The Harper Plan for unilateral Canadian disarmament
Gunnair @ Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:21 am
$1:
Stephen Harper could find himself in unexpected company this autumn, as a contender for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Matt Gurney: Ukraine crisis shows need for larger Canadian military
Though it feels absurd to say this — like a bad joke at a lame 80′s themed party — the Canadian government has announced that this country is sending reinforcements to our NATO allies in Europe. Six CF-18 fighter jets and necessary support personnel will soon deploy to an Eastern European location (expected, but not confirmed, to be Poland), to join other NATO forces in a “patrol” mission. Roughly 20 staff officers will join their alliance peers at NATO headquarters in Belgium, to assist in contingency planning. HMCS Regina, currently deployed in the Arabian Sea on anti-terror duties, may join allied warships assembling in European waters.
Continue reading…
Other Canadians have found themselves in this position: Lester Pearson became a Nobel laureate in 1957 for pioneering UN peacekeeping, an activity for which Roméo Dallaire must later have come close to winning the prize. Stephen Lewis would have been shortlisted for his work on HIV/AIDS, as would have Lloyd Axworthy for the Landmines Convention.
Unexpected company, indeed, for this Conservative prime minister. But consider this: Despite his tough talk about supporting the troops, Stephen Harper has reduced defence spending to just 1% of GDP — the lowest level in Canadian history.
For decades, Canada’s level of defence spending was comparable to that of Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and Norway (all currently at 1.4%). After the Cold War ended, Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin reduced defence spending to 1.2% of GDP — leading to what General Rick Hillier called a “decade of darkness.” The Afghanistan mission necessitated an increase, with spending returning to 1.4% by 2009.
But then Harper cut deep: At 1% of GDP, Canada’s new defence spending peers are Belgium, Latvia and Slovakia.
Two factors account for the decrease.
First, Harper is focused on delivering a surplus in 2015 that will enable him to cut taxes before the election. Deep spending reductions are therefore needed and, with no significant missions underway or anticipated, the military is an easy target.
Last year, reduced maintenance budgets forced the Army to park many of its trucks, while the Navy tied up half of its patrol vessels. The Air Force cut back on maintenance of its CF-18 fighter jets, with possible safety consequences for its pilots. This year, the PM clawed back an additional $3.1-billion in defence spending.
Related
Conrad Black: Canada needs a strong military to back up its bravado
Christie Blatchford: Canadian military’s woefully inept recruiting system blasted in stinging report
Second, the Harper government has failed to complete a number of major defence procurement projects and, by so doing, kept them off the budget. For it is the year of spending, not the year of announcing or contracting, which determines when expenditures first show up on the balance sheet.
The delayed procurements have left the military in a weakened state.
In 2006, the Harper government announced the replacement of the Navy’s 45 year-old supply ships. Eight years later, no construction contract has been signed. The new ships are now expected in 2020, with the $2.6-billion expense postponed until then. In the same year, the government promised 1,300 armoured trucks to replace a fleet the Army warned was at risk of “catastrophic failure.” To date, no manufacturer has been selected and $800-million remains unspent.
New search-and-rescue planes were also promised in 2006, to replace a half-century old fleet. This procurement, too, has suffered repeated delays, leaving $1.9-billion hanging. Also in 2006, the government launched a plan to sole-source unmanned aerial vehicles. No contract has been signed and $1-billion remains unspent.
Under Harper, the Sea King delivery date has slipped to 2018, with nearly $1.8-billion still to be paid
The following year, Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships were promised. Seven years later, no construction contract has been signed and $3.1-billion remains off the ledger. In 2010, the Harper government announced that F-35 fighter jets would be purchased to replace the CF-18s, at a cost of $9-billion. No contract was signed and the decision was later suspended, after the Auditor General estimated a life-cycle cost of $45-billion for the fleet.
In 2011, the government announced that the Navy’s 44 year-old destroyers would be replaced. No contract has been signed, delivery has slipped to at least 2020, and another $5.2-billion has been deferred. Then, in 2013, the government cancelled a $2-billion purchase of Close Combat Vehicles for the Army.
Finally, there is the never-ending effort to replace the Sea King helicopters. The Martin government signed a contract in 2004, with deliveries promised for 2009. Under Harper, the delivery date has slipped to 2018, with nearly $1.8-billion still to be paid.
It is possible that Harper intends to carry through with these procurements, after pausing to create the temporary illusion of a surplus. If so, he is setting his successor up for a headache. For there is, in fact, a substantial deficit — resulting from over-$25 billion in deferred acquisition costs for military equipment.
Exacerbating matters, inflation rates are higher in defence procurement than in the economy in general, which means that every deferred cost leads to higher final costs and, with that, pressure for reduced orders and lowered capability requirements. In other words, failing to recapitalize the military in a timely manner has created a procurement death spiral, as rusting-out equipment becomes increasingly expensive to replace.
From the perspective of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee in faraway Oslo, Canada is engaged in deep-reaching process of unilateral disarmament. For this reason, Stephen Harper could soon find himself elevated to Pearsonian heights. The prospect of winning the Nobel Peace Prize, however, may be the cause of consternation rather than celebration for Canada’s tough-talking PM.
Matt Gurney: Ukraine crisis shows need for larger Canadian military
Though it feels absurd to say this — like a bad joke at a lame 80′s themed party — the Canadian government has announced that this country is sending reinforcements to our NATO allies in Europe. Six CF-18 fighter jets and necessary support personnel will soon deploy to an Eastern European location (expected, but not confirmed, to be Poland), to join other NATO forces in a “patrol” mission. Roughly 20 staff officers will join their alliance peers at NATO headquarters in Belgium, to assist in contingency planning. HMCS Regina, currently deployed in the Arabian Sea on anti-terror duties, may join allied warships assembling in European waters.
Continue reading…
Other Canadians have found themselves in this position: Lester Pearson became a Nobel laureate in 1957 for pioneering UN peacekeeping, an activity for which Roméo Dallaire must later have come close to winning the prize. Stephen Lewis would have been shortlisted for his work on HIV/AIDS, as would have Lloyd Axworthy for the Landmines Convention.
Unexpected company, indeed, for this Conservative prime minister. But consider this: Despite his tough talk about supporting the troops, Stephen Harper has reduced defence spending to just 1% of GDP — the lowest level in Canadian history.
For decades, Canada’s level of defence spending was comparable to that of Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and Norway (all currently at 1.4%). After the Cold War ended, Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin reduced defence spending to 1.2% of GDP — leading to what General Rick Hillier called a “decade of darkness.” The Afghanistan mission necessitated an increase, with spending returning to 1.4% by 2009.
But then Harper cut deep: At 1% of GDP, Canada’s new defence spending peers are Belgium, Latvia and Slovakia.
Two factors account for the decrease.
First, Harper is focused on delivering a surplus in 2015 that will enable him to cut taxes before the election. Deep spending reductions are therefore needed and, with no significant missions underway or anticipated, the military is an easy target.
Last year, reduced maintenance budgets forced the Army to park many of its trucks, while the Navy tied up half of its patrol vessels. The Air Force cut back on maintenance of its CF-18 fighter jets, with possible safety consequences for its pilots. This year, the PM clawed back an additional $3.1-billion in defence spending.
Related
Conrad Black: Canada needs a strong military to back up its bravado
Christie Blatchford: Canadian military’s woefully inept recruiting system blasted in stinging report
Second, the Harper government has failed to complete a number of major defence procurement projects and, by so doing, kept them off the budget. For it is the year of spending, not the year of announcing or contracting, which determines when expenditures first show up on the balance sheet.
The delayed procurements have left the military in a weakened state.
In 2006, the Harper government announced the replacement of the Navy’s 45 year-old supply ships. Eight years later, no construction contract has been signed. The new ships are now expected in 2020, with the $2.6-billion expense postponed until then. In the same year, the government promised 1,300 armoured trucks to replace a fleet the Army warned was at risk of “catastrophic failure.” To date, no manufacturer has been selected and $800-million remains unspent.
New search-and-rescue planes were also promised in 2006, to replace a half-century old fleet. This procurement, too, has suffered repeated delays, leaving $1.9-billion hanging. Also in 2006, the government launched a plan to sole-source unmanned aerial vehicles. No contract has been signed and $1-billion remains unspent.
Under Harper, the Sea King delivery date has slipped to 2018, with nearly $1.8-billion still to be paid
The following year, Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships were promised. Seven years later, no construction contract has been signed and $3.1-billion remains off the ledger. In 2010, the Harper government announced that F-35 fighter jets would be purchased to replace the CF-18s, at a cost of $9-billion. No contract was signed and the decision was later suspended, after the Auditor General estimated a life-cycle cost of $45-billion for the fleet.
In 2011, the government announced that the Navy’s 44 year-old destroyers would be replaced. No contract has been signed, delivery has slipped to at least 2020, and another $5.2-billion has been deferred. Then, in 2013, the government cancelled a $2-billion purchase of Close Combat Vehicles for the Army.
Finally, there is the never-ending effort to replace the Sea King helicopters. The Martin government signed a contract in 2004, with deliveries promised for 2009. Under Harper, the delivery date has slipped to 2018, with nearly $1.8-billion still to be paid.
It is possible that Harper intends to carry through with these procurements, after pausing to create the temporary illusion of a surplus. If so, he is setting his successor up for a headache. For there is, in fact, a substantial deficit — resulting from over-$25 billion in deferred acquisition costs for military equipment.
Exacerbating matters, inflation rates are higher in defence procurement than in the economy in general, which means that every deferred cost leads to higher final costs and, with that, pressure for reduced orders and lowered capability requirements. In other words, failing to recapitalize the military in a timely manner has created a procurement death spiral, as rusting-out equipment becomes increasingly expensive to replace.
From the perspective of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee in faraway Oslo, Canada is engaged in deep-reaching process of unilateral disarmament. For this reason, Stephen Harper could soon find himself elevated to Pearsonian heights. The prospect of winning the Nobel Peace Prize, however, may be the cause of consternation rather than celebration for Canada’s tough-talking PM.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/07/08/michael-byers-the-harper-plan-for-unilateral-canadian-disarmament/?__federated=1
andyt @ Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:31 am
Oh, Yeah? Well JT would spend all the military budget on developing pot vaporizers to blow at the enemy and like mellow them all out, man. Mulcair would promote only women in the military to root out the phallocentric patriarchal culture once and for all, and they would be allowed to only shoot at white men. If we are attacked by people of color, we would not only have to surrender, but apologize and pay reparations for interfering with their legitimate cultural practices of resisting fiendish colonizers like ourselves.
I always liked the Swedish candidate for PM, who, at the height of the cold war, said his defense budget would consist of an answering machine in English and Russian saying "we surrender." Seemed pretty realistic to me.
Also, Harper has a good point. If we were going to have a war, we would have had it by now. 
Jabberwalker @ Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:36 am
always liked the Swedish candidate for PM, who, at the height of the cold war, said his defense budget would consist of an answering machine in English and Russian saying "we surrender." Seemed pretty realistic to me.
It's a damned good thing that we didn't do that as you and I would not be discussing such subjects freely in on an open, international medium like this. If any other entity on this earth had prevailed during the Cold War, your freedom to blah-blah-blah would have been drastically curtailed at least or something far worse may have befallen you. If you don't believe me, ask any immigrant from Eastern Europe what their world was like.
It really wasn't a game. there were very real stakes. Thank gawd we won.
andyt @ Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:38 am
We did't have much to do with the outcome either way. We were, and are, under the protection of our big brother. I we had tried to stand up to Ivan on our own, we might have died free, but we'd for sure be dead.
Jabberwalker @ Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:39 am
That is a really bad excuse to do nothing.
Goober911 @ Sat Aug 30, 2014 10:34 am
And Irving has a real sweet heart deal, aprox 288 million to design Artic Patrol ships. Plans for these ship can be purchased from a number of companies that have experience in building them.
Then he keeps in place the New veterans Charter, which is an abortion of a plan. This was demonstrated clearly in the UK when they implemented the same plan, except they were up for making changes as the fiascoes mounted.
Then has Fantino attack Veterans.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/shipbui ... -1.1300816
A CBC News investigation has uncovered a $250-million mystery at the heart of Canada's ambitious shipbuilding program.
Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose and Defence Minister Peter MacKay announced March 7 in Halifax that Ottawa will pay Irving Shipbuilding $288 million just to design — not build — a fleet of new Arctic offshore patrol ships.
Irving will then build the ships under a separate contract.
However, a survey of similar patrol ships bought by other countries shows they paid a fraction of that $288 million to actually build the ships — and paid less than a tenth as much for the design.
Xort @ Sun Aug 31, 2014 2:18 am
Is 1% today higher in total spending than 1.2% in the 90s?
The GPD has been growing, while the security needs have been more or less static outside of the Afghan mission which is in the closing stage.
Jabberwalker @ Sun Aug 31, 2014 5:30 am
Goober911 Goober911:
And Irving has a real sweet heart deal, aprox 288 million to design Artic Patrol ships. Plans for these ship can be purchased from a number of companies that have experience in building them.
Then he keeps in place the New veterans Charter, which is an abortion of a plan. This was demonstrated clearly in the UK when they implemented the same plan, except they were up for making changes as the fiascoes mounted.
Then has Fantino attack Veterans.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/shipbui ... -1.1300816
A CBC News investigation has uncovered a $250-million mystery at the heart of Canada's ambitious shipbuilding program.
Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose and Defence Minister Peter MacKay announced March 7 in Halifax that Ottawa will pay Irving Shipbuilding $288 million just to design — not build — a fleet of new Arctic offshore patrol ships.
Irving will then build the ships under a separate contract.
However, a survey of similar patrol ships bought by other countries shows they paid a fraction of that $288 million to actually build the ships — and paid less than a tenth as much for the design.
Then he keeps in place the New veterans Charter, which is an abortion of a plan. This was demonstrated clearly in the UK when they implemented the same plan, except they were up for making changes as the fiascoes mounted.
Then has Fantino attack Veterans.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/shipbui ... -1.1300816
A CBC News investigation has uncovered a $250-million mystery at the heart of Canada's ambitious shipbuilding program.
Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose and Defence Minister Peter MacKay announced March 7 in Halifax that Ottawa will pay Irving Shipbuilding $288 million just to design — not build — a fleet of new Arctic offshore patrol ships.
Irving will then build the ships under a separate contract.
However, a survey of similar patrol ships bought by other countries shows they paid a fraction of that $288 million to actually build the ships — and paid less than a tenth as much for the design.
There is a revolution in ship design going on right now an MAYBE someone out there is second-thinking whether the designs that we are to build may be obsolete before the leave the dry dock. It's worth considering.
Then again, that may be just wishful thinking and this is just another incompetent finagle going on.
bootlegga @ Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:11 am
Gunnair Gunnair:
$1:
Stephen Harper could find himself in unexpected company this autumn, as a contender for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Matt Gurney: Ukraine crisis shows need for larger Canadian military
Though it feels absurd to say this — like a bad joke at a lame 80′s themed party — the Canadian government has announced that this country is sending reinforcements to our NATO allies in Europe. Six CF-18 fighter jets and necessary support personnel will soon deploy to an Eastern European location (expected, but not confirmed, to be Poland), to join other NATO forces in a “patrol” mission. Roughly 20 staff officers will join their alliance peers at NATO headquarters in Belgium, to assist in contingency planning. HMCS Regina, currently deployed in the Arabian Sea on anti-terror duties, may join allied warships assembling in European waters.
Continue reading…
Other Canadians have found themselves in this position: Lester Pearson became a Nobel laureate in 1957 for pioneering UN peacekeeping, an activity for which Roméo Dallaire must later have come close to winning the prize. Stephen Lewis would have been shortlisted for his work on HIV/AIDS, as would have Lloyd Axworthy for the Landmines Convention.
Unexpected company, indeed, for this Conservative prime minister. But consider this: Despite his tough talk about supporting the troops, Stephen Harper has reduced defence spending to just 1% of GDP — the lowest level in Canadian history.
For decades, Canada’s level of defence spending was comparable to that of Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and Norway (all currently at 1.4%). After the Cold War ended, Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin reduced defence spending to 1.2% of GDP — leading to what General Rick Hillier called a “decade of darkness.” The Afghanistan mission necessitated an increase, with spending returning to 1.4% by 2009.
But then Harper cut deep: At 1% of GDP, Canada’s new defence spending peers are Belgium, Latvia and Slovakia.
Two factors account for the decrease.
First, Harper is focused on delivering a surplus in 2015 that will enable him to cut taxes before the election. Deep spending reductions are therefore needed and, with no significant missions underway or anticipated, the military is an easy target.
Last year, reduced maintenance budgets forced the Army to park many of its trucks, while the Navy tied up half of its patrol vessels. The Air Force cut back on maintenance of its CF-18 fighter jets, with possible safety consequences for its pilots. This year, the PM clawed back an additional $3.1-billion in defence spending.
Related
Conrad Black: Canada needs a strong military to back up its bravado
Christie Blatchford: Canadian military’s woefully inept recruiting system blasted in stinging report
Second, the Harper government has failed to complete a number of major defence procurement projects and, by so doing, kept them off the budget. For it is the year of spending, not the year of announcing or contracting, which determines when expenditures first show up on the balance sheet.
The delayed procurements have left the military in a weakened state.
In 2006, the Harper government announced the replacement of the Navy’s 45 year-old supply ships. Eight years later, no construction contract has been signed. The new ships are now expected in 2020, with the $2.6-billion expense postponed until then. In the same year, the government promised 1,300 armoured trucks to replace a fleet the Army warned was at risk of “catastrophic failure.” To date, no manufacturer has been selected and $800-million remains unspent.
New search-and-rescue planes were also promised in 2006, to replace a half-century old fleet. This procurement, too, has suffered repeated delays, leaving $1.9-billion hanging. Also in 2006, the government launched a plan to sole-source unmanned aerial vehicles. No contract has been signed and $1-billion remains unspent.
Under Harper, the Sea King delivery date has slipped to 2018, with nearly $1.8-billion still to be paid
The following year, Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships were promised. Seven years later, no construction contract has been signed and $3.1-billion remains off the ledger. In 2010, the Harper government announced that F-35 fighter jets would be purchased to replace the CF-18s, at a cost of $9-billion. No contract was signed and the decision was later suspended, after the Auditor General estimated a life-cycle cost of $45-billion for the fleet.
In 2011, the government announced that the Navy’s 44 year-old destroyers would be replaced. No contract has been signed, delivery has slipped to at least 2020, and another $5.2-billion has been deferred. Then, in 2013, the government cancelled a $2-billion purchase of Close Combat Vehicles for the Army.
Finally, there is the never-ending effort to replace the Sea King helicopters. The Martin government signed a contract in 2004, with deliveries promised for 2009. Under Harper, the delivery date has slipped to 2018, with nearly $1.8-billion still to be paid.
It is possible that Harper intends to carry through with these procurements, after pausing to create the temporary illusion of a surplus. If so, he is setting his successor up for a headache. For there is, in fact, a substantial deficit — resulting from over-$25 billion in deferred acquisition costs for military equipment.
Exacerbating matters, inflation rates are higher in defence procurement than in the economy in general, which means that every deferred cost leads to higher final costs and, with that, pressure for reduced orders and lowered capability requirements. In other words, failing to recapitalize the military in a timely manner has created a procurement death spiral, as rusting-out equipment becomes increasingly expensive to replace.
From the perspective of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee in faraway Oslo, Canada is engaged in deep-reaching process of unilateral disarmament. For this reason, Stephen Harper could soon find himself elevated to Pearsonian heights. The prospect of winning the Nobel Peace Prize, however, may be the cause of consternation rather than celebration for Canada’s tough-talking PM.
Matt Gurney: Ukraine crisis shows need for larger Canadian military
Though it feels absurd to say this — like a bad joke at a lame 80′s themed party — the Canadian government has announced that this country is sending reinforcements to our NATO allies in Europe. Six CF-18 fighter jets and necessary support personnel will soon deploy to an Eastern European location (expected, but not confirmed, to be Poland), to join other NATO forces in a “patrol” mission. Roughly 20 staff officers will join their alliance peers at NATO headquarters in Belgium, to assist in contingency planning. HMCS Regina, currently deployed in the Arabian Sea on anti-terror duties, may join allied warships assembling in European waters.
Continue reading…
Other Canadians have found themselves in this position: Lester Pearson became a Nobel laureate in 1957 for pioneering UN peacekeeping, an activity for which Roméo Dallaire must later have come close to winning the prize. Stephen Lewis would have been shortlisted for his work on HIV/AIDS, as would have Lloyd Axworthy for the Landmines Convention.
Unexpected company, indeed, for this Conservative prime minister. But consider this: Despite his tough talk about supporting the troops, Stephen Harper has reduced defence spending to just 1% of GDP — the lowest level in Canadian history.
For decades, Canada’s level of defence spending was comparable to that of Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and Norway (all currently at 1.4%). After the Cold War ended, Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin reduced defence spending to 1.2% of GDP — leading to what General Rick Hillier called a “decade of darkness.” The Afghanistan mission necessitated an increase, with spending returning to 1.4% by 2009.
But then Harper cut deep: At 1% of GDP, Canada’s new defence spending peers are Belgium, Latvia and Slovakia.
Two factors account for the decrease.
First, Harper is focused on delivering a surplus in 2015 that will enable him to cut taxes before the election. Deep spending reductions are therefore needed and, with no significant missions underway or anticipated, the military is an easy target.
Last year, reduced maintenance budgets forced the Army to park many of its trucks, while the Navy tied up half of its patrol vessels. The Air Force cut back on maintenance of its CF-18 fighter jets, with possible safety consequences for its pilots. This year, the PM clawed back an additional $3.1-billion in defence spending.
Related
Conrad Black: Canada needs a strong military to back up its bravado
Christie Blatchford: Canadian military’s woefully inept recruiting system blasted in stinging report
Second, the Harper government has failed to complete a number of major defence procurement projects and, by so doing, kept them off the budget. For it is the year of spending, not the year of announcing or contracting, which determines when expenditures first show up on the balance sheet.
The delayed procurements have left the military in a weakened state.
In 2006, the Harper government announced the replacement of the Navy’s 45 year-old supply ships. Eight years later, no construction contract has been signed. The new ships are now expected in 2020, with the $2.6-billion expense postponed until then. In the same year, the government promised 1,300 armoured trucks to replace a fleet the Army warned was at risk of “catastrophic failure.” To date, no manufacturer has been selected and $800-million remains unspent.
New search-and-rescue planes were also promised in 2006, to replace a half-century old fleet. This procurement, too, has suffered repeated delays, leaving $1.9-billion hanging. Also in 2006, the government launched a plan to sole-source unmanned aerial vehicles. No contract has been signed and $1-billion remains unspent.
Under Harper, the Sea King delivery date has slipped to 2018, with nearly $1.8-billion still to be paid
The following year, Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships were promised. Seven years later, no construction contract has been signed and $3.1-billion remains off the ledger. In 2010, the Harper government announced that F-35 fighter jets would be purchased to replace the CF-18s, at a cost of $9-billion. No contract was signed and the decision was later suspended, after the Auditor General estimated a life-cycle cost of $45-billion for the fleet.
In 2011, the government announced that the Navy’s 44 year-old destroyers would be replaced. No contract has been signed, delivery has slipped to at least 2020, and another $5.2-billion has been deferred. Then, in 2013, the government cancelled a $2-billion purchase of Close Combat Vehicles for the Army.
Finally, there is the never-ending effort to replace the Sea King helicopters. The Martin government signed a contract in 2004, with deliveries promised for 2009. Under Harper, the delivery date has slipped to 2018, with nearly $1.8-billion still to be paid.
It is possible that Harper intends to carry through with these procurements, after pausing to create the temporary illusion of a surplus. If so, he is setting his successor up for a headache. For there is, in fact, a substantial deficit — resulting from over-$25 billion in deferred acquisition costs for military equipment.
Exacerbating matters, inflation rates are higher in defence procurement than in the economy in general, which means that every deferred cost leads to higher final costs and, with that, pressure for reduced orders and lowered capability requirements. In other words, failing to recapitalize the military in a timely manner has created a procurement death spiral, as rusting-out equipment becomes increasingly expensive to replace.
From the perspective of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee in faraway Oslo, Canada is engaged in deep-reaching process of unilateral disarmament. For this reason, Stephen Harper could soon find himself elevated to Pearsonian heights. The prospect of winning the Nobel Peace Prize, however, may be the cause of consternation rather than celebration for Canada’s tough-talking PM.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/07/08/michael-byers-the-harper-plan-for-unilateral-canadian-disarmament/?__federated=1
Exactly what I've been saying here for years...