A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Canada's role in the future



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 11th 04, 01:21 AM
John Locke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Canada's role in the future

Canada's military is, and has been for over a decade, in a state of
disarray. This is largely due to two facts. The first is the Trudeau
government, which preached quasi-socialist values and viewed the
Soviet Union not as an aggressor, but rather as the victim of American
agression. Trudeau managed to spit on the Army, Air Force, and Navy on
both sides of the border.

The second elements in Canada's dangerous decline is the Chretien
government. Chretien, like many politicos, believed the end of the
Cold War meant an end to hostilities: there would be no more battles.
Peacekeeping would be Canada's military's only role. One of Chretien's
first actions was to cancel the replacement of the Sea King helicopter
with the EH-101. Clearly, the helicopters were needed, and if the
order was not cancelled, Canadian forces would have new helicopters by
now rather than risking lives flying antique Sea Kings that cost more
money to maintain than they are worth.

Chretien sent us into many theaters, from Somalia, Haiti, the former
Yugoslavia, and lastly Afghanistan. Not only were are troops stretched
dangerously thin, they were sent into combat under equipped.

But there is also a larger societal power at play. For some reason in
the last 50 years, Canadians have begun to believe that their soldier
should be more social worker than hardened killer. Peacekeeping is a
noble enterprise, but it must be remembered that it requires the peace
to be kept. How effective was peacekeeping in Rwanda in 1994.

A Conservative government under Stephen Harper must revitalize not
only the numbers and equipment of the Canadian forces, but also
clearly state what we want out of our forces. Is it peacekeeping,
peacemaking, social work, etc. Of course, the role of our forces
should be to do what is in our country's national interest, something
they are currently incapable of doing. Soldiers must consider killing
their first task. Everything else is secondary.

The world is not a friendly place, and there is little prospect of it
becoming peaceful any time soon. Canada should live up to its global
role and enlarge its forces significantly.

JL
  #2  
Old June 11th 04, 04:30 AM
Brian Colwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Locke" wrote in message
om...
Canada's military is, and has been for over a decade, in a state of
disarray. This is largely due to two facts. The first is the Trudeau
government, which preached quasi-socialist values and viewed the
Soviet Union not as an aggressor, but rather as the victim of American
agression. Trudeau managed to spit on the Army, Air Force, and Navy on
both sides of the border.

The second elements in Canada's dangerous decline is the Chretien
government. Chretien, like many politicos, believed the end of the
Cold War meant an end to hostilities: there would be no more battles.
Peacekeeping would be Canada's military's only role. One of Chretien's
first actions was to cancel the replacement of the Sea King helicopter
with the EH-101. Clearly, the helicopters were needed, and if the
order was not cancelled, Canadian forces would have new helicopters by
now rather than risking lives flying antique Sea Kings that cost more
money to maintain than they are worth.

Chretien sent us into many theaters, from Somalia, Haiti, the former
Yugoslavia, and lastly Afghanistan. Not only were are troops stretched
dangerously thin, they were sent into combat under equipped.

But there is also a larger societal power at play. For some reason in
the last 50 years, Canadians have begun to believe that their soldier
should be more social worker than hardened killer. Peacekeeping is a
noble enterprise, but it must be remembered that it requires the peace
to be kept. How effective was peacekeeping in Rwanda in 1994.

A Conservative government under Stephen Harper must revitalize not
only the numbers and equipment of the Canadian forces, but also
clearly state what we want out of our forces. Is it peacekeeping,
peacemaking, social work, etc. Of course, the role of our forces
should be to do what is in our country's national interest, something
they are currently incapable of doing. Soldiers must consider killing
their first task. Everything else is secondary.

The world is not a friendly place, and there is little prospect of it
becoming peaceful any time soon. Canada should live up to its global
role and enlarge its forces significantly.

JL


Not sure what this n/g has to do with your domestic political
campaign.....Send it to the National Post !

BMC


  #3  
Old June 11th 04, 10:46 PM
tim gueguen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Locke" wrote in message
om...
Canada's military is, and has been for over a decade, in a state of
disarray. This is largely due to two facts. The first is the Trudeau
government, which preached quasi-socialist values and viewed the
Soviet Union not as an aggressor, but rather as the victim of American
agression. Trudeau managed to spit on the Army, Air Force, and Navy on
both sides of the border.

No, I suspect the real truth is that Trudeau decided that if there was ever
a war between NATO and the Warsaw Pact it would swiftly go nuclear and we'd
all be dead. So he didn't see the point in large expenditures on the
military.

But there is also a larger societal power at play. For some reason in
the last 50 years, Canadians have begun to believe that their soldier
should be more social worker than hardened killer. Peacekeeping is a
noble enterprise, but it must be remembered that it requires the peace
to be kept. How effective was peacekeeping in Rwanda in 1994.

It would have been effective if the UN biggies had been willing to pony up
the forces needed to stop the massacres. They weren't.

A Conservative government under Stephen Harper must revitalize not
only the numbers and equipment of the Canadian forces, but also
clearly state what we want out of our forces.


But it appears so far they won't. They'll just throw money at things so
they can say, "See, we're spending more. See, we bought some cool new toys
so we'll look cool like the other guys." In reality a major defense review
is needed.

tim gueguen 101867


  #4  
Old June 11th 04, 11:00 PM
Jarg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"tim gueguen" wrote in message
news:5Lpyc.730683$oR5.701504@pd7tw3no...

"John Locke" wrote in message
om...
Canada's military is, and has been for over a decade, in a state of
disarray. This is largely due to two facts. The first is the Trudeau
government, which preached quasi-socialist values and viewed the
Soviet Union not as an aggressor, but rather as the victim of American
agression. Trudeau managed to spit on the Army, Air Force, and Navy on
both sides of the border.

No, I suspect the real truth is that Trudeau decided that if there was

ever
a war between NATO and the Warsaw Pact it would swiftly go nuclear and

we'd
all be dead. So he didn't see the point in large expenditures on the
military.



If so, that would have been a self fulfilling idea! The onle only way NATO
could have defended itself without strong conventional forces would have
been to use nukes. And for that matter, the same weakness might have
encouraged the other side to start a war.


In reality a major defense review
is needed.

tim gueguen 101867




  #5  
Old June 11th 04, 11:32 PM
Brian Colwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"tim gueguen" wrote in message
news:5Lpyc.730683$oR5.701504@pd7tw3no...

"John Locke" wrote in message
om...
Canada's military is, and has been for over a decade, in a state of
disarray. This is largely due to two facts. The first is the Trudeau
government, which preached quasi-socialist values and viewed the
Soviet Union not as an aggressor, but rather as the victim of American
agression. Trudeau managed to spit on the Army, Air Force, and Navy on
both sides of the border.

No, I suspect the real truth is that Trudeau decided that if there was

ever
a war between NATO and the Warsaw Pact it would swiftly go nuclear and

we'd
all be dead. So he didn't see the point in large expenditures on the
military.

But there is also a larger societal power at play. For some reason in
the last 50 years, Canadians have begun to believe that their soldier
should be more social worker than hardened killer. Peacekeeping is a
noble enterprise, but it must be remembered that it requires the peace
to be kept. How effective was peacekeeping in Rwanda in 1994.

It would have been effective if the UN biggies had been willing to pony up
the forces needed to stop the massacres. They weren't.

A Conservative government under Stephen Harper must revitalize not
only the numbers and equipment of the Canadian forces, but also
clearly state what we want out of our forces.


But it appears so far they won't. They'll just throw money at things so
they can say, "See, we're spending more. See, we bought some cool new

toys
so we'll look cool like the other guys." In reality a major defense

review
is needed.

tim gueguen 101867

His statement is full of inaccuracies, actually Trudeau supported Reagans
cruise missile testing program.

BMC


  #6  
Old June 12th 04, 12:40 AM
Ron
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

. com...
Canada's military is, and has been for over a decade, in a state of
disarray. This is largely due to two facts. The first is the Trudeau
government, which preached quasi-socialist values and viewed the
Soviet Union not as an aggressor, but rather as the victim of American
agression. Trudeau managed to spit on the Army, Air Force, and Navy on
both sides of the border.

No, I suspect the real truth is that Trudeau decided that if there was ever
a war between NATO and the Warsaw Pact it would swiftly go nuclear and we'd
all be dead. So he didn't see the point in large expenditures on the
military.


NATO forces would have a much greater likelihood of having to lob buckets of
instant sunshine during the 1970s to stop the Warsaw pact, than compared to the
80s when conventional forces were stronger.





Ron
Tanker 65, C-54E (DC-4)
Silver City Tanker Base

  #7  
Old June 12th 04, 01:53 AM
Avro Canada Archives
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

February 20th, 1959!

Brian Colwell wrote:
"tim gueguen" wrote in message
news:5Lpyc.730683$oR5.701504@pd7tw3no...

"John Locke" wrote in message
.com...

Canada's military is, and has been for over a decade, in a state of
disarray. This is largely due to two facts. The first is the Trudeau
government, which preached quasi-socialist values and viewed the
Soviet Union not as an aggressor, but rather as the victim of American
agression. Trudeau managed to spit on the Army, Air Force, and Navy on
both sides of the border.


No, I suspect the real truth is that Trudeau decided that if there was


ever

a war between NATO and the Warsaw Pact it would swiftly go nuclear and


we'd

all be dead. So he didn't see the point in large expenditures on the
military.


But there is also a larger societal power at play. For some reason in
the last 50 years, Canadians have begun to believe that their soldier
should be more social worker than hardened killer. Peacekeeping is a
noble enterprise, but it must be remembered that it requires the peace
to be kept. How effective was peacekeeping in Rwanda in 1994.


It would have been effective if the UN biggies had been willing to pony up
the forces needed to stop the massacres. They weren't.


A Conservative government under Stephen Harper must revitalize not
only the numbers and equipment of the Canadian forces, but also
clearly state what we want out of our forces.


But it appears so far they won't. They'll just throw money at things so
they can say, "See, we're spending more. See, we bought some cool new


toys

so we'll look cool like the other guys." In reality a major defense


review

is needed.

tim gueguen 101867


His statement is full of inaccuracies, actually Trudeau supported Reagans
cruise missile testing program.

BMC



  #8  
Old June 13th 04, 06:34 AM
Regnirps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Huh? Canadanistan to the Rescue!

-- Charlie Springer
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Future Electronic Attack Aircraft Mike P. Military Aviation 1 April 22nd 04 01:30 AM
Message To America's Students: The War, The Draft, Your Future ~ LITTLE HITLER ~ Military Aviation 0 April 11th 04 11:59 PM
Future military fighters and guns - yes or no ? championsleeper Military Aviation 77 March 3rd 04 04:11 AM
U.S. air force has its own space-age plan America intends to take dominant role Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 February 20th 04 11:29 PM
UNMANNED, THE WAY OF THE FUTURE Larry Dighera Military Aviation 13 November 29th 03 05:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.