damned well better be able to get to a place we say is ours if we want to claim it.

[hiti]

The liberals defended Hans Island and they will defend our northern borders. No doubt about it.

Harper is going to spend $2 billion to build 3 ice-breakers that are really going to cost $3 billion, and the ice is melting? What a joker he is.

[scribblet]

http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=0cc1a6...04708ce&k=87796

Harper says a Conservative government would better be able to police Arctic waters.  I realize that there is an underlying military motive here but seriously, even NDP voters must admit that our waters are being trespassed on and used by foreign countries and we neither have the tools nor the technology to stop them. 

Can anyone really say this is a bad idea?  I think it is about time Canada's sovereignty is defended...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't have a problem with it, sounds reasonable.

[PocketRocket]

Harper is going to spend $2 billion to build 3 ice-breakers that are really going to cost $3 billion, and the ice is melting? What a joker he is.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow, you mean he's going to realize a 33.33% saving on the cost of the icebreakers???

Cool.

But seriously....

And this is as opposed to the Liberals who implemented a gun registry with an estimated cost of $2Million, which has, so far, cost well over 1,000 times that much.

And guess what, it has yet to be shown that this registry has taken a SINGLE illegal or unregistered firearm out of the hands of a single criminal.

So, on the one hand, we have someone making a promise in which your estimate says he will go over budget by a factor of 1/2, whereas the other has gone over budget already by a factor of 1,000. (Before you criticize my math again, double check your own)

And again, the one plan would at least give us something concrete, ie; icebreakers, while the other simply has caused a pain in the butt to law-abiding citizens who are responsible gun-owners, and has still not been shown to have saved any lives, or even to have relived a single criminal of his/her illegal, unregistered weapon.

Then again, let's look a Shiela Copps' flag flap.

$2M for little flags for every Canadian.

Hmmm. I never got one, and I don't personally know anyone who did.

But that's an important way to spend our tax money.

[Montgomery Burns]

http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=0cc1a6...04708ce&k=87796

Harper says a Conservative government would better be able to police Arctic waters.  I realize that there is an underlying military motive here but seriously, even NDP voters must admit that our waters are being trespassed on and used by foreign countries and we neither have the tools nor the technology to stop them. 

Can anyone really say this is a bad idea?  I think it is about time Canada's sovereignty is defended...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree. It's embarrassing when tiny Denmark is entering Canadian territory and we are too weak to do anything about it. A country should always be ready to defend its sovereignty, and the threat of force, as history has proven, works wonders. Perhaps having a half-decent military would make us respected on the int'l scene, like we used to be. Let's face it. The world does not respect us anymore. Ever notice how the room empties when Martin gives a speech at the UN?

[Yaro]

For those that don't understand the underlying issues with the northern passage, a quick synopsis.

Global warming is causing the northern passage to become open for longer periods every year. Right now that is a fairly short time but if projections are correct it could become a year around possibility.

As of right now the US does not have the capability to move there carrier groups from the Atlantic to the pacific without going around the south of south America which is under most circumstances not a very good route. The Panama Canal currently under Chinese control is simply not big enough to move the larger American ships and so the US wants sovereign access to the northern passage and has been instigating political games for almost 2 decades.

[Argus]

The liberals defended Hans Island and they will defend our northern borders. No doubt about it.

Harper is going to spend $2 billion to build 3 ice-breakers that are really going to cost $3 billion, and the ice is melting? What a joker he is.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I bet you never heard of Hans Island before it was in the news recently, know nothing about it, and couldn't find it on a map to save your life.