CdnFox Posted May 19 Report Posted May 19 4 minutes ago, Army Guy said: I'm pretty sure the whole issue is spelled out in the NATO charter....3.5 spent on military, equipment and operating costs, 1.5 % on military infra structure...which could be anything that could be used for the military like railroads, major road networks, dual purpose things like water treatment plants, sewage plants up north.... The nato charter huh. Doesn't look like the US is buying it either Canada military board: U.S. hitting pause WASHINGTON -- The U.S. undersecretary of defence said Monday that the United States is pausing a long-standing military board, claiming “Canada has failed to make credible progress on its defense commitments.” At the end of the day it doesn't matter what the NATO agreement says, or whether we're allowed to count tactical Chipmunks or not, is the money isn't going to actually improve the military it's meaningless. Quote Some of the most wanted things are so simple to solve...for instance 2 RCR has made one of it's 3 infantry companies dismounted ,meaning they have no drive to get to battle........because there is not enough LAV 6 to make them mechanized...which means they either go to battle by truck or school bus...same as tanks, we have 3 armored Regts only one has tanks....the rest are driving around in LAV 6 meant for the infantry...LAV 6 are made in Ontario....and the Army announced no tanks before 2035, which could be built right here in Canada well before then... Yeah, and we make some of the best lavs in the world. The Americans model their strikers after ours. But we gave the ones we were making to the Ukraine and never replaced them so now our people have none but we can claim that we met our commitments for NATO spending and Ukraine. Meanwhile our combat troops are dependent on uber. This is what I'm talking about. We need to force the politicians to agree with us, not NATO, as to what represents a reasonable amount of military spending and hold them to it. As it is each government realizes that they're only in power for 4 years so all they have to do is make announcements that won't take effect for 4 - 8 years and they'll never have to worry about it. Not a single person is holding the Liberals to account for their years of mismanagement, carney is a 'new' gov't and he's doing the same crap but he's making a better show of it. Quote Military is bleeding people because they are getting tired of waiting for something to happen, new equipment, new anything....and a lot of them are the experienced soldiers... Yeah it's frikkin' terrible. I get that. I've got a cousin in the military (career) and i hear stories. It's bad. And carney just gave them a raise,,,, then cancelled the foreign deployment bonus. So. The guys closest to harms way just got a massive pay cut. Canadian military personnel face cuts in overseas allowances | Ottawa Citizen for those who don't know what we're talking about. Quote I get it you did warn me, but people lives are on the line here...and instead politicians are playing politics with those lives...and it seems Canadians are OK with that.... Canadians believe Carney when he says they're massively increasing spending. They believe you guys went from 1.6% of GDP all the way up to a full five and will soon be rolling in new tanks and submarines and planes etc. They have no idea of the shell game that's gone on Even the headlines like the ones above. When carney announces new military spending the headline is always liberals increase spending or Carney hits 5% spending target, But the headlines for the negative stuff never actually include mention of the government or Carney. Notice the headline above does not say that the government cut spending. And people often don't read the story they just skimmed the headlines. If we believe the news carney is personally pouring over pamphlets for new submarines and is just about to click place your order on the Amazon version of military hardware to upgrade all our gear. They have no idea that most of the money is going to things that we wouldn't normally consider to be military and that most of these purchases aren't happening or will happen in decades. I'm very frustrated, I'm sure you are too. I know exactly what's happening and I know why it's working. A significant portion of Canadians, not all but enough to keep the liberals in power, will believe any lie they are told and don't look past the announcements. Military spending will go up but only by a very small amount and I doubt we'll be seeing any substantial new gear anytime during this current administration. Even the stuff we make here 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Army Guy Posted May 19 Report Posted May 19 12 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: Are you saying that the US’s attack on Iran was sensible? Are you suggesting that Iran which sponsors 4 of the largest terrorist groups in the middle east should be left alone to do as they please, not only holding the strait and world trade hostage which is against inter national law....i mean what is the point of having inter national laws if they can not or will not be enforced........ not to mention execute 10s of thousands of their own citizens...So yes not only is it sensible, but necessary.... 1 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.
Zeitgeist Posted May 19 Report Posted May 19 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Are you suggesting that Iran which sponsors 4 of the largest terrorist groups in the middle east should be left alone to do as they please, not only holding the strait and world trade hostage which is against inter national law....i mean what is the point of having inter national laws if they can not or will not be enforced........ not to mention execute 10s of thousands of their own citizens...So yes not only is it sensible, but necessary.... If Iran was Venezuela and it was as simple as removing the supreme leadership, then it would’ve been a safer bet. Consulting allies would’ve helped both to ensure that other countries could help keep the strait open and to give the US greater moral leverage in that part of the world. As it stands, there’s no removal of the regime and the strait remains under Iranian control. Clearly there’s no support for a ground invasion, so all we really got for this gambit is a cut in the oil supply, costlier shipping, and much higher gas prices. I understand that no one has a crystal ball, but this situation doesn’t achieve the goals you mentioned, nor is it an assurance that Iran will stop trying to make weapons grade nukes. Edited May 19 by Zeitgeist 1 Quote
Army Guy Posted May 19 Report Posted May 19 3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: If Iran was Venezuela and it was as simple as removing the supreme leadership, then it would’ve been a safer bet. Consulting allies would’ve helped both to ensure that other countries could help keep the strait open and to give the US greater moral leverage in that part of the world. As it stands, there’s no removal of the regime and the strait remains under Iranian control. Clearly there’s no support for a ground invasion, so all we really got for this gambit is a cut in the oil supply, costlier shipping, and much higher gas prices. I understand that no one has a crystal ball, but this situation doesn’t achieve the goals you mentioned, nor is it an assurance that Iran will stop trying to make weapons grade nukes. Except Venezuela is not Iran, it was not an Islamic extremist government, it is not just one man in control as we see now... That is what this is about failure to consult....And now the world is butt hurt and does not want to contribute...This is not our war many nations have already stated....Sure, then i guess the US will dictate the how, and when it ends and those other countries will keep paying high fuel prices....US government has already asked for help in keeping the strait open, all he got back was crickets...Lots of moral support there... As of today there is no regime change, and the strait more or less is under Iranian control....US offered a cease fire to talk, and that is not going as planed...and now US government is moving in more forces into the area...more than likely will end with more hostilities..SO yes your right no results to speak of, but this is not over.... US is not concerned what the others are getting, it plays a minor role in all of this....Currently the US only allied in this are middle eastern countries...who have launched airstrikes and some ground attacks. Western nations could have gained favors with trump by offering to send aircraft or ships into the region to escort trade...instead they will sit on the side lines, and complain...and they will pay for that decision, US troop withdrawals from Europe,and other NATO operations.... higher prices at the pump, not enforcing inter national law...the list goes on and on... 1 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.
Zeitgeist Posted May 20 Report Posted May 20 6 hours ago, Army Guy said: Except Venezuela is not Iran, it was not an Islamic extremist government, it is not just one man in control as we see now... That is what this is about failure to consult....And now the world is butt hurt and does not want to contribute...This is not our war many nations have already stated....Sure, then i guess the US will dictate the how, and when it ends and those other countries will keep paying high fuel prices....US government has already asked for help in keeping the strait open, all he got back was crickets...Lots of moral support there... As of today there is no regime change, and the strait more or less is under Iranian control....US offered a cease fire to talk, and that is not going as planed...and now US government is moving in more forces into the area...more than likely will end with more hostilities..SO yes your right no results to speak of, but this is not over.... US is not concerned what the others are getting, it plays a minor role in all of this....Currently the US only allied in this are middle eastern countries...who have launched airstrikes and some ground attacks. Western nations could have gained favors with trump by offering to send aircraft or ships into the region to escort trade...instead they will sit on the side lines, and complain...and they will pay for that decision, US troop withdrawals from Europe,and other NATO operations.... higher prices at the pump, not enforcing inter national law...the list goes on and on... The only conclusion I draw from this is that US defence leadership made the foolish decision to go it alone and now they can’t put the genie back in the bottle. Canada should refine its own oil and ensure that we have affordable domestic supply. Why should any country be trying to suck up to Trump, a leader who has basically screwed up well functioning supply chains, abused allies, and driven up inflation? 1 Quote
User Posted May 20 Report Posted May 20 32 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: The only conclusion I draw from this is that US defence leadership made the foolish decision to go it alone and now they can’t put the genie back in the bottle. Canada should refine its own oil and ensure that we have affordable domestic supply. Why should any country be trying to suck up to Trump, a leader who has basically screwed up well functioning supply chains, abused allies, and driven up inflation? These are such phony arguments. So... you supported attacking Iran, only, you wish the US got more countries involved? And you think Canada should have sent its military to help? Quote
Zeitgeist Posted May 20 Report Posted May 20 (edited) 16 hours ago, User said: These are such phony arguments. So... you supported attacking Iran, only, you wish the US got more countries involved? And you think Canada should have sent its military to help? I don’t know that attacking Iran was the way to go on this. It’s not just about Canada. Multilateral diplomacy and military intervention is almost always better than acting alone or with one other country (Israel). I don’t think anyone here has all the answers on this, but I think this mission was a gamble the US didn’t have to take. It’s hard to know without a lot more information than anyone here has. I hope it gets resolved soon. Edited May 20 by Zeitgeist 1 Quote
CdnFox Posted May 20 Report Posted May 20 6 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: I don’t know that attacking Iran was the way to go on this. It’s not just about Canada. Multilateral diplomacy and military intervention is almost always better than acting alone or with one other country (Israel). I don’t think anyone here has all the answers on this, but I think this mission was a gamble the US didn’t have to take. It’s hard to know without a lot more information than anyone here has. I hope it gets resolved soon. This is where I kind of sit as well. Historically these things are done with consultation and agreement of the allies and they go much smoother that way. This FEELS with the information we actually have like it may have been unnecessary right now and kind of ill planned. However there is obviously a tonne of information the public does not have and it's quite possible that there were factors that necessitated doing it this way and right now. All we can do is hope it's over soon and that the resolution benefits the world and the US instead of harming it. 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
User Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 11 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: I don’t know that attacking Iran was the way to go on this. It’s not just about Canada. Multilateral diplomacy and military intervention is almost always better than acting alone or with one other country (Israel). I don’t think anyone here has all the answers on this, but I think this mission was a gamble the US didn’t have to take. It’s hard to know without a lot more information than anyone here has. I hope it gets resolved soon. Well, the folks who live in Israel as well as our strategic interests in the region, which are attacked by Iranian proxies routinely and threatened by them don't have the luxury to sit around forever saying they just don't know if attacking Iran was the way to go on this. The point was, you are saying having more people is better, but you still sit here in opposition to the war and still say it should have involved more people... but won't say Canada should have helped... so, if other nations are not going to help, and you don't support your own nation helping, it is an impossible standard you are putting on the US. You must get help! But I don't support helping you! I hope it gets resolved soon as well. Quote
John Stone Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 (edited) 10 hours ago, User said: Well, the folks who live in Israel as well as our strategic interests in the region, which are attacked by Iranian proxies routinely and threatened by them don't have the luxury to sit around forever saying they just don't know if attacking Iran was the way to go on this. The point was, you are saying having more people is better, but you still sit here in opposition to the war and still say it should have involved more people... but won't say Canada should have helped... so, if other nations are not going to help, and you don't support your own nation helping, it is an impossible standard you are putting on the US. You must get help! But I don't support helping you! I hope it gets resolved soon as well. ......... ......... Ahmadinejad??? Sounds like a Venezuelan shuffle ....... Ahmadinejad ........regime change??😅 Edited May 21 by John Stone Quote
John Johnston Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 1 hour ago, John Stone said: ......... ......... Ahmadinejad??? Sounds like a Venezuelan shuffle ....... Ahmadinejad ........regime change??😅 The only thing Trump and Nutanyahoo can change is their Depends. Quote
BeaverFever Posted May 21 Author Report Posted May 21 On 5/19/2026 at 4:37 PM, Army Guy said: Except Venezuela is not Iran, it was not an Islamic extremist government, it is not just one man in control as we see now... It’s not “as we see now” it’s “as everyone except the know-nothings in the Trump administration have understood for decades” On 5/19/2026 at 4:37 PM, Army Guy said: Western nations could have gained favors with trump by offering to send aircraft or ships into the region to escort trade...instead they will sit on the side lines, and complain...and they will pay for that decision, US troop withdrawals from Europe,and other NATO operations.... higher prices at the pump, not enforcing inter national law...the list goes on and on... You keep speaking of the Trump administration as if they are competent and honourable people They are not. They have no clue what they are doing and there’s no reason to believe that joining their ongoing shitshow is going to improve anything, it just sucks us into their quagmire and makes us pay the price for their incompetence with iur blood and treasure. To suggest that we put our people at risk and under the command of such clearly unqualified, dishonourable and untrustworthy scumbags is ridiculous. Furthermore this would can gain favours is also ridiculous. As we have already seen, you can bend over backwards trying to please them and give them the shirt off you back it doesn’t earn favours they just see that as weakness and it makes you a target for more bullying. Trump has now threatened or imposed tariffs on Europe THREE TIMES after supposedly “reaching a deal” with them, for various reasons. You can’t negotiate with a madman. And “not enforcing international law” comment is a joke. The Trump admin has explicitly stated that they don’t even believe in the concept of international law 1 1 Quote
BeaverFever Posted May 21 Author Report Posted May 21 On 5/19/2026 at 12:22 PM, Army Guy said: Are you suggesting that Iran which sponsors 4 of the largest terrorist groups in the middle east should be left alone to do as they please, not only holding the strait and world trade hostage which is against inter national law....i mean what is the point of having inter national laws if they can not or will not be enforced........ not to mention execute 10s of thousands of their own citizens...So yes not only is it sensible, but necessary.... They weren’t holding the strait hostage until Trump attacked them. And the Trump administration has explicitly stated they don’t believe in the concept of international law and that that the natural order of things is that countries are free to do whatever they are powerful enough to get away with. It seems that for now Iran is powerful enough to get away with closing the strait, thanks to Trump’s incompetence. And Iran was not left alone to do as they pleased they have been heavily sanctioned and they have paid a price for it. Sure there are limits to what sanctions can achieve especially when China and Russia are supporting them but clearly there are limits to what US hard power can achieve as so far it has only made things worse not better. 1 Quote
User Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 9 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: And “not enforcing international law” comment is a joke. The Trump admin has explicitly stated that they don’t even believe in the concept of international law That is mostly all it is, just a belief. I don't see Canada sending their military around the world to enforce much of a damn thing. Quote
User Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 4 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: They weren’t holding the strait hostage until Trump attacked them. And? Is attacking international shipping a valid and legitimate thing to do in war that you fully endorse now? Mr International Law? 5 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: It seems that for now Iran is powerful enough to get away with closing the strait, thanks to Trump’s incompetence. Has nothing to do with Trump. What they can or can't do existed long before Trump, regardless of him. You are so obsessed with hating Trump, though. So, why isn't Canada over there enforcing international law? 7 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: And Iran was not left alone to do as they pleased they have been heavily sanctioned and they have paid a price for it. Sure there are limits to what sanctions can achieve especially when China and Russia are supporting them but clearly there are limits to what US hard power can achieve as so far it has only made things worse not better. Yes, classic leftists... same mentality you have with criminals. You give them a slap on the wrist and then brag about how tough on crime you are. Iran has paid a price they are perfectly willing to pay as they continue to survive just fine doing business with folks like Russia, China, and India regardless of how much they are sanctioned. So why isn't Canada over there doing more to sanction them? Mr International law? You phonies are just fine with Iran pushing their terrorism around the region because its just Israel. You would be crying every day if Iran were funding terrorist proxies in Nova Scotia or Newfoundland that were lobbing missiles into Canada proper every other day of the week. Quote
WestCanMan Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 4 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: You keep speaking of the Trump administration as if they are competent and honourable people They are not. You just keep running your mouth and making baseless accusations here, as if your opinion is somehow worth so much that you can slander a president with just generic babbling, when your whole track record here is laughable, collusion-boy. Quote They have no clue what they are doing and there’s no reason to believe that joining their ongoing shitshow is going to improve anything, it just sucks us into their quagmire and makes us pay the price for their incompetence with iur blood and treasure. That's just a stupid CNN/Al Jazeera/CBC talking point, and again, you have no specific claim there. Just more generic, baseless BS. At least say "I saw it on Al Jazeera so it must be true" or something, instead of just pulling these claims straight out of your arse. Quote To suggest that we put our people at risk and under the command of such clearly unqualified, dishonourable and untrustworthy scumbags is ridiculous. Blahblahblah. You might as well just admit to being an id10t. Quote Furthermore this would can gain favours is also ridiculous. You almost make more sense when you speak gibberish than you do when you fluke off actual sentences. Quote As we have already seen, you can bend over backwards trying to please them and give them the shirt off you back it doesn’t earn favours they just see that as weakness and it makes you a target for more bullying. Uhhhhh, thanks for the words of wizdumb, Confusedass. Quote And “not enforcing international law” comment is a joke. How so, dummy? You gotta admit, left4rds look pretty stupid cheering for Iran to fire rockets at supertankers in defence of the ayatollah... 😂 The ayatollah literally has thousands of women beaten and imprisoned just for showing a bit of their hair, he has killed tens of thousands of legitimate freedom protesters, and he pays people to target women and children for torture, rape and murder... And he's your hero. You guys are willing to see millions of barrels of oil pour into the ocean just to protect the 21st-century Hitler/Satan. Beave, you're an amoral piece of shit. 1 Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
WestCanMan Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 22 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: Trump attacked them. You probably print headshots of the ayatollah, Hitler, Stalin, Hillary and Satan and then pin them on cardboard cutouts, then grind all up on them to the dirty dancing soundtrack. Where's your other hand, Beave? Beave, crooning to the cardboardtollah: "You never close your eyes anymore when I kiss your lips..." 1 Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
BeaverFever Posted May 21 Author Report Posted May 21 On 4/9/2026 at 9:42 PM, CdnFox said: well i didn't quite say that but power plants DO in fact run on oil and gas, and they are stored in tanks That was the conversation where i pointed out it was easier to store petro chemicals than electricity and solar power woudn't be able to replace conventional power till we had a way to store it that was as cheap and effective as we store petro chemcials which is true, and you cried like a baby when i proved it at the time. I have no doubt that you spent all night that night re writing it in your head till it seemed like you won ROFLMAO!! But it's still hilarious to see More of your lies and gaslighting! Why can you not just admit when you say something wrong? Doubling down on stupidity doesn’t make you look smarter just dumber. Your exact words were “cans of gasoline” for which I have ridiculed you endlessly. And no they are not powered by “oil and gas” that is “stored in tanks” the fossil fuel plants in Ontario are powered by natural gas that is fed to them continuously by a direct pipeline you don’t need to “store” anything Second of all you completely miss the point of storing electricity is thatbso you generate it when it’s cheap during low demand and then distribute it to the grid when its in high demand and more expensive to demonstrate As I already explained to you and the other doorknob who tried to come to your rescue in that thread, when you have a gas plant running at full capacity 24/7 storing more “petrochemicals” doesn’t make it produce more electricity during peak times This is another example where you soout off on topics you know NOTHING about and then instead of trying to at least google coherent conservative talking points for your argument you try to freelance and make up your own nonsensical gibberish. Its pathetic On 4/9/2026 at 9:42 PM, CdnFox said: Sorry kiddo from the very get go i've specifically said its "Not new military spending". Go back and look, i said it like 100 times. And you lost that argument so you're trying to pretend we were discussing something else. I never said money spent in the past is new spending. But money spent in the future is now perfectly valid defense spending. Logic isn’t your strong suit but let’s break this down 1) Coast guard spending is legitimate defence spending per NATO: FACT 2) Coast Guard spending was already happening under Trudeau but not being counted by NATO for bureaucratic reasons because it was not in Dept of National Defence FACT 3) Therefore: Canada was actually already closer to 2% under Trudeau than you gave him credit for and Carney was smart to simply reorganize the administration so we could get full credit for what we were already doing Furthermore you actually ignore and deny the BILLIONS of new dollars actually spent or committed to When they announce something new you say announcements don’t count because they haven’t handed the money over yet When they hand the money over for a previous announcement you say it doesn’t count because it was previously announced You find an excuse because you’re not intellectually honest On 4/9/2026 at 9:42 PM, CdnFox said: IF it was already announced and the contract signed then it woudlnt' be new 'military' spending. It would just be spending previously committed to that is being relabeled. If it wasn't a contract then maybe you'd have a point. but if they signed a contract and now they're going to reallocate that money to the military budget? Sorry, not new spending. To repeat ad nauseum: There IS new military spending but there is ALSO ongoing existing spending for things like Coast Guard that are legitimate defence expenditures but weren’t previously being counted because they weren’t organized under DND. It’s not cheating or trickery to do as the US and all our allies do and move these functions to DND There is new spending AND there is ongoing spending that newly qualifies, BOTH things are true and are perfectly fine and normal. You have to escape your child-like “either/or”mentality and be able to consider things intelligently like an adult But then again if you were capable of that you probably wouldn’t be so hyper partisan and living on this site to begin with. On 4/9/2026 at 9:42 PM, CdnFox said: So why doesn't it go on the health care spending? DOn't know? Can't figure it out? Because it wasn't health care. And if you decide to CALL it health care now, it wouldn't be new healthcare spending, it would be military spending that was renamed. Get it? Of course you use a fictional example for your fictional argument To repeat again: NATO, not Carney, defines what does and doesn’t count as defence spending. NATO agrees we are now spending 2% case closed. if Carney or Trudeau could just label anything they please as defence spending they would have done it a decade ago and not bothered with things like restructuring the coast guard in order to qualify Get it? On 4/9/2026 at 9:42 PM, CdnFox said: Then why didn't they count before? Why have we never applied the coast guard to military defense spending? If it's always counted and nothing changed then why not? Simple answer is you're wrong and a liar. It wasn't defense spending. We decided to rename it as defense spending but it wasn't. Which is fine. But - that means it's not new military spending. Very very simple. As I have EXPLAINED to your ADHD-addled brain MULTIPLE TIMES: NATO has rules The rules say you can only count Coast Guard if it’s part of the department of national defense and has a security mandate Neither of those things were true until Carney changed that by moving it from Department of Fisheries and Oceans to Department of National Defence and giving it a security mandate So once again on this topic YOU are wrong and while you are a liar general here you’re just stupid a usual. On 4/9/2026 at 10:33 PM, User said: Once again, this is the problem with you. You ran away from that thread like you do almost every thread you are in. You say something stupid, you get called out, you turn to lies to avoid admitting you were wrong, you run away... then you come back and push the same stupid crap again. Just like you did here in this thread with trees. LMAO nope. Look if you want to step up to the plate, strike out and then complain that sun was in your eyes or the unp is biased yeah we all know that’s how internet trolls operate but you don’t get strike out and then claim you hit the greatest gland slam in history. When Fox was spouting his gibberish about storing “cans of gasoline” to somehow generate more electricity during peak demand that was stupid. Then when you decided for whatever reason to jump in and try to rescue him by hilariously claiming that the pipeline to the gas plants only supplies some baseload amount that needs to be supplemented with the stored gas peak demand that was really stupid too. And unnecessary for you. I mean if all the arguments for you to jump into and make stuff up that was really a bad choice. And I called you out for it. The trees is the same thing: I explained it a hundred times and explained why your claims failed and you just kept repeating the same arguments. All of this is because people like you and fox and the other nutjobs on this site are internet rage-bait addicts who operate primarily on your “system 1” brain, which processes emotion and have low activity on your “system 2” brain, which is the part of your brain that handles logic and reasoning. System 2 can not function properly when System 1 is lit up like a xmas tree. So ppl like you who live on this website 24/7 are internet dopamine addict and can’t be that and be fully rational at the same time. So when you brag about people “running away” from threads while you foam and troll on here 24/7/365 and “win” arguments just by outlasting them, it’s not the own you think it is. In reality we are just psychologically well adjusted people with full and rewarding lives in the real world while you’re just another right wing internet clown who spends too much time online, which only serves to radicalize you even further. Quote
User Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 4 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: When Fox was spouting his gibberish about storing “cans of gasoline” to somehow generate more electricity during peak demand that was stupid. Then when you decided for whatever reason to jump in and try to rescue him by hilariously claiming that the pipeline to the gas plants only supplies some baseload amount that needs to be supplemented with the stored gas peak demand that was really stupid too. And unnecessary for you. I mean if all the arguments for you to jump into and make stuff up that was really a bad choice. And I called you out for it. Well, no, this was your stupid lie about what he said, not what he actually said. Like almost every discussion you are in, you ran away from that one and continue to peddle the same lies long after. If you wish to rehash the past, then provide the actual quotes, not your made-up BS. Or maybe don't run away from the thread. What does any of this have to do with anything here anyhow? Nothing. Just your usual stupidity. You can't win in an earnest discussion, so you just throw mud at the wall. 6 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: The trees is the same thing: I explained it a hundred times and explained why your claims failed and you just kept repeating the same arguments. The trees is certainly the same thing... You ran like the cowardly liar you are from that discussion. 7 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: All of this is because people like you and fox and the other nutjobs And yet you are here on this forum engaging in the BS cowardly antics you do.... Notice how you did not respond to anything I actually said here on this subject... you just rehash old arguments you ran away from, you lied in, to distract. Same old stupid dishonest games you play. Quote
BeaverFever Posted May 21 Author Report Posted May 21 On 5/18/2026 at 6:12 PM, Army Guy said: Leopard tanks hit the news.... With all this new Fake spending being attributed to the military why is it we can not replace our main Battle tanks until 2035...it should be noted that most of our fleet are also older than 40 years today.....And why this is not a priority for the Army is mind boggling...The current plan is to place all the Main Battle tanks in Edmonton, leaving the armored school, 2 CMBG, 5 CMBG without "any" tanks at all....but it gets worse 1/2 those tanks in Edmonton are training tanks....we have 20 LeaoIIA4M and 20 LeoIIA6M...Canada needs to get it's sh!t in a pile, how complicated can one purchase be.... This is not news. Esprit did the story inly because DND just put out the RFI for the Heavy Direct Fire Modernization Project which Btw Aalso called for it to have a common platform with another major project, the Medium Cavalry Vehicle. Gen. Wright, Army Commander has said already tanks are NOT an urgent priority given how threats and the role of armour has evolved: As drones upend tank warfare, Canada's army races to rethink its armour …In a recent interview with CBC News, Lt.-Gen. Mike Wright acknowledged the need to move quickly on the modernization of the army, but suggested the recent lessons and technological advances on the battlefield, particularly in Ukraine, need to be factored into future decisions on what kind of armoured vehicles and tanks are purchased … "Is heavy direct fire modernization one of my top-five priorities? No, it's not," Wright said, noting that the army has a total of 50 major capital projects on the go. Among Wright's priorities are key systems that have languished on the wish list for years — including ground-based air defence systems, long-range strike missiles, mobile artillery and Arctic all-terrain vehicles. "Is heavy direct fire modernization one of my top-five priorities? No, it's not," Wright said, noting that the army has a total of 50 major capital projects on the go. Among Wright's priorities are key systems that have languished on the wish list for years — including ground-based air defence systems, long-range strike missiles, mobile artillery and Arctic all-terrain vehicles. …Replacing them isn't a question, it's what to replace them with, Wright suggested. "Right now, if you ask me in 2026, I can't say what should replace the Leopard tank," Wright said. "Do I believe that we need heavy direct fire? Absolutely. But I think by the time we will be looking at moving that project forward, we'll have a better idea of what heavy direct-fire options exist — uncrewed and crewed — and what technology allows us to have heavy direct fire on the ground." The use of cheap, expendable drones to destroy Russian tanks and armoured vehicles in Ukraine has forced a fundamental reassessment of how and when armour is deployed in battle. German and American tank-makers have redesigned their vehicles to deliver better protection for tank crews and installed anti-drone systems. The U.S. Army will also test the Ripsaw M3 and other Robotic Combat Vehicles (RCVs) this year with plans to potentially field them by 2028. Smaller robot tanks would act as so-called battlefield wingmen to crewed tanks. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tanks-drones-canada-army-9.7155312 Quote
WestCanMan Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 On 5/18/2026 at 3:12 PM, Army Guy said: Leopard tanks hit the news.... With all this new Fake spending being attributed to the military why is it we can not replace our main Battle tanks until 2035... Carney has a plan to buy some Toyota Priuses that identify as tanks. For a couple billion dollars, there's a company called Brookfield that can outfit them with fake guns to make them faux battle-ready. Enemies that don't play dead are considered racist, and asked to turn themselves in for DEI training, where they're given citizenship and free medical & dental. 1 Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
BeaverFever Posted May 21 Author Report Posted May 21 On 5/18/2026 at 6:33 PM, Army Guy said: US drops a key military board and sites a lack of Canadian investment as a key reason....I provided views from both sides of the border...note the differences... 2 % of GDP is not the new standard that was the old standard....Thanks Canada for keeping up.........the new standards in 3.5 % on military expenditures and 1.5 % on military infra structure... https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5883148-canada-defense-cooperation-trump-carney-tensions/ https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trump-canada-us-joint-defence-board-9.7203211 That’s just juvenile MAGA trolling. The fact the MAGA hack appointee linked to Carney’s Davos speech confirms it The board didn’t even meet last year either. MAGAs don’t do planning and don’t do collaboration with others therefore no need for a board anyway. Consensus from Canadian analysts is that the impact of this announcement is mostly symbolic and doesn’t affect much in the ground. Quote
herbie Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 Better do what de Boss says, goy, Massah gonna whip yo' ass.an come down on de rest of us even worser Quote
BeaverFever Posted May 21 Author Report Posted May 21 On 5/18/2026 at 9:52 PM, Legato said: Because of the Carney’s Davos speech — a four-month-old address the Canadian prime minister’s admirers had called Churchillian, and that Washington now treats as a case study in the gap between rhetoric and reality. Except Washington is now run by incompetent trolls who are full of shit and are the embodiment of the gap between rhetoric and reality. “Inflation ending in day 1” and the “Trump golden age” were supposed to have started over a year ago, as but one example. Quote
Legato Posted May 21 Report Posted May 21 1 minute ago, BeaverFever said: Except Washington is now run by incompetent trolls who are full of shit and are the embodiment of the gap between rhetoric and reality. “Inflation ending in day 1” and the “Trump golden age” were supposed to have started over a year ago, as but one example. I was talking about the Carney and Canada, do try to keep up. 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.