AGAIN! O'Connor doesn't know what is going on!

[Canuck E Stan]

He's an honourable guy who obviously cares deeply about every aspect of the military - he's just not cut out for politics.

He cares deeply for the military but being a Tory, you say he would urinate on dead soldiers families.

Come on Stan let's be fair.

Keepitsimple seems reasonable, rational and a decent person.

There is no way he would use a term like "piss on the families" or even condone it's use.

Is there?

I'll do the honourable thing about that remark and apologise to Keepitsimple for implying he would say such a thing.

Keepitsimple, I'm deeply sorry I should have known better.

[Alexandra]

Now, I think in all fairness you should apologize.

I don't think so.

Topaz stated "how dare the PM say ....."

You be surprised how many people give a DAMN!! IF the Harper want to continue with this war then better make sure the families of the military get the best treatment when either coming in a casket or are injured! How dare the PM say that they would recieved whats REASONABLE!! No way, they get the BEST treatment that money can buy and if he doesn't want to do it that way then he can join the unemployment line because this country will not stand for anything less!! Tell that to your leader!!

This is what the PM stated in the House:

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, upon taking office, the Minister of National Defence instructed and made it clear to the Department of National Defence that this government would pay all reasonable funeral costs, even if those exceeded the limit that had been established by the previous government.

I understand that the chief of defence staff has confirmed that to be the case and that National Defence is obviously talking to various families to ensure that policy has been followed.

It is clear the PM was repeating the Minister of Defence's instructions. The PM did not say HEwould pay the families all reasonable funeral costs.

wdystfuahagaj.

[Argus]

It sure wasn't the Liberals, who didn't bother to change the stipend in 13 years in office, and who never mentioned it before now. I guess it would be the Tories, who are getting ready to increase the amount.

I wonder how many Canadians have died over there because the Liberals never bothered to equip them properly.

And now the Tories piss all over the families of dead soldiers. Well done.

And how are the Tories doing that? Or do you think wild, brainless accusations are an apt defence for 13 years of Liberal neglect?

[scribblet]

dobbin says

And now the Tories piss all over the families in dead soldiers. Well done.

Pretty stupid and shallow comment. The veterans benefit package hasn't been upgraded since the 90s, and now its been brought to the attention of the gov't they are changing it.

[Argus]

The Tories don't urinate on dead soldiers families in regards to funerals.

Canadians of all stripes have much more respect of the military than to comment the way you did.

To make such a statement and attribute it to someone else makes me wonder what goes on in your head.

Dissapointed in your selection of words.

It sickens me to think that these brave soldiers are giving their lives to ensure dobbin's right to post such hateful things.

But this was posted earlier and no one takes issue. Hmmm....................

"My experience is Lefties have a profound dissaproval of all things military, and all spending on the military, and that their reflexive, knee-jerk anti-militarism extends to sneering contemptuously at soldiers, regarding them as ignorant, uneducated, violently inclined rabble. And certainly the Liberals didn't mind offering them around to any location in the world that the government thought would make itself look magninimous, but they never put much effort into properly equipping them. That's why they went to Afghanistan with those crappy little jeeps which got some of them killed. That's why they went to Afghanistan with no supply helicopters - thus neccesitating long, dangerous convoy supply missions that got and is continuing to get more of them killed. That's why so much of their equipment is in danger of rust-out, and why there aren't enough of them."

Gander....goose . Ok, I will concede without the pissing part.

There is no equating the two statements. There is ample evidence that Lefties have contempt for all things military, including our military. There is ample evidence the Liberals had contempt for the military during the entirity of their reign over the last three decades. There is no question they ignored the military during Chretien's regime, which Hilliar called the "decade of darkness" I believe. The Conservatives were the ones demanding better funding for the military while the Liberals were spending our money on free flags, cultural festivals and fraudulent advertising campaigns. Now that the Toreis are in power they have been scrambling to reverse the decades of Liberal neglect. A neglect the likes of you and other Liberals apparently approved of in its entirety. Now to hear all your phoney crocodile tears because of soldiers is simply disgusting. To some Liberals, every soldier's death is a cause for celebration, for it gives them another reason to attack the tories and try to score some cheap political points.

[guyser]

A neglect the likes of you and other Liberals apparently approved of in its entirety. Now to hear all your phoney crocodile tears because of soldiers is simply disgusting. To some Liberals, every soldier's death is a cause for celebration, for it gives them another reason to attack the tories and try to score some cheap political points.

Wallow in your hyperbole. What a load of crap.

Lets celebrate , another soldier has died.

Right......

[jdobbin]

And how are the Tories doing that? Or do you think wild, brainless accusations are an apt defence for 13 years of Liberal neglect?

You pretty much dismissed the funerals as an issue. It obviously was an issue for the families but you could care less about them as long as you can swoon over O'Connor's performance. O'Connor had waved bye-bye to the whole thing until another family stepped forward and indicated that they too had been treated with disdain by the ministry. Then, all of the sudden, a hastily called news conference and O'Connor is back to what he has to do for each misstep he makes: apologize.

The anger and bile coming out of the right in laughable. Stop playing the victim and own up to your neglect of military needs when it comes to the families.

[jdobbin]

Pretty stupid and shallow comment. The veterans benefit package hasn't been upgraded since the 90s, and now its been brought to the attention of the gov't they are changing it.

Pretty stupid and shallow government that believed they addressed the issue and then sat on the benches laughing about it. They didn't and a day later had to apologize.

Stop playing the victim. The right have been spouting bile week after week. Well, now the Conservatives have to answer for the own record and it is found lacking when it comes to funerals of the soldiers they extended a mission for. Nice going.

[jdobbin]

There is no equating the two statements. There is ample evidence that Lefties have contempt for all things military, including our military. There is ample evidence the Liberals had contempt for the military during the entirity of their reign over the last three decades. There is no question they ignored the military during Chretien's regime, which Hilliar called the "decade of darkness" I believe. The Conservatives were the ones demanding better funding for the military while the Liberals were spending our money on free flags, cultural festivals and fraudulent advertising campaigns. Now that the Toreis are in power they have been scrambling to reverse the decades of Liberal neglect. A neglect the likes of you and other Liberals apparently approved of in its entirety. Now to hear all your phoney crocodile tears because of soldiers is simply disgusting. To some Liberals, every soldier's death is a cause for celebration, for it gives them another reason to attack the tories and try to score some cheap political points.

To some right wingers, every soldier's death means entry into the world of credibility with our allies. I'm sorry. It doesn't. Most don't have a clue we're there including our friends in Washington. Even the Washington Post this week reaffirmed that Afghanistan is the forgotten war.

Now, we have soldiers dying and their families receiving less than average cost for covering funerals and the right wing plays the victim. Grow up. Take some responsibility for your decision and stop blaming others for your whining and screeching that you're are being hard done by the media, the Opposition and electorate.

We all know you think everyone who doesn't think like you is stupid. You have said so many a time. But could you stop snivelling about it.

[Guest chilipeppers]

Pretty stupid and shallow comment. The veterans benefit package hasn't been upgraded since the 90s, and now its been brought to the attention of the gov't they are changing it.

Pretty stupid and shallow government that believed they addressed the issue and then sat on the benches laughing about it. They didn't and a day later had to apologize.

Stop playing the victim. The right have been spouting bile week after week. Well, now the Conservatives have to answer for the own record and it is found lacking when it comes to funerals of the soldiers they extended a mission for. Nice going.

Not as much bile as is spouted on here, and its not the tories record, its the Liberals lack of action while they were in office for the most part.

[jdobbin]

Not as much bile as is spouted on here, and its not the tories record, its the Liberals lack of action while they were in office for the most part.

So, no ownership of the funeral issue? It is the Liberals fault?

[Michael Bluth]

So, no ownership of the funeral issue? It is the Liberals fault?

So no ownership of the "piss on the families" comment?

It's the Conservative's fault?

[weaponeer]

As a memeber of the CF currently serving in Afghanistan can I weigh in here...

There really is NO government party in Canada, left or right that supports the military. Canadians support the troops because we are people, they do not support the military. They do not support what we do....they are not willing to support the military for real, that would mean big defence budgets, and lots of new modern equip.

The Tories have sort of been OK with equip, but the realities are not good for Canadas military. The Tories recently bought us 100 used Leopard2 tanks for the army, 100. we are buying them used from the Dutch who have over 350. Even when they sell us 100, they will still have more than us, and Holland is smaller than New Brunswick. The army has 3 tanks regiments, they are supposed to have 78 tanks each....

The Tories bought us 16 new Chinook transport helos. We will get them in 2008-09, great, but only 16. They will be a spent force in 20 years, there is simply not enough of them. If the gov't and Canadians were really serious about supporting us we would have bought 50-60 Chinooks. The Oklahoma National Guard has 50 Chinooks, the Brits fly 60, the Dutch have 13 and are buying 9 more.

The Tories bought us 17 new C130J transport aircraft to replace the current fleet of 32 C130E & H models we have. Good, but again too few. They will be tx'd (time expired) in 20 years also. a full squadron is 12 planes, we will have a sqadron and a half. Canada, second largest landmass on earth, G8 country, very very wealthy, not enough...

The Tories bought us 4 C17, very good capability. No probs there.

The Libs, they were very good to the forces in the St. Laurant days of the 1950's, but things have slipped. Yes, they finally bought a Sea King replacement after several crashed and many aircrew lives were lost. Not their fault, the Tories in the 1980's could have bought new ones, but no. EH101 was a good choice, but should have been made years earlier... The Libs finally bought us 28 new H92 helos to replace the Sea King, great helo, thanks, but again too few. 35 is the number the air force needed to properly support naval ops. 28, we will burn them out in 20 years also.

The Libs bought 650 new LAV3 armoured vehicles, not because they loved the military but becasue thet are built at GM in London ON. They were Canadian made, cheap so we got them. Again, the army would need about 1000 to equip all their regiments, we have fallen short on numbers again. There are none for the militia to use at all. They are OK, but there is better ones out there. They are whelled, and light. wheeled means they have limited offroad capability, light means they can be taken out by an RPG. Being restricted to roads means the enemy knows what route you will take and can better set-up an ambush with a really cheap RPG or IED and kill you. That's OK, they were cheap, and made in Canada, so a few soldiers die, whatever....

Our navy ships need refitting, we need new supply ships. We need navy transport ships to haul our gear around, don't think we'll see them. Why spend money on transport ships when we can hire Igor the Russian sailor to bring his freighter to Canada, he's cheap. If he decides to stop along the way and sell some of our stuff on the blackmarket, or blackmail our gov't for more $$ by holding our equipment, that's OK, he's cheap..

We soon will need to replace our old and over extended CF18 fighter fleet. We are down now to 60. Holland has 213 F16s, Australia has 144 fighters, Singapore, a city has 100 F16s and new F15's. Canada, second largest country in the world has 60. Thats enough to protect Manitoba, sort of....

Most of all we need people. If you really support us, JOIN!!!

Traditionally the Libs have been good to the people in the military, pay raises, benifits etc... they have never been big on buying the weapons systems we need to defend Canada. They always have excusses, and then defer our defence to the USA. (then bitch about how the Americans do things)

The Tories have traditionally always been more about buying equipment. Sometimes good stuff, sometimes not, but never in numbers we can really use...

I am very sorry for the Dinnings loss, the funeral should be paid in full, all reasonable costs. The gov't has to keep a grip on things, war profiteering is out there. If there is a free lunch, I have no doubt some funeral home somewhere will take advantage....

As for support the military, lefties, righties, if you really do then it is time to wake up and take action. It is time to properly equip our military, to fork out the big amounts of $$. It is not Americas job to defend Canada, thats our job...

[Argus]

As for support the military, lefties, righties, if you really do then it is time to wake up and take action. It is time to properly equip our military, to fork out the big amounts of $$. It is not Americas job to defend Canada, thats our job...

I pretty much agree with everything you wrote above. I, for one, have long favoured a larger, better equipped military. Unfortunately, any and all military purchase draw howls of protest from the Left, from the media, about waste of money that could better be used in hospitals, or to help poor people or whatever. Just look at the way the Liberals capitalized on this over the EH101 purchase.

I think the Conservatives want to do more, but there is a limit given the minority they have in place. Still, I would not say that even if they had a majority the Conservatives' would increase spending as much as is needed. There really isn't the broad support across the country for that kind of military spending. Where it exists, its among traditional conservatives.

The amount is just too large. We're not going to buy 230 F18s or whatever. And we wouldn't have the pilots for them. We should certainly buy more and better (the best) armored vehicles, because they're comparatively cheap and can be supported politically on the basis that the troops need protection in Afghanistan. They should be placing a huge order for more of these now. I also think we need new helicopters now, not in five years. I've heard noises about making a deal with Boeing to get models destined for the US so we wouldn't have to wait, but I'd like to make it a condition of the purchase. They should insist on it with the US and if the US government can't be forced on that issue then what are we doing in Afghanistan?

What the CAF really needs is a separate capital budget which allows them to buy new vehicles, aircraft, whatever, on an ongoing basis as needed rather than in one-off costly, politically dicey purchases.

[Fortunata]

Very enlightening post weaponeer.

For right or wrong Canada is not a military country; we seem to think well of our military but don't want to be military. I don't know if this was always the case, or as you said, because the USA is next door we haven't felt the need to be. I know that this country was brought into being without (relatively) violence/war and that seems to have stuck to this day.

I'm not sure of any answers; I thought the northwest passage opening up due to climate change would spur support for at least a bigger well-equipped navy since we need to be there to protect our sovereignty. Bill Graham said there was no threat up there; that was only because the Libs wanted to take no action and spend no money. Steve said he would gear things up but hasn't.

I don't know what it will take to get Canadians to change thought mode and realize that we have to have military capabilities for ourselves, not to fight in Afghanistan, not to peacekeep somewhere and not to clear snow from Toronto streets; but here for us if and when we need it. I do fear when we finally realize we need this military it will be too late for what we really need it for.

[jdobbin]

As for support the military, lefties, righties, if you really do then it is time to wake up and take action. It is time to properly equip our military, to fork out the big amounts of $$. It is not Americas job to defend Canada, thats our job...

Good to hear from your weaponeer. Hope you are safe in your work.

Over the last decades Liberal and Tory support has been lacking for the military. It was the first area to cut in the big expansion of social services in the 1960s and 1970s and became a big area to cut when trying to reign in the deficit in 1980s and 1990s.

There has been a build up since 2001 and rightly so. However, after so many years, it is quite the task to gear up for the tasks that need to be done in the world today.

A new blueprint for the future of Canada's military is probably in order. I don't know that anyone has a bead on what that should be entirely and I think there is no shame in getting together an expert group to list the priorities and a timetable that is both realistic and practical.

Things like the submarine purchase appear to be waste of money. When the government announced the deal, I thought it was a poor choice because of the change in the cold war. I thought the money would have been better spent on four to six brand new destroyers or transport craft.

Likewise, we find the need for heavy lift helicopters but at one time the military said they were sold off.

There had been no plans for new tanks until Afghanistan.

Any new strategy will have to be thought in terms of what future actions the military will take and have a certain amount of flexibility to it. We can't be tied to large purchase and operating projects like submarines. They seemed to be a first strike type of craft rather than a craft geared to defense.

[weaponeer]

Very enlightening post weaponeer.

For right or wrong Canada is not a military country; we seem to think well of our military but don't want to be military. I don't know if this was always the case, or as you said, because the USA is next door we haven't felt the need to be. I know that this country was brought into being without (relatively) violence/war and that seems to have stuck to this day.

I'm not sure of any answers; I thought the northwest passage opening up due to climate change would spur support for at least a bigger well-equipped navy since we need to be there to protect our sovereignty. Bill Graham said there was no threat up there; that was only because the Libs wanted to take no action and spend no money. Steve said he would gear things up but hasn't.

I don't know what it will take to get Canadians to change thought mode and realize that we have to have military capabilities for ourselves, not to fight in Afghanistan, not to peacekeep somewhere and not to clear snow from Toronto streets; but here for us if and when we need it. I do fear when we finally realize we need this military it will be too late for what we really need it for.

I know Canada is not a military country, and that's OK I would not want it to be, no more than a police officer would want us to be a police state. I believe in Canada first, we the CF excist to protect Canada and our way of life. We need the proper gear to do it. We should not build up our military to invade Norway, but we should be able to dispatch a credible military force anywhere within Canada. We should have an air force that can maintain air superiority over Canada, an army that can move quickly and defeat any threat within Canada, and our navy should be able to operate in all three oceans.

I don't want to create a Canadain Empire, just do things right. It is embarrassing to have the Americans take the lead in military operations within Canada, not because they bully us, but because we could not be bothered. The 2010 Olympics will be a big test for the military, so far the US is running the show because we don't have what we need.....

[madmax]

As a memeber of the CF currently serving in Afghanistan can I weigh in here...

As for support the military, lefties, righties, if you really do then it is time to wake up and take action. It is time to properly equip our military, to fork out the big amounts of $$. It is not Americas job to defend Canada, thats our job...

Haven't heard from you in a bit. Well worth the wait.

[weaponeer]

As for support the military, lefties, righties, if you really do then it is time to wake up and take action. It is time to properly equip our military, to fork out the big amounts of $$. It is not Americas job to defend Canada, thats our job...

Good to hear from your weaponeer. Hope you are safe in your work.

Over the last decades Liberal and Tory support has been lacking for the military. It was the first area to cut in the big expansion of social services in the 1960s and 1970s and became a big area to cut when trying to reign in the deficit in 1980s and 1990s.

There has been a build up since 2001 and rightly so. However, after so many years, it is quite the task to gear up for the tasks that need to be done in the world today.

A new blueprint for the future of Canada's military is probably in order. I don't know that anyone has a bead on what that should be entirely and I think there is no shame in getting together an expert group to list the priorities and a timetable that is both realistic and practical.

Things like the submarine purchase appear to be waste of money. When the government announced the deal, I thought it was a poor choice because of the change in the cold war. I thought the money would have been better spent on four to six brand new destroyers or transport craft.

Likewise, we find the need for heavy lift helicopters but at one time the military said they were sold off.

There had been no plans for new tanks until Afghanistan.

Any new strategy will have to be thought in terms of what future actions the military will take and have a certain amount of flexibility to it. We can't be tied to large purchase and operating projects like submarines. They seemed to be a first strike type of craft rather than a craft geared to defense.

Hi Jdobb,

Hope your enjoying your spring, I hear I has been hot in "The Peg".

Yes, we do need to do a very thourough top to bottom review of the CF and it's needs. Myself, I believe in a Canada first outlook. What I think we need,

Our air force is the first line of defence. We need more that 60 modern fighters, we need about 120 based throughout Canada, to protect our coastal approaches and major cities. We need surveillance aircraft, manned and unmanned to monitor our coastlines, all three. I would likwe to see us purchase a fleet of about 7 AWACS type aircraft to control and direct our airforces. We need solid search & rescue aircraft. Right now we have 14 EH101, not enough for 32 million people in the second largest counrty on earth, we need about 20 more. We need a robust military air transport capability in order to move quickly throught Canada, and is capable of operating in the high arctic. We are getting 17 new C130 and 4 C17, 21 planes. That's a good start, but we need about 10-12 more C130s. We need tactical helos to support the army, the chinooks are a good start, but we need at least 20 more, plus about 30 gunships.

The navy is not too bad, we do nee supply and transport ships if you are going to operate worldwide. For Canada, we need armed patrol boats, like the Sweedish "Visby" class, as well as armed ships for the arctic. The subs, they were sort of a good buy, but I would much rather see Canada buy 4 US Navy Virginai class nuke subs. The US Navy is building several, and we could just add a few more Canadian ones on their line. Why nuke subs, because they do not need to be refuelled for 50 years. They can operate under the polar ice, and the main reason is that nothing can detect a sub like another sub.

The reason the CF bought the subs was because everybody in the world is buying subs. Old Russian subs can be bought very cheaply. N Korea, China, Iran, Pakistan, India are all buying subs, lots of them. Why, becasue the submarine is the most devistating conventional weapons system evey devised. They cause great anxiety for anyone who has to deal with them. They cannot be detected by surface ships, it is almost impossible. Only helos and other subs have any real chance of detecting them and killing them.

Our army needs to be restructured and reequipped. It should be light and lethal. Light enough to n\move anywhere it is needed quickly and lethal enough to either deter or kill an enemy very quickly. we should maintain at least one "heavy" brigade, tanks and heavy tracked vehicles, for use in a high intensity conflict.

I look to countires like Australia, Holland, Singapore, Norway and Sweden as examples. They have smaller militaries, but they are lethal.

The biggest thing that kills our military is our procurment process. It is a lead weight around our neck. If we were a business we would have been bankrupt years ago, total waste of taxpayers $$...

I would like to see us with an military, well equipped, multi role capable with about 80K well paid professionals. A military that says, We are Canadian, we are friendly, but do not piss us off.....

[weaponeer]

As a memeber of the CF currently serving in Afghanistan can I weigh in here...

As for support the military, lefties, righties, if you really do then it is time to wake up and take action. It is time to properly equip our military, to fork out the big amounts of $$. It is not Americas job to defend Canada, thats our job...

Haven't heard from you in a bit. Well worth the wait.

Hi Madmax,

I have been quite busy here reinventing the wheel:), it's a long story...

Just for the record, I have posted many times here supporting O'Connor on various issues, but my opinion has changed. We can do better.....

[jdobbin]

Looks like the writing is on the wall for O'Connor.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...08?hub=Politics

Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor has the telltale symptoms: the low-level rumblings in the department, the spreading speculation around Parliament Hill, the wounded aura that sends the Opposition into full-on kill mode.

In short, he's got a bad case of Rona Ambrose, symptomatic of a cabinet minister on life support.

Conservative insiders and sources in the Department of National Defence say there is increasing chatter in their circles that O'Connor's troubled ministerial tenure will soon come to a close. Theoretically, his departure could be the catalyst for a cabinet shuffle just before an expected speech from the throne this fall.

O'Connor's name was aired repeatedly during the last shuffle in January. Even then, questions had been raised about his ability to properly sell the Afghan military mission to Canadians. The mission has been identified by pollsters as a major weak spot for the Conservatives -- a fact that must weigh on majority-starved Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Just ask Ambrose.

[Michael Bluth]

The writing has been on the wall for a while.

Jay Hill seems like the most likely name to get bumped up to Cabinet.

Maybe Prentice adds Deputy PM to his title, maybe not.

Maybe Rahim Jaffer adds some much needed youth and colour to cabinet.

Maybe Fabian Manning gets bumped up.

Maybe Helena Guergis becomes a full minister....

[jdobbin]

Hope your enjoying your spring, I hear I has been hot in "The Peg".

Yes, we do need to do a very thourough top to bottom review of the CF and it's needs. Myself, I believe in a Canada first outlook. What I think we need,

Our air force is the first line of defence. We need more that 60 modern fighters, we need about 120 based throughout Canada, to protect our coastal approaches and major cities. We need surveillance aircraft, manned and unmanned to monitor our coastlines, all three. I would likwe to see us purchase a fleet of about 7 AWACS type aircraft to control and direct our airforces. We need solid search & rescue aircraft. Right now we have 14 EH101, not enough for 32 million people in the second largest counrty on earth, we need about 20 more. We need a robust military air transport capability in order to move quickly throught Canada, and is capable of operating in the high arctic. We are getting 17 new C130 and 4 C17, 21 planes. That's a good start, but we need about 10-12 more C130s. We need tactical helos to support the army, the chinooks are a good start, but we need at least 20 more, plus about 30 gunships.

The navy is not too bad, we do nee supply and transport ships if you are going to operate worldwide. For Canada, we need armed patrol boats, like the Sweedish "Visby" class, as well as armed ships for the arctic. The subs, they were sort of a good buy, but I would much rather see Canada buy 4 US Navy Virginai class nuke subs. The US Navy is building several, and we could just add a few more Canadian ones on their line. Why nuke subs, because they do not need to be refuelled for 50 years. They can operate under the polar ice, and the main reason is that nothing can detect a sub like another sub.

The reason the CF bought the subs was because everybody in the world is buying subs. Old Russian subs can be bought very cheaply. N Korea, China, Iran, Pakistan, India are all buying subs, lots of them. Why, becasue the submarine is the most devistating conventional weapons system evey devised. They cause great anxiety for anyone who has to deal with them. They cannot be detected by surface ships, it is almost impossible. Only helos and other subs have any real chance of detecting them and killing them.

Our army needs to be restructured and reequipped. It should be light and lethal. Light enough to n\move anywhere it is needed quickly and lethal enough to either deter or kill an enemy very quickly. we should maintain at least one "heavy" brigade, tanks and heavy tracked vehicles, for use in a high intensity conflict.

I look to countires like Australia, Holland, Singapore, Norway and Sweden as examples. They have smaller militaries, but they are lethal.

The biggest thing that kills our military is our procurment process. It is a lead weight around our neck. If we were a business we would have been bankrupt years ago, total waste of taxpayers $$...

I would like to see us with an military, well equipped, multi role capable with about 80K well paid professionals. A military that says, We are Canadian, we are friendly, but do not piss us off.....

I am still unconvinced on the British subs. I think we'll have to see how the U.S. nuclear subs shake out. I don't know Canada is ready for a nuclear sub. After Harper backed away from nuclear Coast Guard icebreakers, I don't know that he would go for nuclear subs.

I think Australia has been having problems with their homemade built subs as well. They don't seem to be able to dive as deep as the specs says they should.

I have no problem with a full assessment of military needs. After Winnipeg got burned even when it had the lowest bid and higher technical attributes, I'd like to see politics removed from much of the procurement process. Unfortunately, the Tories bypassed that part of the legislation using provisions of national security to do it.

[Argus]

As a memeber of the CF currently serving in Afghanistan can I weigh in here...

As for support the military, lefties, righties, if you really do then it is time to wake up and take action. It is time to properly equip our military, to fork out the big amounts of $$. It is not Americas job to defend Canada, thats our job...

Haven't heard from you in a bit. Well worth the wait.

Hi Madmax,

I have been quite busy here reinventing the wheel:), it's a long story...

Just for the record, I have posted many times here supporting O'Connor on various issues, but my opinion has changed. We can do better.....

In what way? It seems to me that all anyone is accusing him of is not being properly informed about what's going on over there. Which means the military is not keeping him properly informed If that's the kick against O'Connor than Hillier should get the axe too. He's the one who is supposed to make sure the minister's office is kept fully informed. How is replacing O'Connor with anyone else going to remedy a problem whose origin is with Hillier?

[jdobbin]

In what way? It seems to me that all anyone is accusing him of is not being properly informed about what's going on over there. Which means the military is not keeping him properly informed If that's the kick against O'Connor than Hillier should get the axe too. He's the one who is supposed to make sure the minister's office is kept fully informed. How is replacing O'Connor with anyone else going to remedy a problem whose origin is with Hillier?

They won't criticize Hillier because they want him to run as a Tory candidate at some point.