1 billion $ spending cuts proposed for Canadian army

[crazy canuck]

The last few pages were annoying.   

Anyway - when Canada disengages from Libya and Afghanistan, I suspect there will be increased emphasis on the "long term" spending, which will almost certainly include naval and air assets for the far north - Canada's on her own insofar as the US is not supporting Canada's claim to the region and thus Canada will have to have the capacity to patrol the area and enforce the claims - again, long term stuff but necessary if those claims are going to be taken seriously...

Indeed.  Currently the Navy is considering bids worth billions of dollars to build combat and support ships for a variety of potential missions included defending our territory and coastline in the north.

[AnchorClanker]

Yeah, it's gotta happen if those claims are to mean anything.  Good investment, though.

[Razgovory]

I see you are diving right into the ad hom fray yourself. Classy as always Raz.

However, I am honest about it.

Being honest about lacking objectivity or ability to think outside your worldview doesn't really make it better. If anything, it makes it worse. Hell, most people don't even really realize that they don't really look at issues objectively. Knowing that you do not and being ok with it is pretty screwed up.

Yeah, see you are confusing your opinion with an objective truth.  I am under no such illusion.

[crazy canuck]

Yeah, it's gotta happen if those claims are to mean anything.

Agreed.  We cant have Russians prowling around planting flags. 

[Berkut]

I see you are diving right into the ad hom fray yourself. Classy as always Raz.

However, I am honest about it.

Being honest about lacking objectivity or ability to think outside your worldview doesn't really make it better. If anything, it makes it worse. Hell, most people don't even really realize that they don't really look at issues objectively. Knowing that you do not and being ok with it is pretty screwed up.

Yeah, see you are confusing your opinion with an objective truth.  I am under no such illusion.

That is not what we are talking about - we are talking about the ability to look at an issue objectively, rather than through the prism of your group.

This has nothing to do with confusing opinion and "truth".

[Berkut]

The last few pages were annoying.  

Anyway - when Canada disengages from Libya and Afghanistan, I suspect there will be increased emphasis on the "long term" spending, which will almost certainly include naval and air assets for the far north - Canada's on her own insofar as the US is not supporting Canada's claim to the region and thus Canada will have to have the capacity to patrol the area and enforce the claims - again, long term stuff but necessary if those claims are going to be taken seriously...

Indeed.  Currently the Navy is considering bids worth billions of dollars to build combat and support ships for a variety of potential missions included defending our territory and coastline in the north.

How many F-35s is Canada still planning on getting?

[Razgovory]

That is not what we are talking about - we are talking about the ability to look at an issue objectively, rather than through the prism of your group.

This has nothing to do with confusing opinion and "truth".

Run this one by me again.  The first and second sentences make sense on their own, but together I'm confused.

[crazy canuck]

The last few pages were annoying.   

Anyway - when Canada disengages from Libya and Afghanistan, I suspect there will be increased emphasis on the "long term" spending, which will almost certainly include naval and air assets for the far north - Canada's on her own insofar as the US is not supporting Canada's claim to the region and thus Canada will have to have the capacity to patrol the area and enforce the claims - again, long term stuff but necessary if those claims are going to be taken seriously...

Indeed.  Currently the Navy is considering bids worth billions of dollars to build combat and support ships for a variety of potential missions included defending our territory and coastline in the north.

How many F-35s is Canada still planning on getting?

Not sure.  The initial deal was for 65 but the cost per plane seems less certain now as does the deal.

[dps]

Also, I guess the Japanese never conquered the Philippines either.

Nope.  They occupied the Philippines, but since we kicked 'em out instead giving up, it wasn't a conquest.

[dps]

Beeb, why do you not call CC on his obvious shenanigans, yet proclaim Berkut is trolling?

I guess it could be that you expect more out of Berkut, which is certainly understandable.

*sniffs*

Nah, I don't care for this bait.  Have anything else?

I could go dig up some nightcrawlers...

[Viking]

Also, I guess the Japanese never conquered the Philippines either.

Nope.  They occupied the Philippines, but since we kicked 'em out instead giving up, it wasn't a conquest.

They first conquered then occupied the Philippines.

[viper37]

How many F-35s is Canada still planning on getting?

depends if the price is 138 million$ or 400 million$.  Estimates seem to vary, and nobody gives a clear answer.
However, there's no contract now, and none will be signed before 2013.  Lots of things can change.
As CC pointed, the original deal was for 65 aircraft.  It's still supposed to be that, but we'll have to wait for the final price.

[Brazen]

How many F-35s is Canada still planning on getting?

MacKay confirmed they're still buying 65 at the end of September.

[Siege]

This thread needs some pacifist music:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8aal-gveRY

[Eddie Teach]

I dunno, those things always sound better with two words.  Now, my vocabulary of mild derogatory terms consists of only three words:  'liar', 'coward' and 'homo'.  I didn't think that I could get 'homo' to stick, but the other two are pretty vague and easy to throw around, and I wanted to get in on the spirit of the thread.

Call him a fucking goof.