BS: Views from Canada

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 04 Nov 15 - 03:34 PM

I am uncertain if your assessment would hold up to close scrutiny, Charmion, nor whether Swedens case would be the only optiion to consider, nor am I certain that the only option was to totally disentangle Canada from all defensive military alliances?

In recent years, Canada, given it's size, has taken on a disproportionate size of the military load in non-defensive military adventures, forvexamole, in the Middle East. Canada has done well, reputation wise, in the past focusing on United Nations sanctioned initiatives. Canada, like many nations is a member if NATO. Note that while many countries participate in joint NATO defense, not all have chosen the recent course of Canada, and I suspect suffered not much, if any, economic consequenes.

Generally, economic and trade alliances and trade differ. As to the G8, Canada is not a member because if our military might. Japan, forvexample, hardly suffers economically because it is not dropping bombs in the Middle East.

I note Leslie was not selected as Defense Minister. Maybe it is for other reasons, but, there was cobsiderable concern about his potential appointment on the east coast, which has high hopes for Trudeaus election time comnents supporting the Navy.
While I support military spending, especially for genuine national defense, peace keeping and UN santioned missions, the billions spent in agressive (many oil supply inspired) military adventors, has accomplished little ( beyond making enemies with locals, that is). However, this spending has taken resources from military spending to defend our own countries interests and borders - for example in the north. (While search and rescue has a DND lead, supported by other departments, it is hardly ever considered a "primary role").




But if Canada were to make like Sweden and disentangle itself from its web of military alliances in favour of a focus on domestic requirements such as search-and-rescue, the result would be a massive loss of markets in the United States and, possibly, exclusion from the G8 (or however many are in the club these days). Our branch-plant economy would be shaken to its very foundations.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Charmion
Date: 04 Nov 15 - 10:26 AM

Thanks for the link to that Scott Taylor article, Ed. He neatly summarizes most of my own most uncomfortable thoughts about our military adventures since the end of the Cold War.

Canada's defence problem is that, while we have no effective enemies, our friends are almost as troublesome as enemies would be. But if Canada were to make like Sweden and disentangle itself from its web of military alliances in favour of a focus on domestic requirements such as search-and-rescue, the result would be a massive loss of markets in the United States and, possibly, exclusion from the G8 (or however many are in the club these days). Our branch-plant economy would be shaken to its very foundations.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST,#
Date: 04 Nov 15 - 09:14 AM

At this point a coalition isn't necessary--other than to make the House more peaceful. The Liberals have a comfortable majority and even if everyone else ganged up on them, the Liberals still have 184 of the 338 seats. All they need from a vote is 50% plus one.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Nov 15 - 09:09 AM

Trudeau supported C51 but he has said he will modify it to get rid of some of the more troubling clauses.....we shall see.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Rapparee
Date: 04 Nov 15 - 08:52 AM

Is there enough of a coalition to toss out, say, C51? I haven't been following the US news very much the last few days, much less Our Northern Neighbour.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: gnu
Date: 03 Nov 15 - 02:35 PM

Although I detest* such, I would like to see an omnibus bill with a bunch of things like the long form census included (I'll stop at that as there's no need to go on and on and on), debate limited on it and shove the works up... er... down Harper's throat. Give that prick a taste of his own medicine.

#... yeah. I figure the 17th will be day one or, at least, I hope so.

*Detest is not a strong enough word for how I feel about omnibus bills but I wouldn't mind seeing one introduced to kick start a return to our Canada.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST,#
Date: 03 Nov 15 - 11:15 AM

There are a few things Parliament is needed for, pronto, so a BAG puts it at November 14-16, 2015.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Nov 15 - 10:50 AM

I suspevt parliament will be recalled sooner, versus "in the new year" , as projected by some.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: gnu
Date: 03 Nov 15 - 10:25 AM

Cabinet has been vetted and sworn to secrecy. Tomorrow will be a good day. Lots of work has to be undone.

Anyone got a hunch on the recall of Parliament?

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Nov 15 - 06:55 AM

10 more sleeps

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: gnu
Date: 03 Nov 15 - 06:20 AM

One more sleep!

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST,#
Date: 03 Nov 15 - 03:07 AM

That's a good article, Ed. Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 15 - 09:47 PM

Last post was Ed T.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 15 - 09:45 PM

Scott Taylor on Canada's military involvement in the Middle East.
Scot Taylor column

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST,#
Date: 02 Nov 15 - 05:54 PM

"As for Canada, our Arctic surveillance remains gossamer thin and our navy is still waiting for the first Arctic/offshore patrol ships, which were initially promised eight years ago and whose numbers have been slashed back to help slay the Conservative's deficit dragon."

That is from a CBC article http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/russia-pacific-arctic-brian-stewart-1.3297267

Canada needs to take a hard look at our armed forces, decide what strategic and national interests they will face/be used for and get to it. If we are going to have an army then we have the responsibility to support it. Same goes for navy and air force. We need military leadership that follows through on the government's orders, but we must recognize that stupid orders lead to stupid results and that what we really need is a clearer vision of what role we want to play in world affairs, if any.

We have had ten years of bad government, something we can only fault ourselves for because we put them in office. Since we're back to the drawing board anyway, we may as well fix it right. If we continue to have standing armed forces, what should be our priorities? I think we have to drop the strategic dimension and concentrate on home defence at the national level, SAR (on land and sea), large emergencies like floods and snow/ice storms, and if we get entangled internationally it should not be at the behest of existing empires like the US, China, Russia or the oil-rich countries.

We have got ourselves into increasingly shady wars and for what? We have done some of the UN's dirty work and for what? We initially put troops in Afghanistan so as to free-up some American troops the US needed pronto for the Iraq War. Over a decade later we're still involved. For what? Our special warfare troops are world-class, and maybe we need more concentration in that area of combat operations, or maybe we need to change our approach to the countries that want not so much our help but more tellingly, our involvement.

And if we are going to have armed forces, we'd be well advised to build the weapons here, in Canada. We can do very well without so much of the crap we buy from elsewhere, and that includes boats and planes.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST,Ed T
Date: 02 Nov 15 - 06:30 AM

Arctic, Russia-Canada

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Oct 15 - 07:46 PM

Trudeaus Defense Decision 

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Oct 15 - 04:46 PM

Harper to resign, surprise, surprise;)

Ran out of tricks? 

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Jeri
Date: 28 Oct 15 - 04:38 PM

Harpes?

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST,#
Date: 28 Oct 15 - 04:23 PM

I think a new disease should be named after him.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Oct 15 - 09:03 AM

As a compromise, howz about naming only parts of the Calgary Airport for Harper - like "the Harper baggage carousel" , the Harper Control Tower", or the Harper Tarmac"?

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Oct 15 - 09:02 AM

A more fitting legacy for the ex PM: Sign the petition

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Rapparee
Date: 28 Oct 15 - 08:59 AM

Well, I'd sign it, but being a US citizen my signature would be ignored.

If Canada is a "client-state" of the US why aren't you folks trying to bribe me with stuff like fabulous vacations and cruises and things?

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: gnu
Date: 28 Oct 15 - 08:31 AM

Canucks have a proud history of compromise. Sign the petition.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: ragdall
Date: 28 Oct 15 - 02:16 AM

I'm thrilled that Justin is PM. I'll find out in the months to come if I was naive to believe that he intended to keep the promises he made to us.

One that is important to me is already in the works. I won't have to walk a block or two, on an icy road, in bitter cold, to check if any bills cheques or correspondence has arrived in the post, or worse, come home one day to find a huge chunk of my front lawn has been replaced with a concrete slab holding a group mailbox. My mail will continue to be delivered to my door and the Liberals will work on ways to save Canada Post. Perhaps some of the taxes from Marijuana sales could be used to subsidize the service?

rags

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 27 Oct 15 - 04:57 PM

Last guest was me.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Oct 15 - 04:17 PM

Oops,looks like Reuters reissued a June story?Odd?

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 27 Oct 15 - 02:26 PM

""OTTAWA (Reuters) - The Canadian government said on Tuesday it will allow environmentalist Paul Watson to reapply for his passport, three years after the document was confiscated by German authorities.

A spokesman for the Citizenship and Immigration Department denied Watson's allegation that the decision to withhold the passport was driven by Prime Minister Stephen Harper's dislike of environmentalists.""



Paul Watson can reapply for Cdn. citizenship 

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 27 Oct 15 - 01:29 PM

An quote in a recent column from one of my favourite Canadian opinion journalists.

""Parties who act like gerbils, and expect to achieve something other than going around in circles from jumping on the same old spinning wheel, stand only to tire themselves out."" Chantal Hebert on the future direction for the NDP

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 27 Oct 15 - 01:18 PM

"Unskilled, off-the-cuff, and flippy-floppy".

Did you mean "not ready":)

Actually, after suffering the opposite from Harper, I suspect these very qualities were seen as refreshing by many. Oddly enough, Mulcair accused Trudeau as speaking from talking points during one of the debates. I especially found his actions to free up liberal Senators from attachment to the Liberal Caucus refreshing, possibly off the cuff, at a minimum, not reflecting established political skills and approaches.

Some of these qualities could prove to be beneficial, or a disaster. Hopefully, it's the latter.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: gnu
Date: 27 Oct 15 - 12:50 PM

Ed... Joe Who? >;-) I should have not used the word "young". Unskilled, off-the-cuff, and flippy-floppy come to mind. Never say never if you are gonna change yer mind based on polls and media whims. The again, he is the PM and I am not.

As for Joe, I wish he had stayed longer but you can't thumb yer nose at such as Big Oil and get away with. Too bad. I'd like to have me some a that there Petro-Canada share $$$.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Charmion
Date: 27 Oct 15 - 10:39 AM

Again, interesting articles, especially the one about Jean Chrétien. Keep 'em coming, Ed.

People here -- both across Canada and on this board -- like to talk loosely about Canada being "traditionally" a nation that does peacekeeping and acts as an "honest broker" in international relations. My reading of Canadian history produces a rather different picture: as I see it, until Trudeau the Elder came along, Canada "traditionally" raised disproportionately large armies of amateur soldiers to fight in overseas wars under British command, and had little to no voice in international relations. Pierre Elliot Trudeau changed that, taking us out of Central Army Group in the NATO force in West Germany (where our mechanized brigade group operated as part of a British formation), and shifting our defence priorities to focus on sovereignty in Canada, which meant domestic operations and cooperation with the United States in NORAD. That whole honest broker thing came from our participation in UN peace-support operations and the UN Security Council, both artifacts of the Cold War balance of power in which Canada managed to remain a client state of the USA while remaining aloof from the war in Viet Nam. BTW, that was smart stick-handling by both Lester Pearson and Trudeau the Elder.

Of course, Canada is even more of a US client now, thanks in no small part to the Manichean world view of the Conservative Party under Mr Harper. But that's a whole 'nother topic of discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 27 Oct 15 - 06:36 AM

Refreshing to see Canada's youth engaged:

""Former Senate Page, who as a young Senate page disrupted the reading of the government's 2011 throne speech with a "Stop Harper" sign, is delighted voters finally turned her admonition into reality""


Page-Stop Harper 

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 27 Oct 15 - 05:13 AM

Age of Justin Trudeau.

Joe Clark was Canada's youngest PM, at 39, JustinTrudeau is 43. Trudeau has been a MP for 7 years. JFK became USA President at the same age as Justin Trudeau, and Obama at 47.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: gnu
Date: 26 Oct 15 - 10:48 PM

My view. Trudeau is young. Those ads about not being ready yet? Yup. He WAS a loose canon but he got elected because people voted strategically (loooonnnng story). Now, he will be reined in by the old guard to an extent. He still has the power to speak his own mind but it will be with more counsel from people far more wise in "the ways" of getting shit done. I have my thoughts on some of the things he promised... some are just not doable in the time frames he stated or alluded to but that will work itself out.

Me? I don't care about pot legalization (as if that will happen! hahahaha!) and lots of other things. I care about lots of other things.

But, right now, after the Syrian bombing is stopped, I care about one thing. Fuck that memorial to the victims of communism and that fuckin Mother of Canada statue crap on the Cape! Take some of that new infrastructure money and build that new justice building that was supposed to be built and named after PET and make that fuckin piece of shit Harper attend the opening ceremony. After all, the Supreme Court smacked Harper's ass more than once and I would relish to see his ass supremely kicked... humiliated. Of course, there would be a light tea and sandwiches afterwards.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Rapparee
Date: 26 Oct 15 - 09:38 PM

Thanks, #. I'm glad of that.

But we still need more study Up There. "Up Here" a few issues ago had an interesting article on what the Arctic will look like in, I think it was, 2050. If you can find it -- I can't find it online -- it's worth a read.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 26 Oct 15 - 09:08 AM

An interesting post-election interview of Eliz. May, from CBC, Subday Edition,   Michael Enright.


Eliz. May 

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 25 Oct 15 - 12:08 PM

"Mr. (Pierre Elliot) Trudeau could talk to anybody because he kept his independence … The Americans did not like the fact that he was friendly with Fidel Castro," said Chretien. "Talk to everybody and try to offer a solution."

That is what I meant wnen it comes to taking more of a peaceful, middle ground approach, versus taking sides on just about everything and dropping bombs, helter skelter. Keeping the high ground, and closer to the UN, versus ignoring it puts Canada in a better position to be helpful to solve disputes-and they are not all in the Middle east, where the oil abounds. The world has changed, but there is still a valuable role to play in the middle. Canada vacated this position under Harper- while damage was done, it
Is not too late to reposition.


Chretien's advice on foreign policy 

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Oct 15 - 05:44 PM

Regardless of the current oil situation, which could easly turn around, is still of interest for oil transport. Additionally, any transpory ship causality can spill significant quantities if oil, in a vulnerable area.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: meself
Date: 24 Oct 15 - 05:39 PM

Of course, if the price of oil doesn't go back up - way up - it is unlikely there will even be much oil-exploration, let alone development, in the Arctic.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Oct 15 - 04:34 PM

The Canadian Coast Guard is not a military organization.

My observation is Russia has significant government ice breaking capacity in the Arctic,while Canada is at, or near, the bottom. Canadian Science capacity has diminished significantly in the area, as the research fleet is mostly old, and many with such capacity are no longer certified to operate in ice infested waters. Since it takes many years to design and construct such vessels, I would not expect much change in the short term.

Much needed is research on dealing with oil spilled in cold ice infestec arctic waters, as it is complex and coukd have a major environmental impact . Even if there is no oil development in the area, increased vessels transiting the international waters presents a huge risk.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST,Ed T
Date: 24 Oct 15 - 04:08 PM

May included in Climate event

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST,#
Date: 24 Oct 15 - 03:53 PM

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/8-arctic-countries-to-sign-historic-coast-guard-deal-1.3284090

You might wish to give that a read, Rap.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Rapparee
Date: 24 Oct 15 - 03:10 PM

Just a Southern view, but I think that both Canada and the US would be well advised to build icebreakers and other equipment for the North. Russia already has done so. No, I'm not trying to stir old Cold War pots! I think that the North is going to change, radically, in the next few decades -- see this, for instance. (By the way, I subscribe to that magazine.)

There are now cruise ships plying the Northwest Passage, and that means change. The permafrost is melting and changing, meaning still more change. The North is changing, and Washington, Ottawa, Oslo, Copenhagen, Helsinki, and other capitols had best awaken.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Oct 15 - 03:09 PM

Four east coasters I am keeping an eye on:

Dominic LeBlanc, whose Dad was forner cabinet minister under PET, Senator and GG. Dominic ran for the lib. Leadership and gif his Masters of Law degree at Harvard.

Scot Brison, originally a PC, served as Minister of Public Works under Paul Martin and was Finance critic in opposition sibce 2010. He has an impressive international financial record. In givernment affairs.

Geoff Regan, a lawyer and former Fisheries Minister, son of a provincial Premier, who was also a cabinet minister in PETs government. His wife is the NS, Liberal, provincial Labour Minister.

Bill Casey, formerly a MP in the Harper government (a progressive) , who left the CPC over Harpers failure to honour a signed funding agreement with Nova Scotia, which gave him political "folk hero" status in Nova Scotia. He knocked off a major CPC candidate.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: GUEST,Charmion's brother Andrew
Date: 24 Oct 15 - 02:46 PM

There have been so many lacklustre performances by those late of the services as MND--Andy Mcnaughton (Andrew Leslie's paternal grandfather), Gilles Lamontagne, Paul Hellyer, Douglas Harkness, George Pearkes, Allan McKinnon, C.M. "Bud" Drury, Gord O'Connor and Gordon Churchill come to mind--that Andrew might do better to steer of it. Only Layton Ralston and Brooke Claxton (Andrew's maternal grandfather) might be said to have stood out. (Like Andrew, five of these ministers were late of the artillery.) Andrew has a master's degree from the London School of Economics in conflict studies, so I would argue that the best fit for him would be Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Marc Garneau might be a good fit for defence; a sailor has never had the post.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Dorothy Parshall
Date: 23 Oct 15 - 07:47 PM

I second what Gnu just posted. This thread is more interesting than CBC reporting.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: gnu
Date: 23 Oct 15 - 06:05 PM

Excellent posts. Again, I am thankful for the edification and viewpoints.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Charmion
Date: 23 Oct 15 - 05:11 PM

Ed T., thanks for posting that article by Susan Delacourt.

I agree with you about shallow thinking by the Conservative government. Mr Harper sure talked a great game of Arctic sovereignty and strengthening the Forces, but, once we were clear of Afghanistan, delivery just kept not happening. Priorities shifted, then drifted. To the best of my knowledge, we still don't have the fixed-wing search-and-rescue aircraft that has been promised in every Report on Plans and Priorities since the late 1990s, and I recently read in the Globe and Mail that the Navy is out looking to rent operational support ships as the fleet is now down to its last creaky old oiler. What ever happened to General Hillier's "big honkin' ship"? Oh, right. We got four Globemasters instead.

However, I think Canadians should give up any hope of a return to "traditional" peacekeeping. The practice of forming a multinational force to sit a buffer zone and babysit the cooling hostilities of two belligerent powers was a thing of the Cold War, when the belligerents were typically clients of the super-powers and the peacekeepers came from other clients of the super-powers. (UNEF I, fielded after the Suez Crisis, and the International Control Commission in Indo-China are the most glaringly obvious examples of this phenomenon.) The failure of UN-style interpositional peacekeeping in Somalia (1993), Croatia and Bosnia (1995) and Rwanda (1996) should have convinced even the most starry-eyed romantic long ago, but this fantasy just refuses to die. Bottom line: the Canadian Forces will never do that again. "Traditional" peacekeeping is over.

We can, however, expect to see a lot more deployments like Operation Hestia, the humanitarian mission in Haiti after the big earthquake of January 2011, and Operation Mobile, Canada's participation in the 2011 blockade and no-fly zone in Libya.

Subject: RE: BS: Views from Canada
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Oct 15 - 12:06 PM

Candid reporters recollection on Trudeau