Possible Disaster Looming For Canadian Military Independence

Posted on Monday, August 23 at 14:15 by Perturbed
Who knows if peacenik leaders like Duceppe and Layton will try to stop this, and we know the Conservative position on Canadian military independence, although they so support increased spending to serve U.S. interests. Personally I've heard that hald of our CF-18s are already grounded or used for training, and Dr. Caleb mentioned one of our destroyers HMCS Huron (IIRC) was laid-up due to manpower shortages, but this is getting pretty transparent. Weaken Canada--and have an Orwellian gun registry to locate possible areas of resistance in an invasion, perhaps? I know two high-school graduates personally, who both did preliminary training for at least 2 years, and were told at the end of it, that they passed with flying colours, but could not be taken on due to "Lack of available funds." Let's be thankful for the internet. At least now the Liberals can't pull a C.D. Howe without us finding out about it quite quickly... Promise could gut military Ships, jets may be scrapped to fulfill Liberal troop pledge Chris Wattie; with files from Mike Blanchfield National Post, with files from CanWest News Service Saturday, August 21, 2004 The Canadian military may be forced to mothball all of its remaining destroyers and ground up to a quarter of its front-line fighter jets in order to fulfill a Liberal election promise to create a new, 5,000-strong "peacekeeping brigade." Bill Graham, the Defence Minister, is to present options on the proposed new brigade to Cabinet by the end of the month, but Defence sources have told the National Post the military has been told to prepare drastic measures to pay for the ideas. In an article posted yesterday on the Web site of Jane's Defence Weekly, the London-based defence publishing and analysis group said senior Canadian officers have been working in secret on finding a way to pay for the promised influx of new troops. Under the proposal, the navy is to take all of its Iroquois-class destroyers, the flagship vessels from which commodores or admirals can command a task force of warships, out of service, while the air force is to ground as many as 20 of its CF-18s, a quarter of its entire fighter force. The CF-18 Hornet is in the midst of a $2.3-billion, six-year modernization program. During the federal election campaign, the Liberals promised to add a new brigade of 5,000 troops to the overstretched and chronically underfunded Canadian military specifically for peacekeeping and "peace support" missions. The military was caught completely off guard by the pledge, which senior officers believe Paul Martin, the Prime Minister, made hastily in the heat of fighting an early Conservative surge in the campaign. One senior military official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Armed Forces are worried they "are going to be perceived as being in bed with this cockamamie idea." They also fear the plan could lead to the effective demise of the navy and air force. Just shows how much our sellout politicians truly practice careerist-poltiics. To read the rest: http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=b393159c-5380-4b7d-91f3-8266b57ac1bf

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:04 pm
    I'm kinda for this, suprisingly.

    Disband the military. Go ahead, who cares we don't need it. A 5000-man peace-keeping force sounds about right.. just in case some crazy militant anarchy group pops up in our own country, or for disasters, etc. Why not set the precident that you know what, even if we disagree strongly with you (another country) on an issue, we're not going to become involved in physical violence or intimidation to get what we want. We'll talk it out and try to find a middle ground. If we come from the perspective of compassion and tolerance, how can things go wrong?

    Sure, you could agrue that maybe some crazy dictator on the other side of the World does not care if we choose peace instead of war, he'll shoot us anyway. But, I don't think this would happen. If we (the Primie Minister himself) address the PEOPLE (who are 99.9% of the time completely cut out of the discussion, and are fed dumb-downed and often complete bullshit through the media) in their country, as well as their administration.. with (fully documented and open) honesty, integrity and fairness (even if we stand to lose a little bit on some issues, less resources whatever it may be) would that not open up new avenues of cross-cultural acceptance? Why not conduct candid weekly interviews with figureheads (the Prime Minister, etc.) explaining for themselves what issues they were dealing with that week, and what steps they were taking to solve them? No prepared speeches, just a nationally televised chat over coffee. No secrets whatsoever. A complete open book policy for all to see. How else can we keep our "superiors" honest? Where did this idea of secrecy and paranoia come from anyway?

    In Canada we don't stop anyway from freely practicing their religion or customs. Go for it, we don't mind. As long as it doesn't interfere with the freedom of others why should anyone mind? I'll tell you why, because World leaders aren't interested in tolerance and compassion, they're interested in control. They have no faith in the goodness of people, because they see and feel and act on the corruption in themsevles.

    K, I forgot where I was going with this. Haha. I need to take a nap.

    ---
    Revolution.

  2. Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:25 pm
    <a href='http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1093257919668&call_pageid=968332188774&col=968350116467'>Nope.</a><p><p>---<br>"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill <br />

  3. Mon Aug 23, 2004 11:11 pm
    I think Canadian who are mislead believe that it comes down to either doiong the quasi-peacenik stuff overseas, cleaning up U.S. garbage, or protecting our own interests at home. It does not.

  4. Mon Aug 23, 2004 11:18 pm
    I don't trust the Post any more than anyone, but would it honestly surprise you Dr. Caleb if it happened? I mean, what else is the general going to say? He's a government paid official.

    I personally liked the claim in the article that it takes many years to train soldiers and officers....you'd know more about this than I do of course, but I assume it wouldn't take 10 years to train a soldier or build a ship were it a priority. Say if NATO got us into another big war. It would happen almost instantly, wouldn't it?

    I find it hilarious that we just built the fairly large Rexall Tennis Centre in Toronto to house the tennis masters tourney, in only 10 months, but these G-8 countries tell us it takes years to do something that could take weeks or months.

  5. Mon Aug 23, 2004 11:20 pm
    Until the world learns to get along - a military is a neccessity. How much and how the equiped though is still up for debate.

    We need to decide WHAT kind of military we want and for what purpose.

    A closer move to the US? No thanks - unless they drop that pre-emptive empire building bullshit.

    ---
    If there was ever a time for Canadians to become pushy - now is the time - for time is running out on this nation called Canada.

  6. Mon Aug 23, 2004 11:32 pm
    No, it's not out of the realm of possibility. They cut Military spending in the 90's when the public's attention turned toward healthcare, and away from the military because of Somalia and the 'hazing' rituals in the Airborne. Which is why the military is in the shambles it is now (dictionary: see <i>irony</i>). Also see: Pte. Kyle Green under the heading <i>scapegoat</i><p> That was a Toronto Star article by the way (hehe) ;)<p><p>---<br>"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill <br />

  7. Tue Aug 24, 2004 5:53 am
    What if we just chose to get along at any cost.. taking the great risk of being invaded? What if our resolved was so strong, that we stand in front of the world naked (no military) and cry out "enough!" Would that not be an example that people the world over would identify with and want to emulate? When I say people of the world I do not mean instituions.. be it the corporations or, lets face it, puppet governments. If not puppet, then bent strongly to conform with Capitalist ideals at the expense of what seems to be common sense (health care, education, etc.). Anyway, when I say people I mean the regular folk. Your next door neighbour. People slaving in the good ol' 9-5, worrying about bills. People who believe that PEACE, TOLERANCE, EQUALITY AND UNDERSTANDING are top priorities, above all else. People who believe it so deeply that they would band together and stand up in front of the entire world community, risking everything by doing so. People who aren't plugged into this rediculous culture of media propelled fear and propaghanda.

    Heh.

    K I'm going to stop now before I get <i>really</i> riled up.

    :)

    ---
    Revolution.

  8. Tue Aug 24, 2004 6:16 am
    In a perfect world, I`d be for total dis-armament. But since we live next to the 4th reich, and this 4th reich lays claim to being 'tired of defending a complacent Canada', I say we re-arm! We have the means, and then the US can no longer say that we`re riding on their coattails. Then we protect ourselves and our resources from not some overseas threat, but surely the threat that comes from south of the great lakes and 49th!

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  9. Tue Aug 24, 2004 6:46 am
    This is really funny, we can't afford our military because we need to defend U.S. interests, and clean up their mess, but at the same time, refer to exhibit A posted on vive: search 'Defence Audit Problems'. We need some major changes in who and how our public money is managed!

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  10. Tue Aug 24, 2004 7:09 am
    Yeah but that's exactly the kind of thinking that's kept the world enveloped in wars for.. well, ever. Plus, arm and do what? Lose? The Americans would kick our ass without batting an eyelash. It has nothing to do with courage or toughness. It has to do with capital and numbers. Building and maintaining an army is an archaic way of defining yourself as a nation. Standing up exposed to boldly challenge other world leaders on this by totally disbanding is revolutionary. A bloodless revolution. Maybe not the first but certainly an important (maybe most important?) one in history. Honestly, what is the worst that could happen? Do you think we'd be invaded? Haha. By who? Who would dare? Imagine in Europe recieving news that the U.S. was invading and annexing Canada. Do you see how far-fetched that sounds (totally worth the risk in my opinion. Call the bluff of the huffing and puffing Americans)? The peaceful World community would never stand by for that. We're PAST all that. Although the propaghanda-feuled media would have us think otherwise.

    Think about it, we are all fed (food, not media images heh.. although I guess we are fed both). All of us. Sure we have to buy our food (which we shouldn't have to, but that's another matter), but it's there. None of us (even the homeless, as poorly treated as they are) ever starve. So, if you are not starting a war because you need food and are starving, then by what right do you start that war? ..because you need x resource over there to grow and expand technologically? Why not work in tandem with x country and include them in the process (if they say no, too bad. work harder to convince them of the good it would create for humanity, or think of another way to pull it off)? Oh that's right, greed. The fact that there's an economic component to it. Capitalism. The drive to place your country (with globalization its no longer about your country and totally about the individual/corporation), above another. The plight for power I suppose. But TECHNOLOGY exists now where we, at the very least, can see ITS infinite potential. Why not work towards freedom (from capitalism and the economic model first and foremost) instead of placing more shackles on it (socially and economically)? I think, as it's probably annoyingly clear (heh), that capitalism IS corruption and a very large (not all, but large) part of the problem. They go hand in hand. Only when we free ourself from the former can we even attempt to tackle the latter, and vice versa. We need to think our way out, but it's goddamn hard. I think disbanding the military is a (VERY) bold step in the right (? heh) direction, but then again change was never easy, right?

    K. My mind just exploded. I gotta take a nap.

    ---
    Revolution.

  11. Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:08 pm
    Some of these posts are hilarious they're so dumb! keep'em coming!

  12. Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:24 pm
    I don`t think it`s far fetched at all that the US would consider invading. Only thing is, they never had to, since most of our leaders were all too compliant. All I say is, we point a few nukes their way and tell them to back off. It`s really a shame that it`s down to this, for sure, but look at history and countries who peacefully tried to control their own destiny- the US moved in, and set up puppet dictators! We have to defend ourselves. At the human level, there`s nothing wrong with learning martial arts, or a woman carrying a can of mace, for self-defense. If we don`t defend ourselves, then its the end of Canada. Think of Fort Drum, built by the US on the St.Lawrence, right around the time of the FLQ crisis. Guess what they were thinking if Trudeau somehow couldn`t control the situation? And Chretien already signed a treaty with the US allowing their troops into Canada 'to deal with any terrorist attack!'

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  13. Tue Aug 24, 2004 9:18 pm
    Vive users are pretty dumb, so yes, the posts do provide a most entertaining read. Myself, I perfer the socialist/communist drivel for a good laugh. But the pro-disband the military comments are a close second.

  14. Tue Aug 24, 2004 10:57 pm
    Comment deleted. Play nice!

    ---
    "If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news