Previous  1 ... 5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Admitted, boot.
The gold rush did start it all off but I doubt all those folks wouldn't stay there without a big paycheck. The military would be there because that's the closest to the godless commies and they need to get their fighters up to shoot down those backfires while their still over Canada. .
My point was that opening the north up to industry would promote more people to be there and definately give us a "presence" more than a hand full of inukshooks.

   

I, for one, spend my time deciding whose plan/idea is best for our country, not childishly trying to point out erroneous inconsistencies in the party I've already decided I will never support, no matter what their policy. I say this to those of you who think Jack is off his game with his minor policy switch. I would rather vote for someone who admits to a mistake/change of circumstances and shifts his course based on the need of the country and the will of the people than someone who holds steadfastly to ideals that no longer hold any merit.

And EyeBrock, I was not bashing you, but bashing the argument. There is no need for a cheap shot like this "Mr. NDP" shit, because the intelligence required to make a post like that is on par with that of a five year old. Also, I would appreciate it if you did not judge my political views by a small orange and green graphic displayed to the left of my post. I did not claim to be anti-military.

   

Problem with NDP military policy is that no matter what position the leader may take no one will believe that their convictions run deep when the rank and file supporters of the NDP are so ardently anti-military.

Think peacenik and what party comes to mind? Greens come close but NDP take that portion of the public by a landslide. Even the reference made here Layton said that it would be for science, not military sovereignty, that icebreakers would be used. You imagine the yuks yuks he'd get on the hill if he even tried to suggest Canada invest more in the military? His point may well hold water but the NDP's position on all matters military does not.

   

Well Russia is using scientific research vessels to assert their Arctic sovereignty. That's all they have up there; they have not established a military presence. We have also known about this since 2001, when Russia let its proposal out to the UN, which required that Russia conduct additional research and submit it by 2009 before moving on to further issues. There won't be wars fought over this territory in any of our lifetimes, and for now, information and intelligence are the ways to secure our Arctic sovereignty. Again, I'm not anti-military, and I'm not saying we shouldn't have some kind of presence up there. But this is a stint by the Russians to show that they have the technology and the resources to go anywhere, and do anything, and it is very weighty. In this situation, science IS sovereignty.

   

Science may well be a vital part of the sovereignty equation but if we are seen as nothing more than a paper tiger on the world stage then what is to stop the Russian, Dutch, US or Kazakhstan for that matter just ignoring our cries of protest? Force and the will to use it. That means more than just flying over ships in the arctic in a helicopter and dropping a Canadian flag either. It means that there must be a credible reaction to provocation. You may not be anti-military but a great deal of the rank and file NDP are very much so and would never even dream of spending the billions required for such action.

   

This is not a declaration of war or a game of risk. This is Russian scientists doing geological research in the waters immediately north of their own country, in order to prove their allegations that they own the natural rights to this region based on terms which have already been outlined in the U.N. Maritime Convention, which the U.S. is looking to ratify in order to get their foot in the door. Even though these events have already been prepared for by the Maritime Convention, people still are pissed off and worried about Russian land claims even though the U.S., Canada, Denmark, and Norway have always had the right to go up there and explore for themselves. I don't see the reason why we have to start an arms race to stop them from exercising the right that they and we as well have all given each other, and have been aware of since long past. If they begin to show disrespect to the land, and molest the Arctic region for oil and gas, then yes, there will be a problem, and international law will probably try to fix it with some sort of pseudo-compromise.

Putin's quiet imperialism and dream of an energy superpower is worrysome, but I question whether it would be any better if the U.S. got its hands on the Arctic resources. I doubt this will go over well with Japan, who have Russia to worry about and compete with but probably aren't eager to side with the west either. I want to see what Nagatacho will have to say about this.

   

Sorry, in my opinion being NDP puts you firmly in the anti-military camp.

I'd also point out that I've never met a left wing regular member of the military.

   

We have never stopped being in an arms race but the race is more with ourselves than with them. Its not that we want to beat the drums of war and go off in a hail of bullets but rather a quest for constant development of our authority over our own lands. How can we claim anything if we can not claim ourselves? A governments sovereignty begins at home.



6 and 1/2 dozen the other. Why even give them the chance to claim our nations birthright?

   

I’m sorry…to suggest all Canadians are equal in worth is patently very silly.
Do we really think that the guys who serves us McDonalds ( no disrespect intended) is worthy of the same respect as the guy who serves in the Royal Canadian Regiment in Helmand Province, Afghanistan?
I like the odd McMuffin but I consider the guys out there in combat more than equal to the chap that gives me my brekkie.
To dismiss the young chap who signs the ‘dotted line’ as equal TTC drivers or any other less-than-glamorous job with our guys humping packs and engaging the Taleban in firefights is really disingenuous.
All pigs are not equal to quote our George.

Those guys out there are putting their lives on the line after swearing allegiance to Canada.

They deserve a bit more respect than a taxi driver.

   

More than the Taxi driver that gets mugged 2-3 times a week or the convince store clerk that gets shot working at 4 am alone? Ok, so lets say they are worth more then. How do we measure that reward other than political? Do we grant them special status? How many more votes should they have over the lesser Canadians who don't serve but support the family at home? Do you see how silly that sounds?

   

This is starting to sound way to much like its heading to a situation where for one to be considered a "citizen" and have "voting" rights one must join the armed forces. 1st class citizens.....2nd class citizens......3rd class....depending on what you do for a living.

Should we look back and see what political leaning those that advocate one person is "worth more" than another is? No, I don't think that's nesassary...... it's pretty obvious without looking.

   

It's a nessesary condition of socialism that all animals are equal and all jobs have the same merit. The doctor, teacher and bricklayer all have different jobs but the same value.. as long as their all unionized.

   

Please demonstrate how "it's a necessary condition of scoliaism that all animals are created equal and all jobs have the same merit." I don't think you know the first thing about ideological socialism or its contemporary manifestations and and i'd like to see you quit simply tossing out terms you know nothing about. I'll wait for your application of theory and you'll likely dodge, whine, insult or complaint, but i'll bet the answer will still allude us.

Hop to it.

   

Really? Do you care to define what you mean to be "left-wing"? You're sitting on top of a massive bombshell of a problem for yourself.

And I notice that for somebody who fought that whole "job=better Canadian", you've certainly petered out on that one. What is it now, more respect? Well, my job correcting you on that one is finished.

P.S. Don't quote Orwell if you haven't read him; it shows.

   

The mind boggles. What if, for the sake of argument, the battle of the Atlantic took the focus off of protecting the civilian merchant marine and instead devoted all the attention towards 'higher valued' military assets and task forces in an attempt to take the fight to the enemy. What would happen? Sure a Battleship would be worth more than a lowly freighter but the military planners that held sway and won the war knew the war could not be won by force alone. Had they adopted such a reckless strategy the U-boats would have been able to have a free reign in the Atlantic and sunk the merchant marine in short order and all the 'high valued' military assets would have been stranded and captured in port for lack of supply.

So as a nation does it make sense to take the same tack when we are fighting an enemy like the Taliban that favors terror attacks on the same scale as the German U-boats employed in the Atlantic? If the war in Afghanistan could be won by force alone then don't you think the goat herders would have been beaten already?

It's not that the military lacks value, its of different value and you use the right tool for the right job. You don't pitch hay with a shovel and you don't then say that pitchfork should be worth more than the shovel, its just silly.

   

Previous  1 ... 5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next