- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
What he said.
A
aesop081
Guest
See...i knew i didn't sleep trough the last 12 years of my career........
Michael OLeary said:
I think that the tactics of overthowing our government are not grounds that I wish to tread upon lightly.
As to the legality of trying senior government officials for gross negligence of our national defense, I challenge anyone to dispute that Canadains have a strong case morally, and possibly legally. This trial, howver, will never likely occur unless the negligence of the military comes back to haunt Canada in a most undesirable way.
As to instituting a gov't in in place - I don't feel there would be a need to ever subvert the democratic process in this county. However a constitutional amendment ensuring that our military must always be able to adequately defend our territory would be enough to make the average Canadian sleep well at night, regardless of the stupidity of future generations of politicians.
A
aesop081
Guest
mo-litia said:.
As to instituting a gov't in in place - I don't feel there would be a need to ever subvert the democratic process in this county. However a constitutional amendment ensuring that our military must always be able to adequately defend our territory would be enough to make the average Canadian sleep well at night, regardless of the stupidity of future generations of politicians.
The why don't you enlighten us as to what the military should be to adequately defend this country...be specific please....and also, how do you propose to fund it , sustain it, recruit for it.....
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 430
In order to help you make your case for discussion, perhaps you could enlighten us as to what proof you have that the average Canadian isn't sleeping well at night because of his concern that defence is underfunded.
aesop081 said:
I feel that Canada's military should be able to totally defend Canada's population centres and be able to rapidly mobilize to protect our interests in our underpopulated areas. It would not bankrupt the country to maintain a force that is capable of meeting these requirements.
A
aesop081
Guest
Michael OLeary said:
Yeah......i could definetly enjoy you position on this as well as what i asked previously
Good call Michael
A
aesop081
Guest
mo-litia said:
You didn't answer my question !! I'm still waiting.....
Michael OLeary said:
I know that the average WESTERN Canadian has grave misgivings with the state of the CF. I would hope that those from more, shall we say, enlightened areas of the country will be able to recognize this state of affairs for the serious problem that it is . . .
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
How in the hell did this thread get this long. I was sure it'd die a lonely death after the fifth post or so...
A
aesop081
Guest
mo-litia said:. .. look two posts above your last for my reply to your question
I asked you for specifics not a general " i don't have an answer " statement. You have stated that the CF as they are now are inadequate to defend this country. What i would like to hear from you is what would be adequte ????? What type of troops...how many...what kind of ships planes...bases.....etc...
- Reaction score
- 5,604
- Points
- 1,360
Yes, you did. It made me think you made statements that you don't have answers for and are just trying to BS your way through.
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 430
mo-litia said:I know that the average WESTERN Canadian has grave misgivings with the state of the CF. I would hope that those from more, shall we say, enlightened areas of the country will be able to recognize this state of affairs for the serious problem that it is . . .
Interesting, the survey conducted by the Canada West Foundation, dated May 2004, which surveyed the opinions of 3200 WESTERN Canadians, had a different result for their major concerns. In fact, page 3 of the report doesn't list Defence in the top thirteen high priority topics at all.
http://www.cwf.ca/abcalcwf/doc.nsf/...87256ea2004c2276/$file/Western Directions.pdf
A
aesop081
Guest
48Highlander said:
Well...mo-lita brought out some problems and still will not offer what his solution is.............
aesop081 said:
I have to allow that it would be better left up to the generals to come up with a complete defence plan for this nation. But I hope you are not trying to insinuate that 80 fighter aircraft and an army smaller than the New York City Police Department can actually defend this great nation to the degree that it deserves . . .
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
trea ·son (trzn) n.
Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
A betrayal of trust or confidence.
I find it rather odd that you want the Prime Minister of our country arrested for treason, when as a soldier your comments look alot like they could be interpreted as treason, im pretty sure i saw somewhere in either the QR&O's, or the CFAO's or similar documents stating the fact that your not publicly allowed to state your opinion about the government...correct me if im wrong.
Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
A betrayal of trust or confidence.
I find it rather odd that you want the Prime Minister of our country arrested for treason, when as a soldier your comments look alot like they could be interpreted as treason, im pretty sure i saw somewhere in either the QR&O's, or the CFAO's or similar documents stating the fact that your not publicly allowed to state your opinion about the government...correct me if im wrong.
A
aesop081
Guest
mo-litia said:
I wasnt implying anything at al...i want to hear what you propose is "adequate forces"..........so far you have put forward nothing....
A
aesop081
Guest
m_a_r_c said:
You are correct which is whay i made the QR&O comment earlier
Similar threads
