Canada Kicks Ass
Joint Support Ship Scrapped

REPLY

1  2  3  4  Next



Gunnair @ Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:58 pm

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/08/23/ships-cancelled.html

8O Didn't see it coming.

   



TattoodGirl @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:08 am

WTF????....this shit pisses me off!!! We can spend how many millions or should I say billions on a shit useless 2010 games but we cannot replace our ships??? Holy fuck!!!

   



martin14 @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:00 am

thats a real shame.. Navy needs the new ships, and we need some extra
for up North.. needed right now, please.

ffing politicians cant see past their own damn noses.

   



Arctic_Menace @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:06 am

So one of the most important thigns that are needed right now, are getting out off because it's too expensive...Even though we just spent billions on FOUR heavy Transport Aircraft... :? :roll:

   



Gunnair @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 7:48 am

Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
So one of the most important thigns that are needed right now, are getting out off because it's too expensive...Even though we just spent billions on FOUR heavy Transport Aircraft... :? :roll:


Makes me wonder if this is one way to look at buying offshore.

   



Wada @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:17 am

flip..FLOP, but let's not get all morbid. I'm sure Stevie will have more promises to make before the fall election, eh!

   



EyeBrock @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:24 am

I think this is another signal that the writ is about to be dropped.
I would think a decision on a cheaper ship or something 'off the shelf' will be made post election by which ever leader scrapes another minority government in.
The C17's and the CH47's were and still are top priority because of combat in the Stan.
Maritime Command isn't taking an active role in this mission so resources are going to the Army.
I agree that we need new support vessels but we need rotary lift and strategic airlift more the new ships at the moment.

Really we just need to spend a lot more cash on the military after the 'decade of darkness', especially on ships and combat aircraft but I doubt we will get our wish with an economic downturn beckoning.
All will be on hold until an election.
See you in the voting booth.

   



Wada @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:35 am

...so when the Ruskies invade we will start building a navy eh. Now that's definitely good strategy.

   



mtbr @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:39 am

Wada Wada:
...so when the Ruskies invade we will start building a navy eh. Now that's definitely good strategy.



it never worried a Liberal before why should it now.

   



EyeBrock @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:44 am

Wada Wada:
...so when the Ruskies invade we will start building a navy eh. Now that's definitely good strategy.


wada, we have a limited budget and the #1 priority at the moment is to ensure the bit of the CF actually fighting has the kit it needs. Ten years of rust-out has left the CF in a bad position and hard decisions have to be made to ensure the Army can do the job, under fire, we are asking it to do.

   



stokes @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:48 am

WTF...I think a big part of the problem is that they would like to build ships that are capable of moving the Army....considering they would be doing this less than 10% of the time the cost isnt justified!

But I am still very disappointed we need new ships, new planes, and more people...time to scrap universal health care :twisted:

   



Wada @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:03 am

If we had ordered the kit say five years ago we might have it now, instead you insist we order it as needed and I think you'll agree that that's when it's too damn late.

and Stokes ...time to scrap "universal" health care, which I guess would include Afganistan. I agree lets get back to National Health Care quick, before you blow a blood vessel or worse.

   



EyeBrock @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:33 am

Five years ago the Liberals were not ordering C17's or CH47's.
There has been more procurement in the past 3 years than the previous 10. Hence Hillier's term 'decade of darkness'.

   



Wada @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:54 am

Agreed, so why are we flip flopping on ships now when we may have need of them even before we can get them built? Blaming the Liberals at this point seems rather childish since the Cons are supposedly in charge, don' ya think?

   



Arctic_Menace @ Sat Aug 23, 2008 10:17 am

EyeBrock EyeBrock:
I think this is another signal that the writ is about to be dropped.
I would think a decision on a cheaper ship or something 'off the shelf' will be made post election by which ever leader scrapes another minority government in.
The C17's and the CH47's were and still are top priority because of combat in the Stan.
Maritime Command isn't taking an active role in this mission so resources are going to the Army.
I agree that we need new support vessels but we need rotary lift and strategic airlift more the new ships at the moment.

Really we just need to spend a lot more cash on the military after the 'decade of darkness', especially on ships and combat aircraft but I doubt we will get our wish with an economic downturn beckoning.
All will be on hold until an election.
See you in the voting booth.


Sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree.

While the mission in Afghanistan is very important and we do need kit there and fast, I believe that national security/domestic issues and sovereignty come first above all else. What good is fighting a war half-way around the world if you don't even have the proper kit to defend and assert your soveignty over your own homeland?

   



REPLY

1  2  3  4  Next