1 billion $ spending cuts proposed for Canadian army

[crazy canuck]

We could program a bot for you to pop up to defend the French interests here.  It would save some time.

How was I defending French interests?  I thought I was just pointing out this was European power politics. 

I was pointing out this was a European war and you used the word Butthurt. You have a really odd way of expressing yourself.

[Ideologue]

We could program a bot for you to pop up to defend the French interests here.  It would save some time.

How was I defending French interests?  I thought I was just pointing out this was European power politics.  Territory changing hands as some sort of outrage is absurd.

Nice was the example I used because France took it from Piedmont in 1859.

I also spent time in Barcelona but those people DO bitch.  Miserable fucks.

About what?  Being Catalans?  No one cares.  No one even recognizes they're a separate ethnic or linguistic group; even when they do, they still don't care.  Example: me.

[Valmy]

I was pointing out this was a European war and you used the word Butthurt. You have a really odd way of expressing yourself.

I was talking to Viper.

[crazy canuck]

I was pointing out this was a European war and you used the word Butthurt. You have a really odd way of expressing yourself.

I was talking to Viper.

ah, an error of misattributed butthurt.

[Razgovory]

That's okay, the Francophones probably don't consider their settlement of Quebec a Conquest either.  But the First Nations probably do.

There were no First Nations in Quebec by the time of Champlain.  Nor in Montreal.

In the whole of Quebec?  It's a pretty big province.  I find that hard to believe.

[jimmy olsen]

nobody (and I mean nobody) spends as much per capita on defence as the US does.

Except for North Korea, Eritrea, Saudi Arabia, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Israel, Chad, Jordan, Georgia, and Iraq.

[Barrister]

nobody (and I mean nobody) spends as much per capita on defence as the US does.

Except for North Korea, Eritrea, Saudi Arabia, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Israel, Chad, Jordan, Georgia, and Iraq.

Yet somehow I think you proved my point, despite simultaneously disproving it...

[Berkut]

Canada joins New Zealand and Belgium and defends itself by relying on a big friendly well armed neighbor.

Canada spends a little over $21 billion dollars per year on defence.  With our heavy Afghanistan commitments, this has gone up quite a bit over the last several years.  A cut of one billion dollars is hardly going to destroy the Canadian Forces.

Right, cutting 5% won't destroy it and neither will another 5% after that and another 5% after that. In fact, you can always cut 5%, and have virtually no effect at all! Repeat ad naseum.

[Barrister]

Canada joins New Zealand and Belgium and defends itself by relying on a big friendly well armed neighbor.

Canada spends a little over $21 billion dollars per year on defence.  With our heavy Afghanistan commitments, this has gone up quite a bit over the last several years.  A cut of one billion dollars is hardly going to destroy the Canadian Forces.

Right, cutting 5% won't destroy it and neither will another 5% after that and another 5% after that. In fact, you can always cut 5%, and have virtually no effect at all! Repeat ad naseum.

Given our Afghanistan expenditures, the expenses for the CF have increased substantially the last few years.

I'm sure if you want to do some research, you can find some fault in how Canada funds the CF.  It's a shame you haven't done so in your post however.

[Habbaku]

To be fair, no amount of cuts in the Canadian Forces will harm the USA's ability to defend Canada.

[Berkut]

Canada joins New Zealand and Belgium and defends itself by relying on a big friendly well armed neighbor.

Canada spends a little over $21 billion dollars per year on defence.  With our heavy Afghanistan commitments, this has gone up quite a bit over the last several years.  A cut of one billion dollars is hardly going to destroy the Canadian Forces.

Right, cutting 5% won't destroy it and neither will another 5% after that and another 5% after that. In fact, you can always cut 5%, and have virtually no effect at all! Repeat ad naseum.

Given our Afghanistan expenditures, the expenses for the CF have increased substantially the last few years.

I'm sure if you want to do some research, you can find some fault in how Canada funds the CF.  It's a shame you haven't done so in your post however.

I don't need to do any research to point out the absurdity in "Gosh, we spend $21 billion, so a cut of $1 billion is hardly going to destroy anything!"

A 5% cut to the budget is drastic. It is a major reduction in spending, and you don't have to do any research to know that the standard refrain of budget cutters that THIS cut will only cut the magical deadweight and "inefficiency" leaving the core mission unaffected is of course standard bullshit.

If you want to cut the Canadian military by a huge amount, just have the balls to say that is what you are doing, rather than pretend like it is not really much of a cut at all.

Otherwise, your "logic" that 1 billion from 21 is no big deal should just as readily apply to 1 billion from 20, or 950 million from 19, or 900 million from 900, etc., etc. Is there something magical about that LAST 1 billion that makes it different and somehow irrelevant compared to the other 20 billion?

[Barrister]

To be fair, no amount of cuts in the Canadian Forces will harm the USA's ability to defend Canada.

Thank goodness our two countries are such good friends then.

[Barrister]

Canada joins New Zealand and Belgium and defends itself by relying on a big friendly well armed neighbor.

Canada spends a little over $21 billion dollars per year on defence.  With our heavy Afghanistan commitments, this has gone up quite a bit over the last several years.  A cut of one billion dollars is hardly going to destroy the Canadian Forces.

Right, cutting 5% won't destroy it and neither will another 5% after that and another 5% after that. In fact, you can always cut 5%, and have virtually no effect at all! Repeat ad naseum.

Given our Afghanistan expenditures, the expenses for the CF have increased substantially the last few years.

I'm sure if you want to do some research, you can find some fault in how Canada funds the CF.  It's a shame you haven't done so in your post however.

I don't need to do any research to point out the absurdity in "Gosh, we spend $21 billion, so a cut of $1 billion is hardly going to destroy anything!"

A 5% cut to the budget is drastic. It is a major reduction in spending, and you don't have to do any research to know that the standard refrain of budget cutters that THIS cut will only cut the magical deadweight and "inefficiency" leaving the core mission unaffected is of course standard bullshit.

If you want to cut the Canadian military by a huge amount, just have the balls to say that is what you are doing, rather than pretend like it is not really much of a cut at all.

Otherwise, your "logic" that 1 billion from 21 is no big deal should just as readily apply to 1 billion from 20, or 950 million from 19, or 900 million from 900, etc., etc. Is there something magical about that LAST 1 billion that makes it different and somehow irrelevant compared to the other 20 billion?

Funding for the Canadian Forces has gone UP significantly in the last few years.  This is hardly the death of a thousand cuts.

No - a 5% cut is rarely 'drastic'.  And it certainly isn't in this case.

[Habbaku]

To be fair, no amount of cuts in the Canadian Forces will harm the USA's ability to defend Canada.

Thank goodness our two countries are such good friends then.

Canada should just disband their armed forces and pay 5% of the US defense budget.  Win-win.

[Barrister]

To be fair, no amount of cuts in the Canadian Forces will harm the USA's ability to defend Canada.

Thank goodness our two countries are such good friends then.

Canada should just disband their armed forces and pay 5% of the US defense budget.  Win-win.

If the US would give Canada 5% of authority over how the US military is used, that might be a reasonable basis for discussion...