# Justin Trudeau - Timelines



## RangerRay (8 Sep 2006)

Spawn of Trudeau speaks:

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Mandel_Michele/2006/09/07/1809990.html



> "It's a crying shame," argues the late Pierre Trudeau's middle son. "Their sacrifices are in vain."



 :threat: :rage:  :threat:


----------



## 17thRecceSgt (8 Sep 2006)

Whats that?  

"It's a crying shame that you are insane?"

Well, sort of.  But I won't argue with the insane part of your comment.  

If I were you, I wouldn't "pee at the urinal" in public.  Someone might just dunk your head in to freshen you up some.  Twice.  Three times even.

I didn't know he was running for the NDP.


----------



## karl28 (8 Sep 2006)

Typical bleeding heart lefties to bad we couldn't leave them some where like the  North West Teratories you call it something nice like environmental assessment of the north  make it sound  really important  and than just forget to pick them back up be a good way to get rid of them LOL  Darn it there I go thinking out loud again LOL


----------



## exsemjingo (8 Sep 2006)

Which Vietnam will Afghanistan become?  The one where public opinion at home undermined the government's ability to plan and support the war properly?
Why is Trudeau so eager to make this happen to us?

Hopefully, five years into the mission, the Canadian public has grown enough guts in order to let us finish the job.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (8 Sep 2006)

From the posted article:

While {Turdeau} initially supported sending Canadian troops to Afghanistan after 9/11 -- "Afghanistan had become a threat to the world" -- he insists that our mandate is complete. "The terror threat has been neutralized. We no longer have a reason to be there," Trudeau says. "I believe what our forces are now doing is killing and fighting and being killed by Afghani people who are farmers  and it's just not our business to be doing that. They are no longer harbouring outside elements. 

"Al-Qaida has been routed out of Afghanistan and that's it and there's nothing to do there anymore. If the people wanted our forces there, or wanted our help, but obviously they don't, not in that province."  

Whatta prick.  I guess that is part of trying to be a big media type, spout off about things that you know nothing of.  
Seems to me one of PET's spawn was in Gagetown in the summer of 96 for officer training?  Anybody remember which one, and if he was as useless as his father or was he alright?


----------



## Weinie (8 Sep 2006)

Typical egotistical tactic from someone trying to drum up interest - make controversial comments so that MSM will put some heat and light on your project. 

    One wishes for avalanches on demand.


----------



## Infanteer (8 Sep 2006)

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree I see....


----------



## Edward Campbell (8 Sep 2006)

I expect a Lawrence Martin column in the _Grope and Flail_ any day now explaining why young _'film maker'_ Trudeau, unlike the bureaucrats in PCO, DFAIT and DND and the generals and admirals, knows all about the lack of any real threat to Canada and is uniquely fitted to plan and manage our foreign policy and military operations.


----------



## manhole (8 Sep 2006)

I believe it was this young man...........and I think (I am getting a little forgetful) that he was with the Black Watch.   Oh well......... :


----------



## Fishbone Jones (8 Sep 2006)

Sounds like he's tired of working for a living, (or a group with deep pockets and clandestine interests has gotten to him), and he's about to step into the world of professional politics. He'll probably be running for head of the Lieberals in five years.


----------



## a_majoor (8 Sep 2006)

Jumping on the bandwagon, but missed the step!

Better luck next time, eh.


----------



## probum non poenitet (8 Sep 2006)

> In an interview at the Four Seasons, where he is drumming up publicity for his upcoming documentary for CTV ...



... by latching on to a poorly thought-out but media-friendly soundbyte. Well done, son, you'll go far.


----------



## North Star (8 Sep 2006)

So wait a second...why does this guy matter? What has he accomplished up to this point in his life? His legitimacy in this matter is entirely predicated on that, and from what I know about him he's no different than some film-student bum on the street. 

Oh yes, I forgot - he's a Trudeau. Although his father would rant at the very idea of a hereditary aristocracy, somehow it doesn't apply to him. Because he's a Trudeau, even the filth that flows from him must be of value. Because he's a Trudeau, he should get media time. Great, just what we need in this country - a lefty-politico with no legitimacy getting media time. Stephen Staples, you've found a friend. 

The media should be ashamed that it's giving this nobody a voice on this issue.


----------



## larry Strong (8 Sep 2006)

For someone that won't participate in the way the country is run (by not voting), I don't think he has any right to b*tch about the way things are being done.


----------



## North Star (8 Sep 2006)

I was merely pointing out he has NO legitimacy on military matters, yet somehow the media give him face time. He is no more qualified to produce a valid opinion than the "average Canadian". Kinda like Stephen Staples, another less-than "expert".

As for his parentage, I think that's a bit too far!


----------



## McG (8 Sep 2006)

When Alexandre (Sacha) Trudeau becomes quoted by media on topics of foreign affairs & the military, then it may be fair game to dispute his relevance as an authority of the subject (you could also attack the logic of his arguments).  However, mean observations about his parents are irrelevant and will not be posted.


----------



## redleafjumper (9 Sep 2006)

From MCG - "When Alexandre (Sacha) Trudeau becomes quoted by media on topics of foreign affairs & the military, then it may be fair game to dispute his relevance as an authority of the subject (you could also attack the logic of his arguments).  However, mean observations about his parents are irrelevant and will not be posted."

That's close to my point.  An argument which disputes what he says is much more effective than questioning his relevance.  Anyone can have an opinion, not everyone can defend their opinion successfully.  Opinions without supporting premises and supporting information are not relevant.  It may be fair to question his ability to form a supported opinion based on his perceived knowlege and experience, but it is much more effective to systematically take apart his point, if any.


----------



## Elwood (9 Sep 2006)

Great past and future world-leaders like John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Prince William and Henry Mountbatten-Windsor all have something in common... military training. If Alexandre Trudeau was allowed to be in a position to speak out against the CF, he should then have had the experience to serve his country for a few years and discover what the military is really like. 

Alexandre Trudeau seems like a very small man in stature, especially against his father. I don't know if he will succeed politically, but his extreme leftist attitude will not gain my support, even if he's on CTV's pay-roll.


----------



## wotan (9 Sep 2006)

I can't recall who first said it, but the quote, albeit paraphrased, is apt:

"His sole qualification is that he survived childbirth".

All of the Trudeau offspring and their dear old dad share one trait:  they're all posturing, effete, dilletantes.


----------



## TCBF (9 Sep 2006)

Man, you've got some serious anger management issues...


----------



## RangerRay (9 Sep 2006)

Elwood said:
			
		

> Great past and future world-leaders like John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Prince William and Henry Mountbatten-Windsor all have something in common... military training. *If Alexandre Trudeau was allowed to be in a position to speak out against the CF, he should then have had the experience to serve his country for a few years and discover what the military is really like.*



I heard that he was an officer in the CF in the mid-90's.  Can anyone confirm this?



			
				wotan said:
			
		

> I can't recall who first said it, but the quote, albeit paraphrased, is apt:
> 
> "His sole qualification is that he survived childbirth".



Ronald Reagan, describing Sen. Ted Kennedy.


----------



## paracowboy (9 Sep 2006)

the only one that should have "pulled out" is this idiot's grand-daddy.  :


----------



## JackD (10 Sep 2006)

look will you guys stop bad mouthing anyone being "left" - I'm "left" of politics, "left" of handedness, and "left out" when there's money being handed out... Call them what you will - and what I call 'em ain't allowed to be said on this site -  but don't denigate us lefties  ;D


----------



## rmacqueen (10 Sep 2006)

Let's keep in mind that this is the same person who wrote a letter a few weeks back describing Castro like he was some sort of superhero.  If his last name wasn't Trudeau no one would even give him the time of day.  Next thing you know Ben Mulroney will be telling us everything that is wrong with the economy.


----------



## GAP (10 Sep 2006)

JackD said:
			
		

> look will you guys stop bad mouthing anyone being "left" - I'm "left" of politics, "left" of handedness, and "left out" when there's money being handed out... Call them what you will - and what I call 'em ain't allowed to be said on this site -  but don't denigate us lefties  ;D



Then why do they suffer from an epidemic of "Hoof & Mouth Disease?"


----------



## rmacqueen (10 Sep 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> Then why do they suffer from an epidemic of "Hoof & Mouth Disease?"


I believe it is "foot in mouth disease" ;D


----------



## ArmyRick (10 Sep 2006)

I think alot of people are right on target. Alexandre Trudeau said... Who? What has he done now? Does he really know anything about anything at all?

Hey Trudeau, sum up and stick to living the life of a spoiled brat.


----------



## JackD (11 Sep 2006)

Foot in mouth disease? Those rich socialist types get  education grants for that. Us poor socialist types don't. Socialism implies that there are certain government responsibilities towards the people, and vice versa. In this responsibilites, every-one is equal - much like the old -age pension - same rate for all, but these 'socialists' want more than their fellow man/woman. Call them "pseudo-socialist" if you will, "dilletante socialists" perhaps "sphincter-muscle socialists". Have any of you read Tommy Douglas's biography - he was a co-founder of the NDP, and yes, he volunteered for the Second World War.. Don't call these turkeys socialists - call them what they are - jerks. By the way I'd love to find out Tommy Douglas's NDP's voting record on atomic munitions, on defence spending in the 60's. Seems to me that such things weren't issues for them then.


----------



## 2 Cdo (11 Sep 2006)

He is a good example of why some animals eat their young!


----------



## brihard (11 Sep 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> the only one that should have "pulled out" is this idiot's grand-daddy.  :



I'm glad you caught me between sips of coffee with that one, lest it end up on my keyboard. Well put.


----------



## IanAlexander (12 Sep 2006)

Hi Everyone. Long time lurker, first time poster. I thought I'd respond to this thread since I actually know something about the subject.

Alexandre (Sacha) Trudeau was in the CF in the mid-90's. He was in my platoon for Infantry Ph II during the summer of '96. We was a 2Lt reservist from the Royal Canadian Hussars or Sherbrooke Hussars, something like that. Everyone in the platoon really liked him. He never complained, always did more than his fair share of work and always helped out his platoon mates. He seemed to be pretty competant in his training too: he passed both his recce patrol and section attack on the first try. There was only a few of us who passed both on the first try (I needed two tries for my section attack). We all knew he was a little strange though when he told us that he had a degree in meta-physics from some German university.

I remember one funny incident, we were confined to the geographic area for the weekend and Sacha decided he was going to go back to Montreal. Well who shows up on the weekend to see his son? Of course the commandant of the school and the RSM and everyone else is there to greet him and take him down to see his son. I wasn't there at the time but I guess the commandant's face was pretty red when he found out Sacha wasn't there. I think he was confined to the base for the remainder of the course after that.

Well, I always had pleasant memories of him. Its too bad that he seems to have turned into such a freak.

Ian


----------



## rmacqueen (12 Sep 2006)

Here is a link to his letter about Castro from the Toronto Star.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1155420635589


Since Cuba is voicing opposition to the mission in Afghanistan and restarting the non-aligned union it is not surprising that Trudeau is saying these things.


----------



## RangerRay (15 Sep 2006)

JackD said:
			
		

> "left out" when there's money being handed out...



Then get a job and work for it like the rest of us!  

:


----------



## zipperhead_cop (17 Sep 2006)

IanAlexander said:
			
		

> I remember one funny incident, we were confined to the geographic area for the weekend and Sacha decided he was going to go back to Montreal. Well who shows up on the weekend to see his son? Of course the commandant of the school and the RSM and everyone else is there to greet him and take him down to see his son. I wasn't there at the time but I guess the commandant's face was pretty red when he found out Sacha wasn't there. I think he was confined to the base for the remainder of the course after that.



HAH!!  I forgot about that!  I confirm it as true.  That was one major flinch that weekend.  Somebody thought he took off to Halifax for the weekend, but didn't tell anyone.  So here is THE all too precious PET himself, tooling around the Center of Excellence with various people in green hovering at his heels, trying to disguise the fact that they had "lost" his kid.  Everyone who wasn't on that course was glad they were not on that course.  Maybe getting confined to base and doing extras is what got him so sour at the military?


----------



## Franko (17 Sep 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Seems to me one of PET's spawn was in Gagetown in the summer of 96 for officer training?  Anybody remember which one, and if he was as useless as his father or was he alright?





His daddy called the duty center and asked to talk to his son. The staff went to check and he wasn't there. PET then said it was because his son was standing next to him.

He went AWOL.

Daddy wanted him to be sorted out....and the kid was charged IIRC.

He got out soon after......waste of rations.

This is the same kid I think.....so yer basically wasting your breath.

Regards


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (17 Sep 2006)

"Al-Qaida has been routed out of Afghanistan and that's it and there's nothing to do there anymore. If the people wanted our forces there, or wanted our help, but obviously they don't, not in that province." 



 :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:  I think this kid must've found a stash of extra fine somewhere! He might have a career as a stand up comedian though! ;D


----------



## Mike Baker (17 Sep 2006)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> "Al-Qaida has been routed out of Afghanistan and that's it and there's nothing to do there anymore. If the people wanted our forces there, or wanted our help, but obviously they don't, not in that province."



 : Oh my, what they do come up with.  :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Sep 2006)

> In an interview at the Four Seasons, *where he is drumming up publicity for his upcoming documentary for CTV*, the slight, reserved filmmaker fixes you with piercing blue eyes and insists that our job in Afghanistan is done, that it is time to pull out before more lives are lost.



'nuf said...

G2G


----------



## rmacqueen (17 Sep 2006)

Recce By Death said:
			
		

> His daddy called the duty center and asked to talk to his son. The staff went to check and he wasn't there. PET then said it was because his son was standing next to him.
> 
> He went AWOL.
> 
> Daddy wanted him to be sorted out....and the kid was charged IIRC.


Uh oh, you have managed to give PET some respectability in my eyes, setting it up so the kid had to face the consequences for his own actions (not that it seems to have helped any)


----------



## a_majoor (18 Sep 2006)

rmacqueen said:
			
		

> Uh oh, you have managed to give PET some respectability in my eyes, setting it up so the kid had to face the consequences for his own actions (not that it seems to have helped any)



What's rather bizzare about that story is the entire thrust of PET's "just society" was to relieve people of responsibility for their actions.....


----------



## Franko (18 Sep 2006)

a_majoor said:
			
		

> What's rather bizzare about that story is the entire thrust of PET's "just society" was to relieve people of responsibility for their actions.....



Well I guess he wanted to make an example out of his boy then. He was charged and fined IIRC.

At the grad parade he was present, in the bleachers, not in the VIP seats. 

It kinda took me by surprise seeing him there sitting on a bench.

Of course Seior Officers were milling aabout him after the parade was done....but he bee lined it for the instructors.

He asked some pretty direct questions and patted the Sgt on the back that pushed for the charge.



He certainly wasn't the PET that I knew.

Regards


----------



## Trip_Wire (18 Sep 2006)

I wonder what this person thinks would happen to Afghanistan, once NATO and American Forces pulled out? They apparently thought it was a threat prior to our invasion and removal of the Taliban. Such a withdrawl would result in the Taliban once again running the Country and all if not more, of all the worlds terrorists, once again setting up training camps and bases there.

I just don't understand people like that, however, we have them too here in the USA!  :rage:


----------



## Yrys (22 Feb 2007)

He's in!

Let me check if I can find an english link.

Édith : here.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070222/trudeau_election_070222/20070222?hub=TopStories



> Justin Trudeau has confirmed to CTV News that he will take on the Bloc Québécois in the next federal election when he runs for the Liberals in the Montreal-area riding of Papineau.
> 
> Trudeau was originally expected to run in the Montreal-area Outremont riding, recently vacated by Jean Lapierre, a former Liberal cabinet minister.
> 
> ...


----------



## observor 69 (22 Feb 2007)

Parti libéral du Canada

Justin Trudeau dans Papineau

 Après avoir eu des prétentions pour la circonscription d'Outremont, le fils de l'ancien premier ministre Pierre Elliott Trudeau souhaite être candidat dans Papineau, à Montréal, lors de la prochaine campagne électorale.

Actuellement représentée par la bloquiste Vivian Barbot, la circonscription a longtemps été celle des libéraux André Ouellet et Pierre Pettigrew.

Justin Trudeau devra tout d'abord obtenir l'investiture du Parti dans la circonscription, qui n'est pas fermée aux autres candidatures, selon le président de l'exécutif, Luc Cousineau. S'il la remporte, M. Trudeau sera officiellement désigné candidat.

Lors de la course à la direction qui a couronné Stéphane Dion comme chef du PLC en décembre dernier, Justin Trudeau avait d'abord donné son appui à Gerard Kennedy, qui a terminé au quatrième rang. Il s'était par la suite rallié au chef actuel, ce qui avait contribué à lui donner l'élan pour vaincre Michael Ignatieff.

Papineau est une des circonscriptions les plus hétéroclites de l'île de Montréal. Elle comprend le très multiethnique quartier de Parc-Extension, une partie très francophone du quartier Villeray et une partie du quartier Saint-Michel, où vit une importante communauté haïtienne.

Lors du scrutin de janvier 2006, Mme Barbot l'avait emporté avec 990 voix de majorité sur l'ancien ministre Pierre Pettitgrew. Une campagne de la communauté haïtienne avait à ce moment dénoncé les politiques libérales face à leur pays d'origine et contribué à la défaite de l'ancien ministre des Affaires étrangères.

http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/Politique/2007/02/22/001-trudeau-plc-papineau.shtml


toute l'gang ici sont bilingue


----------



## career_radio-checker (22 Feb 2007)

Let the Trudeau dynasty... resume!


----------



## Boxkicker (22 Feb 2007)

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> Let the Trudeau dynasty... resume!


  Please tell me there is a lot of sarcasm in this statement.


----------



## career_radio-checker (22 Feb 2007)

Boxkicker said:
			
		

> Please tell me there is a lot of sarcasm in this statement.



It's no secret that the name "Trudeau" rings patriotic bells in many Canadian hearts. And I make no secret as to my disapproval to the Trudeau era and what he did to Western Canada, and the fact that his family name could give Justin an unfair advantage over opponents because some voters are only willing to look as far as his last name as a credential (ie. "He's a Trudeau, he must be good). He can run, of course, that's his right and you can disagree with me all you want. But it does not take a genius to realize that the liberals will treat him like the next 'PM in waiting'. And once again the liberals will have another PM hopeful from Quebec. I don't have a grudge against Quebec, I just hate how the liberals think that every single stinking leader of their party has to come from Quebec. What about the rest of the country?


----------



## Yrys (22 Feb 2007)

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> I just hate how the liberals think that every single stinking leader of their party has to come from Quebec. What about the rest of the country?



They don't think that. They just have notice that they have a better chance
of running the governement with a Québécer in the leader position, for
whaterver reason. I think that's why they usually elect or try to elect
a francophone each other time.

They don't care about the rest of the country, they want power, they want money.
They do want what they can to get it.


----------



## Sassy (22 Feb 2007)

Justin, another LIberal who  thinks he was born to lead this country,  but don't all Liberals believe that they have the "God" given right to rule Canada?  Gag me with a spoon, and not a silver one like Justin is use to please. ;D


----------



## observor 69 (22 Feb 2007)

Yrys said:
			
		

> They don't think that. They just have notice that they have a better chance
> of running the government with a Québécer in the leader position, for
> whatever reason. I think that's why they usually elect or try to elect
> a francophone each other time.
> ...



The Liberals or Conservatives must win a lot of seats in Quebec, plus their base voters, to achieve a majority government. How better to do this than to have a leader from Quebec ! 
So a Quebec Liberal. And there my friends is the sad story of Canada's military and it's many many "dark decades."


----------



## frist one (22 Feb 2007)

Not another person name TRUDEAU.The first one was bad enough. In 4years he will be the leader of lib's then it will be time for me to pack my bags and leave CANADA.                 :crybaby:


----------



## Franko (22 Feb 2007)

Wonder if he'll go AWOL for a while when the going gets tough?

Regards


----------



## larry Strong (22 Feb 2007)

Well I will give him credit as he passed on a "given" riding and went for the "unsure" riding. That said...what does he have to offer besides his surname and general platitudes.


----------



## warspite (22 Feb 2007)

Look at the bright side, by the time he'll be running for primeminister, the next census will have come along, the west will get its fair share of seats, and his chances of winning will be looking a little less cheerful.

That and I will be able to vote ^-^


----------



## Franko (23 Feb 2007)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> That said...what does he have to offer besides his surname and general platitudes.



Absolutely nothing. Along the same lines if "Lying Brian's" son decided to run.

Regards


----------



## career_radio-checker (23 Feb 2007)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> Well I will give him credit as he passed on a "given" riding and went for the "unsure" riding. That said...what does he have to offer besides his surname and general platitudes.



And I (reluctantly) have to give him credit for wanting to go through the nomination process and not wanting to be 'parachuted in'.


----------



## Reccesoldier (23 Feb 2007)

Here is my reading of this whole mess from the top.

*SITUATION*

1.  The Liberals have elected a weak Leader.  In fact it could be argued that certain of the leadership candidates have conspired for purely personal political gain to bring about the election of a weak leader.  I see this in the Kennedy/Dion agreement, it did nothing whatsoever for the good of, or the political future of their party, but had everything to do with good old-fashoned back scratching.

2.  Someone in the JT "camp", (party elite) possibly before there even was a "camp" to speak of floated the idea of Justin running for federal election all those months ago to gage public, and possibly even more importantly media reaction.  The reaction has been exactly what they wanted.  The public has come out vehemently for or against Trudeau, you don't want to enter politics unnoticed and you don't want to be unopposed a la Paul Martin's fall from grace.  The media has practically tripped overthemselves calling him "Royalty" doting on his every word, all the free publicity he could ever want.  In all the time I have been interested in politics I had never heard a reporter refer to a political candidate by his first name till Susan Bonner (the CBC's top political reporter) did it last night when referring to Trudeau.

3.  The backroom shenanigans of the leadership hopefulls have come home to roost in a leader that can not connect with Canadians, can not it seems, speak for all his MP's and perhaps can not be trusted to speak for the party in the HoC

4.  JT, aka the Liberal Jesus has "decided to run" for office.

*PTHE PLAYERS*

1.  The Liberals are permanently split into two camps, The Cogs and The Machine.  Any preception of unity is due to The Cogs being in coerced/implicit agreement with The Machine.

The Cogs are the fringe MP's, backbenchers and constituency offices they have democratic power but no Machiavellian power to speak of. They will continue on with Dion calling the shots.  The MP's care about their positions in Parliament and may be naive enough to think that they help guide the party.  They will not, however, be a happy bunch and will quickly become frustrated by Dion's lack of leadership, of vision and his increasingly autocratic nature as he is confronted more and more.  

The Machine are the old guard, select front benchers, party caucus and the hidden elite.  Power and personal position is all they really care about.  They may think that they do what they do for the country but the Party has usurped the position of prime importance.  Some may not even see the difference between the party and the country.  

They *KNOW* that they were had in the leadership race.  Their choice for leader (most likely Iggy) was confounded by the actions of some of the leadership hopefuls, they also know that this was most likely an unintended consequence of personal ambition and not what they would call subversion. 

The Machine knows that Dion is a lame duck, and with JT having been guided to run (through the aforementioned machinations of party elite) they know that Dion is now no more than a placeholder for the once and future King, Trudeau.  
But the situation poses problems.
a.  Dione is still the leader
b.  Trudeau has not and can not be elected as an MP until the next election
c.  Dione will strengthen as leader if the Liberals win the next election (the ignorant masses within the party (The Cog)will ensure it)
d.  Trudeau has no experience in Parliament
e.  With no experience Trudeau will not be elected leader of the party by The Cog.

*THE MACHINE SOLUTION*

1.  Divide and Conquer.  Lead the Cogs in disobedience to Dion, undermine his authority, make him appear weaker than he is

2.  Engineer the fall of the current Government with the unwitting assistance of the other opposition parties and Dione himself.  _*Dione will take a principaled position on some issue, most likely Afghanistan/Terrorism and be goaded into proving that he is not as weak as others believe him to be.  **The Conservatives will most likely save the Machine some trouble by engineering their own defeat as their position improves in the polls._

3.  Liberals go into the election and loose.  The Conservatives win a majority.

4.  Dione becomes a visible liability within the party, if he does not immediately resign (like Paul Martin) a leadership review will see him ousted within 3 months

5.  The process of selecting a leader from the Liberals is laid out. (probably taking longer than last time to let JT get experience in the HoC) 

6.  The rumor of JT running as leader is floated almost immediately by the media  (no input required from The Machine)

7.  The Machine guages the response and JT most likely runs while earning experience in the HoC

8.  JT is selected as the party leader and has the better part of 4 years to hone his skills before the next election.

9.  The 2011 election is the next one that The Machine plans on winning.


----------



## mover1 (23 Feb 2007)

I worked with Justin in the summer on the set of the Great War...He is politically motivated for sure. I had a nice talk with him.


----------



## ArmyRick (23 Feb 2007)

Justin Trudeau is running for  : 

Hopefully he and the liberals party do not succeed in politics. I still think of Dion's line "Liberals, we must get back to power" 

The liberals.
They care nothing for responsibilty.
They care nothing about representing all of Canada.
They care nothing about what is really good for the common people.
They care nothing for Her Majesty's Canadian Armed Forces.
They care about themselves. They are thirsty for power and if they do get in power again, they will again, rule this coutry on nasty power trip.


----------



## Sassy (23 Feb 2007)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> Justin Trudeau is running for  :
> 
> Hopefully he and the liberals party do not succeed in politics. I still think of Dion's line "Liberals, we must get back to power"
> 
> ...



I belong to a liberal discussion forum and according to the Liberals it's not "If" they get re-elected it's "When", this arragance is frightening.


----------



## Mike Baker (23 Feb 2007)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> Justin Trudeau is running for  :
> 
> Hopefully he and the liberals party do not succeed in politics. I still think of Dion's line "Liberals, we must get back to power"
> 
> ...


+1, send that to Dion.


----------



## ArmyRick (23 Feb 2007)

Give me his email I will do it.


----------



## Yrys (23 Feb 2007)

Stéphane Dion :

http://www.liberal.ca/members_f.aspx?id=2369

Dion.S@parl.gc.ca


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (23 Feb 2007)

All we need now is to have Ben Mulruney run for the covervatives and complete the circle of the up and coming.

 Jeese i'm getting old...


----------



## Yrys (23 Feb 2007)

Maybe Ben won't want to run for the conservatives, 
as he asked a few years ago to Justin to form a party 
with him  ;D !


----------



## Boxkicker (1 Mar 2007)

Sassy said:
			
		

> I belong to a liberal discussion forum and according to the Liberals it's not "If" they get re-elected it's "When", this arragance is frightening.



  What would that be I would love to try and have a civilised conversation with them.


----------



## wildman0101 (2 Mar 2007)

:rofl:
            scoty b


----------



## TCBF (3 Mar 2007)

Really, who does this kid think he is, a KENNEDY?

Won't go anywhere.  His mother confessed to the press that she battles mental illness.  Genetic Predisposition.  Dead in the water, until proven otherwise.

http://www.canada.com/topics/bodyandhealth/story.html?id=8cf493ee-f0d4-421c-bfce-92adb8b2ea0b&k=22306


----------



## TCBF (3 Mar 2007)

TCBF said:
			
		

> Really, who does this kid think he is, a KENNEDY?
> 
> Won't go anywhere.  His mother confessed to the press that she battles mental illness.  Genetic Predisposition.  Dead in the water, until proven otherwise.
> 
> http://www.canada.com/topics/bodyandhealth/story.html?id=8cf493ee-f0d4-421c-bfce-92adb8b2ea0b&k=22306



Very brave of her, actually.  Her frank statements may show others they are far from alone.


----------



## Yrys (3 Mar 2007)

> However, doctors and researchers are still trying to determine what causes bipolar disorder. Blier said most mental illnesses are genetic in nature, but other factors, such as the environment, may be to blame.



That doesn't mean her sons will have it.
That doesn't mean somebody with mental illness can't get elected.

And it's bipolar disorder, not a form of schizophrenia with violence...


----------



## Roy Harding (3 Mar 2007)

Yrys said:
			
		

> ...
> That doesn't mean somebody with mental illness can't get elected.
> ...



I'm fairly certain that some with mental illness HAVE been elected - Justin's Dad for instance, Paul Hellyer also comes to mind.

Roy


----------



## TCBF (3 Mar 2007)

"That doesn't mean somebody with mental illness can't get elected."

- Good point.  I should have been clearer in my above two posts, which I arsed up.   The people of Canada by and large won't care, and if he is elected, the opposing parties would commit political suicide if they raised the issue.

The real back-stabbing will be behind the closed doors of his own party.


----------



## Boxkicker (3 Mar 2007)

With his mom have a mental illness that just give him one of those happy feel good things to jump on the liberal bandwagon.
My brother is a paranoid Schizophernic, and my sister is a pshychiatrist, so that just means I have to people in family that are nuts.
nobody feels sorry for me but they will sure jump out saying oh that poor brave boy look at all the adversity in his life. People start doing that I would love to pull the silver spoon from his mouth and shove it up his A**.


----------



## TCBF (3 Mar 2007)

It's bound to be used, one way or another.  Look how the Left tried to tar McCain a few years back when they hinted his years as a P.O.W. may have rendered him 'unstable'.  A gutless attack by faceless cowards behind the scenes, but that's who usually launch them.

No, if Justin has to fight that battle, it will be within the Liberal Party.

No doubt, as we speak, spin-doctors are meeting in a strip club in Brossard and talking about the same thing.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Mar 2007)

TCBF said:
			
		

> ....No doubt, as we speak, spin-doctors are meeting in a strip club in Brossard and talking about the same thing.



 :rofl:


----------



## Boxkicker (3 Mar 2007)

TCBF said:
			
		

> No doubt, as we speak, spin-doctors are meeting in a strip club in Brossard and talking about the same thing.


 HMM maybe I should go and look for them!!


----------



## The Bread Guy (21 Aug 2008)

Highlights mine, shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the _Copyright Act._

*'Canada needs to leave Afghanistan'*
Jeff Heinrich ,  Canwest News Service, 21 Aug 08
Article link

MONTREAL - Canada's "aggressive" war in Afghanistan is all about "teaching lessons with weapons" and will leave nothing behind "except the blood we've lost there," the journalist son of late prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau said Thursday.

*"Our aggressive military activities in Afghanistan are foolish and wrong,"* said Alexandre (Sacha) Trudeau, 34.

"The Pashtun (people) have extremely different values than ours, values we may not agree with in any case, but *it's not our business to try and teach them lessons with weapons*," Trudeau told Canwest News Service.

"Because, in fact, they'll be the ones teaching us lessons.

*"We're going to have to leave the place or there'll be nothing left of us or of whatever we've done, except the blood we've lost there after we leave. So it's better we leave now."*

Trudeau was speaking from Beijing, where he has been filing cultural reports on China as part of the CBC's Olympic broadcast team.

He *made his comments at the end of an interview to promote his latest documentary film, Refuge, about war-ravaged Darfur*. The interview was done two hours before news that three more Canadian soldiers had died in Afghanistan on Wednesday was announced.

Trudeau knows the Canadian military firsthand, but not through combat. *In the mid-1990s he trained as a reserve officer at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in New Brunswick and joined the Royal Canadian Hussars in Montreal, one of Canada's oldest army reserve regiments, with the rank of second lieutenant.
*
Shortly after that, he embarked on a career as a globe-trotting journalist and filmmaker.

Asked Thursday *whether he now wants to make his next film in Afghanistan - an idea he floated last year on The Hour, a CBC talk show hosted by George Stroumboulopoulos - Trudeau replied "No."

"I don't think I'd go to Afghanistan," he said.

"I don't want to go and sit in the (Canadian Forces) camp in Kandahar and film the Tim Hortons.

"What I want to do is leave it to younger filmmakers to show who the Pashtun are - people we falsely call Taliban, in most cases - and why we really have no reason to tell them how to live their lives, why Afghanistan should be left to its own devices."*

Trudeau said he had approached several TV networks to make a film about the country. Each one turned him down, probably because in 2006 "I made a film about Canadian politics, Secure Freedom, about Canadian security certificates," that was highly critical of the Harper government's anti-terrorism measures.

"Networks have shied away from allowing me to go to Afghanistan when I had the chance, and now I don't think I'd want to go - it's too dangerous," Trudeau said.

Before the birth of his son, Pierre Emmanuel, in December 2006, Trudeau travelled to places like Liberia, Iraq and the West Bank to make a series of subjective, point-of-view documentaries about the human cost of war and conflict. He went to Sudan and Chad last year to live, travelling with rebels fighting the Sudanese government.

As a young father, his days of perilous travels are now firmly behind him, Trudeau said.

He intends to return to Montreal "in a couple of weeks" with the nearly completed manuscript of his "labour of love," a book about China that he has been researching and writing for several years and which is to be published next spring.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Aug 2008)

Will we ever be rid of this family and its ridiculous legacy?


----------



## Fusaki (21 Aug 2008)

Am I the only one becoming desensitized to these douchebags?


----------



## PMedMoe (21 Aug 2008)

I hope he didn't pay much for his education.  It certainly hasn't taught him much.


----------



## midget-boyd91 (21 Aug 2008)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> "I don't want to go and sit in the (Canadian Forces) camp in Kandahar and film the Tim Hortons.


Jackass



> "What I want to do is leave it to younger filmmakers to show who the Pashtun are - people we falsely call Taliban, in most cases - and why we really have no reason to tell them how to live their lives, why Afghanistan should be left to its own devices."



So, we've falsely been accusing people planting bombs and ambushing NATO troops and aid workers as Taliban. They aren't really Taliban? Wow. Boy were we ever wrong on that one. Weren't we, Jackass?



> "Networks have shied away from allowing me to go to Afghanistan when I had the chance, and now I don't think I'd want to go - it's too dangerous," Trudeau said.


But like you said. Those people aren't really Taliban.. we only THOUGHT they were. So, it can't be that dangerous, you Jackass.

Midget


----------



## SeaKingTacco (21 Aug 2008)

Like Father, Like Son...


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Aug 2008)

Let's watch the fine line when something moves from a generality to a personal attack everyone.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## SeaKingTacco (21 Aug 2008)

Sorry, I should have made my post clearer- it was not meant to be ad hominem.

It appears to me that Trudeau Jr has acquired his father's rather nasty traits of wooly-headedness, pacificism, and intellectual superiority.

It appears that he has no appreciation for the situation on the ground and no desire to learn.  Should make a perfect next leader of the Liberal Party of Canada...


----------



## George Wallace (21 Aug 2008)

This interview impressed me.  It impressed upon me that he didn't have the courage to follow his "calling" as a Journalist and go to Afghanistan like so many other journalists have.  It impressed me how little courage he had in suggesting that others go in his stead.  It impressed me as to how little he must have learned about the CF in his short tenure as an officer in training.  It impressed me as to how little he really knows............'But that is what impressed me.   I have a feeling he has equally impressed the Left, and unimpressed the Right.


----------



## stryte (21 Aug 2008)

> He intends to return to Montreal "in a couple of weeks" with the nearly completed manuscript of his "labour of love," a book about China that he has been researching and writing for several years and which is to be published next spring.



I hope next spring Mr. Trudeau puts in the same time and research into Canada's military operations in Afghanistan as he has into his book. Maybe then his perception will change.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Aug 2008)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Sorry, I should have made my post clearer- it was not meant to be ad hominem.



SKT,

Nothing personal to you. Just a general warning to everyone is all. No sweat.


----------



## blacktriangle (21 Aug 2008)

I have a better idea let's send the whole CF to afghanistan, and surrender and see what happens. 

 :-\


----------



## Eye In The Sky (21 Aug 2008)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> *it's not our business to try and teach them lessons with weapons*," Trudeau told Canwest News Service.



What?



> Trudeau knows the Canadian military firsthand, but not through combat. *In the mid-1990s he trained as a reserve officer at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in New Brunswick and joined the Royal Canadian Hussars in Montreal, one of Canada's oldest army reserve regiments, with the rank of second lieutenant.*



This is a joke, right?



> Afghanistan should be left to its own devices."



Yes, because that worked out extremely well for the population under the Taliban.   :



> and now I don't think I'd want to go - it's too dangerous," Trudeau said.



What year did he say he wanted to go before because it was safe then?  

I think I will just attach the appropriate file as the remainder of my reply....


----------



## spkeown (22 Aug 2008)

> who the Pashtun are - people we falsely call the Taliban



If I remember correctly this (brilliant!!!) young man's father also had an (enlightened) opinion on Fidel Castro which is quite the opposite of human rights groups. It appears that the hate-mongering STATISTICS are all wrong, and that we need the wisdom and compassion that only morally superior socialists can provide...

"Pierre Trudeau, lent credibility to Cuba's communists through his personal friendship with Fidel. While Canada was trading with Cuba during the early years of his Fidel's regime, however, roughly 500,000 Cubans -- nearly 8% of the total Cuban population--fled the island, more than 77,000 died trying, tens of thousands were unjustly imprisoned and roughly 30,000 were executed by revolutionary firing squads."

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=319826



> It's too dangerous right now


Honestly, your ideologies (no you personally, that would be ad hominem   )are the greatest ally the Taliban could ever hope for.


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Aug 2008)

I remember Trudeau Senior, and they are not fond memories.

He alienated Western Canada, and his policies ensured that Atlantic Canada was to remain "have nots" until very recently. 
Trudeau hated anything military, unless it was employed by the USSR, Cuba or our dear friends in COMMUNIST China.

Now his soft headed son "Sacha" spouts the same peacenik rhetoric his father spouted.

Beware of this young fellow, as their are many leftovers from the Trudeau era who still think this way.


----------



## Timex (22 Aug 2008)

That's nice Sacha, as a young father you think your days going to dangerous places are done? Right then, I hope he feels safer at home free to make his movies critical of governments and institutions that he finds fault with. A luxury afforded to him by other young fathers to paid the price. Too bad he doesn't think his fellow filmmakers in places like Afghanistan deserve the same freedom. I wonder how Mullah Omar and the taliban would have dealt with the Afghan version of young Mr T.


----------



## geo (22 Aug 2008)

Oldsoldur... 
Justin - not Sasha


----------



## time expired (22 Aug 2008)

When someone mentions the name Trudeau I always remember
Trudeau-mania sweeping the country,my wife was bitten by the
bug and I was dragged to couple of pre election rallies surrounded
by mostly women and teenagers.What strikes me is the parallels
to the Obama-mania happening in the US and the irrationality of 
it all,celebrity power versus political content.I also remember how 
it all seemed to come apart ending with the picture of the great
man giving the finger to the Canadian public at some western railway 
station.
            Regards


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Aug 2008)

Let us not be complacent here.

The younger Trudeaus are cut from the same cloth as the elder. They will use their charisma and charm to gain power, then chop us off at the knees.


The elder brought us the NEP, which gutted Alberta literally overnight.
The elder had a hand in the emasculation of the military, which we are now just recovering from.
The elder had a hand in UI (now EI) which ensured that the Maritime provinces would remain have nots until very recently (Way to go Newfoundland!! Danny for PM once Mr. Harper has had enough!!)
The elder hated Western Canada (the finger and "fuddle duddle")

Why would we even consider their point of view?


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Aug 2008)

> "Networks have shied away from allowing me to go to Afghanistan when I had the chance, and now I don't think I'd want to go -* it's too dangerous*," Trudeau said.
> 
> Before the birth of his son, Pierre Emmanuel, in December 2006, Trudeau travelled to places like Liberia, Iraq and the West Bank to make a series of subjective, point-of-view documentaries about the human cost of war and conflict. He went to Sudan and Chad last year to live, travelling with rebels fighting the Sudanese government.
> 
> *As a young father, his days of perilous travels are now firmly behind him, Trudeau said.*



He should count himself lucky he has that choice. The men and women who secure his freedom of speech don't have the luxury of staying out of harms way cause they got a family.

Trudeau if you're reading this don't you worry about putting yourself in harms way and run the risk of your family never seeing you again. 
You just sit at home enjoy your quality of life (that Afghani's are lacking)  and blog away, we've got it covered.


----------



## geo (22 Aug 2008)

To Justin... with "love"... :tsktsk:  

We serve Canada


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Aug 2008)

I would not have been so charitable.

Justin....you only serve yourself.


----------



## jp86 (22 Aug 2008)

The last couple of posts have been going after Justin.  The article is very clear that the Trudeau in question in Alexandre (Sacha).


----------



## Maelstrom (22 Aug 2008)

Yea. that was very confusing. Had to make sure I had the right Trudeau in mind...


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Aug 2008)

MY apologies to Justin, BUT these two aspire to their father's ideals.

They are not in keeping with Canadian values as I see them.

We used to stand for something, and that is what was right. The right thing to do, whether or not it was on your continent or not.

Did our grandfathers and great grandfathers et al balk at Vimy Ridge? NO!

Did our forefathers wring their hands and whine "Its not our war" when Hitler went on a rampage? NO!!

So lets get off our duffs, Canada and get back to doing the right thing....not the "popular" thing.


----------



## geo (22 Aug 2008)

Whupsie... I might have accidentaly "smeared" Justin with his brother's rhetoric.
Thousand appologies to Justin.. I guess.  Now that Justin is standing in the front ranks of the Fed Libs, I guess he's just waiting for Stephane to step on his D!cc - and possibly open the way to the party leadership - maybee/possibly.  Good reason for keeping mouth shut in the meantime.


----------



## observor 69 (22 Aug 2008)

Well so far this thread has done a good job of attacking the messenger vice addressing the salient points of the message.

I could list here many independent qualified groups that say the mission in Afghanistan is in danger of being lost due to lack of NATO and the West's support or in other words lack of boots on the ground and dedicated equipment, heavy lift choppers etc. The situation is complex involving many players/countries.

The Pashtun (people) have extremely different values than ours, values we may not agree with in any case.

True to most of the region Pakistan, Nepal and India.

"We're going to have to leave the place or there'll be nothing left of us or of whatever we've done, except the blood we've lost there after we leave. "

Strong words but if the mission does not succeed, which is a possibility, I would expect this will be true. The Taliban are already busy blowing up schools and chocking of the rights of women. Even the most optimistic picture does not show a country that would look like any Western democracy.

I support my brothers in combat all the way but the way the mission is presently configured, as Gen Mackenzie has said, is in trouble.
Hopefully things will improve. The US is sending more troops and showing a renewed interest in this war.


----------



## Proud_Newfoundlander (22 Aug 2008)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Highlights mine, shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the _Copyright Act._
> 
> *'Canada needs to leave Afghanistan'*
> Jeff Heinrich ,  Canwest News Service, 21 Aug 08
> ...



Yeah, the Taliban were on their own, and well, we saw how that played out. From what I've been reading only 20% of the pashtun region is against us, and thats the highest support level throughout the entire country. I also suppose anyone that isnt a an islamic male likes the system fine and dandy, having no rights isn't as bad as it sounds. I also suppose leaving the country instead of rebuilding is a good idea too, and leavin weapons down will certainly stop the taliban from doing whatever they do (suicide bombings, hostages, executions and attacks).


I have to agree with the majority of this forum for once, when we will we be ridden of this Family ? (I actually thought sacha was the sensible one up to now)


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Aug 2008)

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> Strong words but if the mission does not succeed, which is a possibility,



Not in my books brother. Nor many other deployed soldiers, I would imagine.  We've already won, the Taliban are just a little slow and haven't realized it yet  




			
				Proud_Newfoundlander said:
			
		

> I have to agree with the majority of this forum for once, when we will we be ridden of this Family ?


Hey be nice guy.
I wonder if Sacha would be interested in my idea of doing a documentary on the Khadr family using US deserters as extras in a Blair witch favor.


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Aug 2008)

IN all fairness, Pierre Elliot did run the FLQ to ground. But they got away and were allowed to return.


----------



## Proud_Newfoundlander (22 Aug 2008)

Well, I think Pierre aggravated the situation, especially later on (notably leaving quebec out of the constitution as a signee).


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (22 Aug 2008)

> "What I want to do is leave it to younger filmmakers to show who the Pashtun are - people we falsely call Taliban, in most cases - and why we really have no reason to tell them how to live their lives, why Afghanistan should be left to its own devices."



I think he needs to brush up on his history. While the Pashtun who prefer to be called Taliban were in power he conveniently forgot to mention how many people they killed or executed in sports stadiums and the like, mainly women and people who didn't adhere to their twisted philosophy of _Sharia law_. The taliban are all about shoving their beliefs down other peoples necks, no matter what the cost and for those who didn't comply, they are systematically murdered or barbarically tortured into submission. We live in the 21st century not the 6Th century. The taliban are nothing but as bunch of phycotic thugs, right up there with the likes of Hitler and Stalin and they have to be eradicated just like the cockroaches they are.

Sorry Sacha, but you need to tell the whole story. There's your version and then there's the hard cold facts.


----------



## BigRudy (22 Aug 2008)

I think it all comes down to opinion of convenience for "_these people_". If we had never gone into Afghanistan, and the Taliban were still treating their people like it was the damn dark ages, "_these people_" would be throwing a massive hissy fit about how we should be there, how can Harper stand by and let this happen, etc etc. Unfortunately for "_these people_", their pretty hypocritical little lives get messed up several times a year, when they see the true cost of Canada standing up for those who can't stand up for themselves: a ramp ceremony on the evening news and a newspaper article the next day.

While I am sure _their _ emotional burden is a heavy one to bear, I doubt it's anywhere close to as heavy as carrying a casket down the runway at KAF(which isn't in the same category as _their _ burden- it's an honour). So, perhaps the onus *should * be on them to remember why we go to places like this in the first place, and why it's important that we continue to do so.

I won't be holding my breath...


----------



## Franko (22 Aug 2008)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Trudeau knows the Canadian military firsthand, but not through combat. In the mid-1990s he trained as a reserve officer at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in New Brunswick and joined the Royal Canadian Hussars in Montreal, one of Canada's oldest army reserve regiments, with the rank of second lieutenant.



IIRC it was 1992 or 1993...

He also knows the consequences of being AWOL as well and being ratted out by his dear old pappa for us to deal with him. (I loved that day of duty)

Mr Trudeau called the School and asked to speak with his son. We tried to find him, seeing as they were all CB'd that weekend he should have been in the shacks...but wasn't. Dear old dad put him on the line....

The DO spoke to him and advised him that was going to be charged with AWOL and to make his way back down pronto, which he did and was promptly charged.

Glad to have met the twit when he went through the Armour School....he made an impression to all that met him then and it still rings true today.

Garbage commander that couldn't make the simplest of decisions nor follow the simplest of orders. I loathed driving him.

Regards


----------



## Sythen (22 Aug 2008)

> Did our forefathers wring their hands and whine "Its not our war" when Hitler went on a rampage? NO!!



Isn't there a picture or something of the elder wearing a nazi helmet driving his motorbike somewhere during the war?


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Aug 2008)

SKT is right, my thoughts exactly when I read the first post.  Like Father like Son.  I remember the Trudeau era both in the CF and as  a Civillian.     Hope this little bugger does not get in too deep like his old man.


----------



## Proud_Newfoundlander (22 Aug 2008)

yeah, trudeau had a rather low regard for soliders, they were just dolts and idiot and mindless killing machines to him. yeah, during ww2 him an his buddies rode on motorcycles through the quebec countryside in prussian army gear. He was then conscripted and let out due to abd behaviour.

My dad was in the CF in the 70's and when he was out on the field he says they didnt have e money for blanks, so when they were in war games they would have to yell "bang bang", and he says they were using "old crap from the 50's"


----------



## The Bread Guy (22 Aug 2008)

Recce By Death said:
			
		

> He also knows the consequences of being AWOL as well and being ratted out by his dear old pappa for us to deal with him. (I loved that day of duty)
> 
> Mr Trudeau called the School and asked to speak with his son. We tried to find him, seeing as they were all CB'd that weekend he should have been in the shacks...but wasn't. Dear old dad put him on the line....



Didn't agree with the old man's policies, but I have to give him credit for this one...


----------



## a_majoor (22 Aug 2008)

Like most other members of the chattering class, he recycles any negative observation he hears (and think about it, if you took out the name, how are these comments different from those of the Selnis Council, the Polaris Institute, the NDP, the Toronto Star, etc?).

The two things that make the Selnis council stand apart from the others is they also have "*boots on the ground*", and unlike anyone else on the Left, *they actually propose a solution*. (we may not agree with the solution, but at least there is something substantive there to discuss). So instead of wasting precious bandwidth on the various Oxygen thieves out there, lets focus our considerable talents and energies on looking for and implementing actual solutions to the problems we see and hear about. Here at home we can raise monies for schools and teachers, get on talk radio and tell our stories and let the public know what the "journalists" who "sit in the (Canadian Forces) camp in Kandahar and film the Tim Hortons" don't, or go over there with NGO's (or even found our own. I'm thinking Kandahar province is in dire need of reforestation, for example....)

Trudeau (either one) can be set on "ignore". *We* have work to do......


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Aug 2008)

Now, a counterpoint - highlights mine - shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the _Copyright Act._

*Back to basics on Afghanistan*
Globe & Mail editorial, 23 Aug 08
Article link

*Alexandre Trudeau should stick to filmmaking. The documentarian and political heir could not have been more wrong* when he argued this week that Canada should end its "aggressive" military operation in Afghanistan and leave alone the Pashtun people who "have extremely different values than ours, values we may not agree with," and whom we "have no reason to tell...how to live their lives." "It's not our business to try to teach them lessons," he said.

Mr. Trudeau's claims are mistaken on every level of analysis. One might begin with the fact that the Pashtun - the ethnic group from which the Taliban emerged - represent just 42 per cent of Afghanistan's population, and that the Taliban used their position of power before the 2001 invasion to oppress, and occasionally massacre, non-Pashtun Afghans.

More important than Mr. Trudeau's evident ignorance of Afghan demographics is that, if the country were "left to its own devices," as he suggests, it would almost certainly reclaim its former position as champion of the global league of utterly odious societies, and resume exporting abroad the venom that fuelled its barbarity.

*The "extremely different values" to which Mr. Trudeau refers included, before the arrival of Western troops in 2001, denying women health care and education and banning them from public gatherings, amputating their fingers for the sin of wearing nail polish, and executing adulterers by stoning.*

There are a great many societies where "values we may not agree with" prevail, and Canadian soldiers are demonstrably not fighting to change them. Afghanistan under the Taliban was in a class of its own. For Afghans, the stakes of a NATO withdrawal before a stable democracy is in place are a return to those medieval conditions, not a benign shift in social norms.

Those stakes are high for us, too.* There is little doubt that an Afghanistan allowed to regress to its old habits would be an expansive safe haven for violent extremism, particularly as practised by al-Qaeda, whose leaders are currently trapped in a small corner of Pakistan.*

Politicians have cried "wolf" over potential terrorist attacks with sufficient frequency since 2001 to make it easy to forget that the threat remains real, and that all Western states, Canada included, could be affected by it.

Denying militants the use of Afghanistan as a base for international operations has been an undeniable reason for our good fortune to date.

The mission in Afghanistan is far from perfect. Progress toward stable, secular, democratic government there has been erratic. It is unclear whether NATO can shut down an increasingly organized insurgency without substantial reinforcement, and Canada, along with a few partners, has had to shoulder a tremendous military burden in the country's most volatile regions, as other allies have kept their troops far away from trouble.

*When Canadian soldiers return from a faraway land in coffins, it is tempting to suggest that their mission was both doomed and unnecessary. But it is neither, and the risks of concluding otherwise are grave indeed.*"


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Aug 2008)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> "Networks have shied away from allowing me to go to Afghanistan when I had the chance, and now I don't think I'd want to go - it's too dangerous," Trudeau said.
> 
> He went to Sudan and Chad last year to live, travelling with rebels fighting the Sudanese government.
> 
> As a young father, his days of perilous travels are now firmly behind him, Trudeau said.



Could he explain why Afghanistan is too dangerous?
Could he please elaborate on his understanding of Pashtuns, and kindly explain why there are many Pashtuns in the ANA fighting against the Taliban?
Could he explain why he is against "teaching" Pashtuns a lesson, but for teaching Sudanese a lesson?

Since I too am a young-ish father, could he explain to me why I should not be making a perilous travel in the near future?


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Aug 2008)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> The two things that make the Senlis council stand apart from the others is they also have "*boots on the ground*", and unlike anyone else on the Left, *they actually propose a solution*. (we may not agree with the solution, but at least there is something substantive there to discuss).



They're also willing to discuss it reasonably intelligently with a range of players, without just ranting  ideologically.


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Aug 2008)

The Calgary Herald seems to agree with the Globe & Mail.. Highlights are mine, shared with the usual disclaimer.

*Trudeau, not mission, is wrong*
Calgary Herald, 24 Aug 08

We will say this on behalf of Alexandre Trudeau. When he uttered his defeatist remarks about Canada's military efforts to help the Afghan people realize some degree of dignity and freedom, he could not have known that within two hours, the deaths of three more Canadian soldiers would be announced in Kandahar.

However, he chose to describe Canada's role as "aggressive," as though it had taken Great Britain's 19th century place in the Great Game, as the geopolitics of central Asia was then described. He further predicted Canada will leave nothing behind, "except the blood we've lost there."

The truth of the matter of course, is that Canada fights in Afghanistan along with many other countries under the authorization of a December 2001 UN resolution, that stated "the situation in Afghanistan . . . constitutes a threat to international peace and security."

Yet, to describe as aggression this country's taking its place as a responsible member of the international community is to so twist the meaning of the word, that young Trudeau exposes himself to the suspicion he does not wish the military mission well.

Given his brief service in the militia, we will give him the benefit of the doubt. However, *his words are a slap in the face to every Canadian who grieves a fallen soldier. They died in a cause that is neither "wrong" nor "foolish" -- other epithets he offered -- unless it be wrong to help the downtrodden, and foolish to try.

It is actually Trudeau who is wrong. For it is not only their blood that 93 Canadian soldiers left behind. They also left an example of what it means to live richly in the service of others, even to the point of death.

Ordinary Afghans will understand, and marvel, even if Trudeau does not.*


----------



## Fishbone Jones (24 Aug 2008)

Just taking a stab in the dark here, but I bet his politician brother was on the phone pretty quick, telling him to STFU  ;D


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Aug 2008)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Just taking a stab in the dark here, but I bet his politician brother was on the phone pretty quick, telling him to STFU  ;D



LOL, I was thinking the exact same thing.  I bet little brother is laying low.


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Aug 2008)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> I bet little brother is laying low.



When he's not writing about banning bottled water, he is


----------



## stryte (25 Aug 2008)

Alexandre Trudeau is coming to Regina.

So how many tickets can I put you guys down for to come hear him speak?  

They're a deal... $75/seat.  :-X

http://www.bigbrothersofregina.com/


----------



## apache2001 (25 Aug 2008)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Highlights mine, shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the _Copyright Act._
> 
> MONTREAL - Canada's "aggressive" war in Afghanistan is all about "teaching lessons with weapons" and will leave nothing behind "except the blood we've lost there," the journalist son of late prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau said Thursday.
> 
> ...



So much lessons to be learned: 
"Never ever judge a book by its cover"
"It is the best to have tried than failing because you never tried at all"
"That is why you never made it that far"
and so on...


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Aug 2008)

Pilon said:
			
		

> Alexandre Trudeau is coming to Regina.
> 
> So how many tickets can I put you guys down for to come hear him speak?
> 
> ...



Uh, thanks but if I want to donate to Big Brothers, I'm thinking this isn't my first choice of methods....


----------



## Mister Toddler (28 Aug 2013)

What do you guys think will happen to the Canadian Armed Forces if, no, when Trudeau gets elected? I think there will be big budget cuts, and at least one base would probably get shut down.   :'(


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Aug 2013)

I think there will be an investigation on how you knew Trudeau would be elected for certain.  Almost like you knew there was ballot tampering going on.


----------



## jeffb (28 Aug 2013)

Trudeau already is elected. He has been a sitting Member of Parliament for some time now. I assume you are asking what will be the impact of Trudeau becoming PM if the Liberals form a government while he is still the Leader of the LPC?


----------



## Shrek1985 (28 Aug 2013)

Did you guys seriously not know that was exactly what he meant? Or did you need to burn off the snark budget for the day?

To answer the question posed; I think it will be bad, very bad. Massive budget cuts, irrevocable loss of infrastructure and capability in favour of an "expanded focus" on "peacekeeping".


----------



## George Wallace (28 Aug 2013)

Shrek1985 said:
			
		

> Did you guys seriously not know that was exactly what he meant? Or did you need to burn off the snark budget for the day?



You sure are snarky tonight.


----------



## Kat Stevens (28 Aug 2013)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> You sure are snarky tonight.


Budget surplus.


----------



## Rifleman62 (28 Aug 2013)

JT elected PM? 

Mandatory puffing especially for HQ staff as their heads are already in the clouds.

Honestly, I think JT has seen what the men and woman of the CF have done, and is impressed. His father:



> When the Second World War broke out, Trudeau, at age nineteen, was expected like all young men of his age, to contribute to the struggle against Nazism. As a student he was required to join the Canadian Officers Training Corps but, opposing conscription, he refused to do so and never participated in the war effort. He chose instead to support the Bloc Populaire an anti-war group. Canadian author, Mordecai Richler relates that at that time, Trudeau, wearing a Nazi helmet and uniform, would ride his motorbike around the lakeside where Richler and his Jewish friends had their cottages. This was perhaps a foreshadowing of things to come, pirouetting behind Queen Elizabeth, sliding down banisters and giving voters the "finger salute".



Another account:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Trudeau


> Trudeau earned his law degree at the Université de Montréal in 1943. During his studies he was conscripted into the Canadian Army like thousands of other Canadian men, as part of the National Resources Mobilization Act. When conscripted, he decided to join the "Canadian Officers' Training Corps", and he then served with the other conscripts in Canada, since they were not assigned to any overseas military service until after the Conscription Crisis of 1944 (after the Invasion of Normandy that June.) Before this, all Canadians serving overseas were volunteers, and not conscripts.
> 
> Trudeau said he was willing to fight during World War II, but he believed that to do so would be to turn his back on the population of Quebec that he believed had been betrayed by the government of William Lyon Mackenzie King. Trudeau reflected on his opposition to conscription and his doubts about the war in his Memoirs (1993): "So there was a war? Tough... if you were a French Canadian in Montreal in the early 1940s, you did not automatically believe that this was a just war... we tended to think of this war as a settling of scores among the superpowers."[6]
> 
> In an Outremont by-election in 1942, Trudeau campaigned for the anticonscription candidate Jean Drapeau (later the Mayor of Montreal), and he was thenceforth expelled from the Officers' Training Corps for lack of discipline


----------



## George Wallace (28 Aug 2013)

Mister Toddler said:
			
		

> So, I have questions about the Canadian Armed Forces, and what do you care what I've done for exercise. Lets face it Trudeau will become PM sooner or later. So, if you're not going to answer the question then don't comment.


Yes you do have questions.   Many are coming across as very immature.  Of course Trudeau will follow on and fulfill the Trudeau dynasty in Canadian Politics as we know the Canadian public has little to no choice in good leaders.  Trudeau is a leader in name only.  We always get the least of the worse choice as leader.  He still has a long way to go, and who knows; perhaps the Liberals will find a 'real' leader someday to replace Trudeau and they will win.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Aug 2013)

Mister Toddler said:
			
		

> So, I have questions about the Canadian Armed Forces, and what do you care what I've done for exercise.



Simply that it's interesting that you said you've done both special forces PT workouts and then ask what the weight limit is.


> Lets face it Trudeau will become PM sooner or later. So, if you're not going to answer the question then don't comment.


You're asking people to answer a question in which you've already decided half the answer. That's not open minded or logical.


----------



## Mister Toddler (28 Aug 2013)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Yes you do have questions.   Many are coming across as very immature.  Of course Trudeau will follow on and fulfill the Trudeau dynasty in Canadian Politics as we know the Canadian public has little to no choice in good leaders.  Trudeau is a leader in name only.  We always get the least of the worse choice as leader.  He still has a long way to go, and who knows; perhaps the Liberals will find a 'real' leader someday to replace Trudeau and they will win.


 How is it immature to ask questions?


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Aug 2013)

I'm a mesomorph but we can still be friends 

I think George was referring to some of our comments, not yours.

It's pretty tricky to answer what Trudeau will do if he is elected as PM considering politicians don't have such a great record at making good on their campaign promises.

The way you worded your question sounded like you were trolling to me, hence the response.  Not too sure what fight club is though.


----------



## 241 (28 Aug 2013)

Mister Toddler said:
			
		

> How is this trolling?



Sorry didn't mean trolling, that's what I get for posting while watching a 4year old and 11month old, I was telling the older one she was being a troll while typing and I apparently can't do two things at once tonight.

What I was trying to get at is you are asking loaded hypothetical opinion questions and when someone's opinion does not match yours you get upset and  having a mini meltdown and telling them not to bother commenting on the thread.


----------



## Shrek1985 (26 Jul 2014)

I have some friends telling me that Justin Trudeau will be a better friend to the CF than Harper.

Yeah, right. 

They insist that having Andrew Leslie on his staff proves this and claim to have read many articles on the subject. However, when I try to find these, I cannot find word 1 on JT's defence policy.

The only supporting argument I can find is a *very* tenuous link to the idea that, historically the CF suffers as much, or more under short-lived conservatives governments as Liberal one's. I find this theory difficult to swallow and not well supported by history, however.

Can anyone point me to some black and white facts on exactly what JT's defence policy, if elected might be?


----------



## Edward Campbell (26 Jul 2014)

I don't expect anything in the way of policy from the Liberals until next year. I'm not sure they'll say much on defence; parties rarely do - a few platitudes, unless we have troops in contact with an enemy.


----------



## trustnoone73 (26 Jul 2014)

Hmmm, history...

I look out into the vehicle compound and I see our majestic fleet:

LSVW - On it's fourth Prime Minister and third governing party

It's pretty new though

MLVW - 7th PM four changes in governing party.  But at least it's not crap.  Russia was still the enemy when it rolled into service so I guess field capable was still important back then.

I know of no serving machine gunner older than his weapon.

I've seen little difference in governments.  We made hay in ten years of sunshine and before that we suffered in ten years of darkness.  The foundations of both those periods were laid by previous governments.  That foundation outside of wartime is based on money not policy.  More specifically, how little money can be spent to minimize the ridicule of our allies.

That concludes TNO's Moral Minute.  Enjoy voting.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (27 Jul 2014)

Shrek1985 said:
			
		

> Can anyone point me to some black and white facts on exactly what JT's defence policy, if elected might be?



Trudeau's defence policy?  Same as all his other policies - nice hair.

CF 100 - 1952 - 639 LIBERAL
CF 101  - 1961 - 132  CONSERVATIVE
CF 104 - 1961 - 200  CONSERVATIVE
CF 5 - 1968 - 135  LIBERAL
CF 18 - 1978 - 138  LIBERAL

1,244 in 26 years - none in the last 36 years

I suspect we are seeing the peace dividend, not partisan politics


----------



## Crispy Bacon (27 Jul 2014)

Shrek1985 said:
			
		

> I have some friends telling me that Justin Trudeau will be a better friend to the CF than Harper.
> 
> Yeah, right.
> 
> ...



They don't have a defence policy. Simple as that. Here are their "priorities" under Trudeau: http://www.liberal.ca/what-we-stand-for/

If you want to read what they used to stand for, back in 2011 under Ignatieff, here's that platform: http://www.liberal.ca/files/2011/04/liberal_platform.pdf


----------



## trustnoone73 (28 Jul 2014)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> Same as all his other policies - nice hair.



 :rofl:

Never underestimate the power of a good head of hair...or if balding, the power of looking good smoking a cigar and being Churchill.

Not saying JT is in the same league as any of them but good hair will last longer than any pre-election policy.


----------



## Pencil Tech (20 Aug 2014)

I don't think it's a given that Trudeau's Liberals will be worse than Harper's Conservatives for the military. Trudeau's father is always demonised of course, but in his day defence spending was 2% of GDP compared to the 1% it is now (the lowest since WW2). Almost the entire Royal Canadian Navy fleet was built by PE Trudeau, not to mention something like 130 F-18s, some of which are still flying. Don't forget some of the recent RCAF and CA acquisitions were initiated under Paul Martin. I'll give the Tories the C-17s. The Harper gov't make a lot of sentimental noises about the military but there's no evidence to suggest they really support it any more than the Liberals did, or will (or might).


----------



## George Wallace (20 Aug 2014)

Pencil Tech said:
			
		

> I don't think it's a given that Trudeau's Liberals will be worse than Harper's Conservatives for the military. Trudeau's father is always demonised of course, but in his day defence spending was 2% of GDP compared to the 1% it is now (the lowest since WW2). Almost the entire Royal Canadian Navy fleet was built by PE Trudeau, not to mention something like 130 F-18s, some of which are still flying. Don't forget some of the recent RCAF and CA acquisitions were initiated under Paul Martin. I'll give the Tories the C-17s. The Harper gov't make a lot of sentimental noises about the military but there's no evidence to suggest they really support it any more than the Liberals did, or will (or might).



True. Mulroney probably did more damage to the CAF than Trudeau ever did.  He just didn't have to outward appearing "Leftist" image that Trudeau did.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (20 Aug 2014)

As I understand it, the NATO allies were likely more important on ensuring Canada spent some money on defense, than any intent on his part.


----------



## Edward Campbell (20 Aug 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> True. Mulroney probably did more damage to the CAF than Trudeau ever did.  He just didn't have to outward appearing "Leftist" image that Trudeau did.




Nope, never ... think the 1970 White Paper, _"A Foreign Policy for Canadians"_, followed, a few months later, by a _White Paper on Defence_ - they were unmitigated disasters and they aimed to disarm Canada, Costa Rica was Pierre Trudeau's model state.

Mulroney did us no good, but not much harm, either.


----------



## Edward Campbell (20 Aug 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> As I understand it, the NATO allies were likely more important on ensuring Canada spent some money on defense, than any intent on his part.




Very true, Helmut Schmidt, famously, took him for a walk in the garden and explained just how little influence Canada had and how hard he, Schmidt, could and would make life for Trudeau if he he didn't, for example, buy new (German) tanks.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (20 Aug 2014)

Pencil Tech said:
			
		

> Almost the entire Royal Canadian Navy fleet was built by PE Trudeau,



That is complete Bull.

When Trudeau came to power in 1968, the construction of the batch one IROQUOIS class was just starting, a decision made under his predecessor Lester B. Pearson (who probably understood the use of military power in foreign affairs by middle power better that anyone since WWII).

Trudeau cancelled the batch 2 of the IROQUOIS without any plan for further replacement, creating a twenty years gap in fleet replacement, even though DND started working on new replacement plans as early as 1975 after this cancellation of the follow on IROQUOIS (this was ultimately the Canadian Patrol Frigate Program). This action by Trudeau brought the fleet to near total obsolescence as even in 1972 (commissioning of the last IRO), the steamers of the various ST-LAURENT derivatives were getting overdue for replacement.

In 1979, as a result of the Iranian revolution, the US offered Canada the four fully armed Spruance class derivative AAW destroyers ordered but not yet delivered to the Shah (known as the Kidd class), for a third the price: Trudeau absolutely refused. They ended up in the US fleet for a long time, then were recently transferred to Taiwan.

When, and only when, it became absolutely clear that the fleet was falling apart (The newspapers of the day were joking that if you saw three ships go sailing by at Christmas, it was the entire Canadian fleet) and other countries in NATO started to pressure Canada to hold up its end, did Trudeau agree to begin, slowly, the implementation of the CPF program of the Navy, by letting contracts in 1983 (year before his last defeat) for the design phase and development of tenders only for the CPF batch one. Even then, his main concern was the industrial benefits. It was left to the Conservatives of Mulroney to actually let out the contracts for the CPF batch one and two, to cancel the batch 3 in order to develop instead a program (entirely resulting from the Mulroney gov. white paper on defence) to acquire nuclear attack submarines. When the wall fell and the Nuc. boats program was abandoned, a diesel submarine acquisition program was started by the conservatives, then itself cancelled by Chretien, which ultimately led the same Chretien to acquire the british Upholder when it became clear that the "O" boats could not be refitted and carry on.

As for the smaller vessels, at least two replacement programs were cancelled under Trudeau.

The MCDVs are an entirely Mulroney government program, and the Trudeau government let both classes in place during his tenure rot with minimum funding even for upgrades. When I joined in 1976, the Gate Vessels and PB's on the west coast were already 25 years old. They got to be more than 40 years old before they were replaced. I was one of the last captains of the PORTE ST-JEAN: she was the last ship commissioned in the Canadian Navy by the king.

So don't ever say that Trudeau built the Canadian Navy Fleet: He let it slip into obsolescence on purpose and couldn't care less about it.


----------



## Kirkhill (20 Aug 2014)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Very true, Helmut Schmidt, famously, took him for a walk in the garden and explained just how little influence Canada had and how hard he, Schmidt, could and would make life for Trudeau if he he didn't, for example, buy new (German) tanks.



Probably having even more impact on the naive Mr. Trudeau as coming from a lifelong member of the Socialist International to a recent recruit.


----------



## Pencil Tech (20 Aug 2014)

Oldgateboatdriver, full on respect to your experience and knowledge, and I wasn't sure about the MCDVs, but then given that, my point was really how many hulls has Stephen Harper cut? Or likely to in the future, honestly? And how's that deepwater Arctic port coming along? I mean actually how much worse can it get?


----------



## Loachman (20 Aug 2014)

Pencil Tech said:
			
		

> how much worse can it get?



A little patience, and the answer will be obvious.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (20 Aug 2014)

Pencil Tech said:
			
		

> Oldgateboatdriver, full on respect to your experience and knowledge, and I wasn't sure about the MCDVs, but then given that, my point was really how many hulls has Stephen Harper cut? Or likely to in the future, honestly? And how's that deepwater Arctic port coming along? I mean actually how much worse can it get?



Forgot to also specify that all three (then) AOR's were also in the process of being built or in the water when Trudeau senior became PM. We know where their replacement stands !!!

How much worse it gets is only a matter of mathematics:

In terms of fleet replacement, the AOR's and the IRO's are way way overdue: they are obsolete as hulls and of limited use as warships in today's environment as even the last refit of the IRO goes quite some ways back.

The HAL's are in reasonable shape as a result of the current mid-life they are being given BUT (and there is always a but) work on their replacement is now getting seriously due: it has got to begin now so the first replacement will get in the water just when the first HAL that went through mid-life comes due for its next  operational upgrade (by which point the hull/machinery will near its useful life failing extremely expensive replacement/repairs).

The MCDV's are ok but plans for their replacement should get underway sometimes in the next five years.

The subs are ok at this time but planning for the next sub should begin shortly also as the lead time for submarines programs are longer than frigates/destroyers ones.

Finally, someone should explain (or try to anyway) again to the government why its insistence on equipping the Navy with light icebreakers is ridiculous, should be scrapped and that the Navy does not need to be in that business regardless of the fact that the Arctic is getting to be available for commercial exploitation.

If they insist on the Navy acting as policemen on our coasts, here's a suggestion (the design is avail now and construction could begin as soon as contracts are let out): http://products.damen.com/en/ranges/offshore-patrol-vessel/offshore-patrol-vessel-1400


----------



## Kirkhill (20 Aug 2014)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> ......
> 
> Finally, someone should explain (or try to anyway) again to the government why its insistence on equipping the Navy with light icebreakers is ridiculous, should be scrapped and that the Navy does not need to be in that business regardless of the fact that the Arctic is getting to be available for commercial exploitation.
> 
> *If they insist on the Navy acting as policemen on our coasts*, here's a suggestion (the design is avail now and construction could begin as soon as contracts are let out): http://products.damen.com/en/ranges/offshore-patrol-vessel/offshore-patrol-vessel-1400



OGBD -

Here is where I think you lose a lot of supporters.  Most folks want the RCN's work to begin at tidewater.  Just as they expect the RCAF to do SovPats and the Army to sling sand bags and take glorious snowmobile adventure excursions through the arctic.

Perhaps the OPVs that you suggest could be used not just on Canada's ice free waters (the West Coast and everything south of the Nose and Tail) but could also be used as a deployable policing force for the littorals and places like the Horn of Africa.  A CSC and a couple of OPVs would also be a token.


----------



## GR66 (20 Aug 2014)

Here's an alternative pair of ships (http://en.dcnsgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/180561.pdf)....one OPV with twice the range of the one mentioned above and a Corvette in the same family with anti-air, anti-surface and ASW capabilities.  One could replace the MCDV's in the offshore role and the other could be a lighter (both in size and manpower requirements) complement to the future CSC.  

My personal opinion is that Canada would be better served with a larger fleet of ships...say a handful (4?) of high-end CSC's with taskforce command capabilities, a larger number of multi-purpose Corvettes (6-8?) and several OPV's (8-10?) rather than the proposed smaller number of CSC's (max 12 planned but almost certainly to be less).


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (20 Aug 2014)

Perhaps I expressed myself incorrectly.

The operative word in my sentence is "policemen", not "operating on our coasts", which we already do.

Our work does begin at tidewaters, even before tide waters: My name is on a list of recipients of a CDS unit citation for the Oka crisis. We provided patrol boat support for the op and closed the river to inter-reserve traffic. 

We do sling sandbags too: In the Winnipeg flood, we repatriated all the navy heavy RHIBs by truck or air to Winnipeg and provided the "heavy trucks" of sandbagging to remote areas accessible by water only.

We do our share of Sovpats: We are always sailing in our area of responsibility (Canadian waters). Anything on the water in our area of responsibility, we try to identify and track in our common picture system.

And we do all this in defence of Canadian sovereignty. But policing, that is enforcing the laws of Canada within the Canadian borders or EEZ is not our job anymore than the Army patrols downtown Montreal for parking infractions or the Airforce will inspect the maintenance logs of  Air canada planes to see if they are up to date.

The Arctic, whenever it is ice free so that commercial exploitation can occur is just as ice free for our current type of warships. That is why, for instance we do operate frigates, MCDV's and submarines in the high Arctic in the summer months in support of the defence of the Arctic. However, being able to operate in the ice would serve no purpose and it is only wanted as a form of police presence by the government. The Coastguard can carry out this "presence" role better and make more economical other use of the hulls at the same time, for ocean research/rescue/ice breaking services to commercial traffic, etc.

Lets face it the only military role an icebreaker could have is to go and "attack" a "military" target in the Arctic. That would be akin to sending a four inch long snapping turtle across a whole school gym to go after the other side's snapping turtle (for those of you unfamiliar with icebreakers, they usually don't move through ice much faster than a fast walker would walk on it.). When you otherwise have at your disposal a seagull that can break a turtle's back with its beak, such a slow motion chase becomes ridiculous. If there is a military threat to the Arctic within the iced area, air power will be required, not slow Navy icebreakers. (Historical aside: Funny enough, the last time the RCN operated an icebreaker as an Arctic Patrol Vessel [HMCS LABRADOR], she was mostly used in support of the RCAF in helping it set up the DEW line of radar stations.). If the military threat is not itself a slow icebreaker, then it is because the conditions are propitious to employment of standard warships by both side.

P.S GR66: The planned number of CSC's is 15, plus the 6 to 8 AOPS, which are the abomination I would like to see replaced by proper OPV's, whether along the line you propose or the one I do. I picked the one I presented because, unlike the larger OPV's or AOPS, they could be mostly manned and operated by the reserves. A fleet of 15 CSC, 2 AOR, 12-14 OPV such as the one I propose and 4-6 submarines would serve us great. If two Mistral type amphibious ships could be added, it would be even better.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (20 Aug 2014)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> Trudeau's defence policy?  Same as all his other policies - nice hair.
> 
> CF 100 - 1952 - 639 LIBERAL
> CF 101  - 1961 - 132  CONSERVATIVE
> ...



You forgot:

CF-105 - 1959 - 5 LIBERAL / cancelled and scrapped CONSERVATIVE


----------



## GR66 (20 Aug 2014)

I agree 100% that a token military presence does little to nothing to enforce our sovereignty in the Arctic.  That's not to say that we shouldn't have a presence there or have the ability to project force there if another nation decides to operate in our territory.  

However it would be a MUCH stronger statement of Canadian sovereignty if a team of Spetsnaz operatives mushing over the Canadian ice pack with their dogsleds were to be pulled over by a local bylaw officer on a skidoo and ticketed for not having dog licenses and for littering with the discarded packaging for their rations than them spotting an AOPS chugging along on the horizon.  

REALl sovereignty comes from use of the land and civic control over the territory not having your military pass through on occasion.  It would be much more cost effective for the government to encourage development and settlement of the arctic and to install the mechanisms of civil society than to build a handful of ice-strengthened RCN ships.


----------



## Kirkhill (20 Aug 2014)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Perhaps I expressed myself incorrectly.
> 
> The operative word in my sentence is "policemen", not "operating on our coasts", which we already do.
> 
> ...



All clear OGBD.... by the way.   You could make money on those snapping turtle fights.   Just think of all the beer you could sell waiting for contact  :nod:

Point well taken on the primacy of the air response in the Arctic.  

So if you increased the deepwater OPV fleet (at the cost of the MCDV/AOPS fleet)  how would that impact the CSC buy?  Suppose you had 20 OPVs to replace the MCDVs and AOPS.  I'm back to thinking about moving up the scale to the 2400s or even the Hollands.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Aug 2014)

The nice thing is that the "snapping turtle" is likely to be a commercial design, with some military comms, radar and drop in weapon systems tossed on to it. I suspect most of the designs would readily take the aforementioned systems with minimal issues. It's main job is to show the flag and to have a visible presence. The good news is that manning a a commercially designed modern icebreaker would require far fewer crew than your average navy ship. Sometimes there is a cost to be where you live. Maintaining a good "fence" between your neighbours is likely cheaper in the long run then letting their dogs and brats run wild on your property. The Arctic is not going away, the CCG are terrible at "policing" I suspect soon or later the Navy is going to have to dedicate more resource up there whether they want to or not.

Frankly I think the Naval reserve is highly underused asset and one that needs to be grown and introduced in new places like the western and eastern Arctic (As well as Prince Rupert if some of the LNG stuff moves ahead) It will take time to build the capacity up there, start with smaller seasonally vessels like a CB90 based out of Tuk.


----------



## GreenMarine (21 Aug 2014)

First concerning Justin's Hair and Pot policies http://CD.trend hunterstatic.com/thumbs/.jpeg

Second: My hope for the next government is to realize that we need more mixed equipment to handle different problems.
A Single Surface class is nice, smaller patrol boats for the Joe jobs will help. Same goes for the Ice Breakers, a few Heavy Ice breakers and some quicker Lighter ones.  (I wonder if the northern fleet will be call MarNor or MarArc?)

Third: Like Colin P mentioned our Naval Reserves are underused, they could be employed to assist in the deep water port's beginnings to help insure proper infrastructure is in place, for future personnel to use.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (21 Aug 2014)

Oh, GM, GM, GM, ….. where do I begin?

Well, lets start with icebreakers: It's not their "weight" that determines speed. A light icebreaker as opposed to a heavy one refers to the amount of ice it can break. None of this makes them any faster. Rather the opposite: a heavy ice breaker will be faster than a light one in a given ice condition. BTW, "light" icebreakers, which is what the AOPS would be, would not be able to operate in the Arctic in winter and would therefore withdraw South.

Second: What the he%$ll is a "naval Joe job" ??? The RCN is tasked with the naval defence of Canada, not merchant marine tasks, such as the Coastguard does (Maritime SAR/Icebreaking in support of commercial navigation/aids to navigation/traffic control). The type of ship used to perform any duty, whether Coastguard or Navy or other, is dictated as much by the mission as it is by the location where it will occur: Prince Ruppert you say! Anyone here sailed near Haida Gwai in winter? A patrol boat ain't gonna cut it - you need a large ship.

Third: The Naval reserves are currently stretched almost to breaking point to provide the crews of the MCDV's. Without those crews, Marlant and Marpac cannot man theses vessels, which are performing critical tasks and freeing the frigates and destroyers for where they are needed. They are not under-utilized, but rather the reverse. Moreover, what makes you think in any way that the naval reserves have any skills related to the running of harbour infrastructure? That is not even near their training and duties.


----------



## GreenMarine (21 Aug 2014)

Thanks for the insight OGBD.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Aug 2014)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Oh, GM, GM, GM, ….. where do I begin?
> 
> Well, lets start with icebreakers: It's not their "weight" that determines speed. A light icebreaker as opposed to a heavy one refers to the amount of ice it can break. None of this makes them any faster. Rather the opposite: a heavy ice breaker will be faster than a light one in a given ice condition. BTW, "light" icebreakers, which is what the AOPS would be, would not be able to operate in the Arctic in winter and would therefore withdraw South.
> 
> ...



OGBD
My reference to Prince Rupert is more to a new security requirement than attempting to take over the Port Authority role. We would be looking at 1-3 LNG carriers a day out PR and 1 day out of Kitimat. It would be a good reason(excuse) to grow the reserve and make use of a underutilized existing government facility (Seal Cove) and Sourdough Bay next door would have been a Turnkey base to start from(shortsightedness on PWGCS part). Not to mention a good pool of people with lots of marine experience to draw upon. I think I should correct my statement by saying that the NR is under developed as opposed to underused, I think there is a lot of untapped potential on the West Coast.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Aug 2014)

Back on track folks. We're talking about Trudeau's military policy (or lack there of), not the RCN, general or otherwise.

---Staff---


----------



## jollyjacktar (21 Aug 2014)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Back on track folks. We're talking about Trudeau's military policy (or lack there of), not the RCN, general or otherwise.
> 
> ---Staff---



Trudeau had a policy????


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Aug 2014)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Trudeau had a policy????



His father did. His policy was to bleed the military to the bare minimum it needed.


----------



## a_majoor (21 Aug 2014)

Since the Young Dauphin can't even articulate what the "Middle Class" is, or how he plans to "help" them, asking for a defense policy is really grasping for straws.

If you want to discover what the Liberal "policy" on anything might be, look at polls and see what is "popular" at any given time. Or look at the example of Ontario.

Of go to the default position of saying "Nice hair...."


----------



## Transporter (21 Aug 2014)

Didn't the Libs recently recruit a retired Army GO to advise them on such issues? Don't worry, he'll nail it for them.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Aug 2014)

Transporter said:
			
		

> Didn't the Libs recently recruit a retired Army GO to advise them on such issues? Don't worry, he'll nail it for them.



Andrew Leslie. Yeah, he's a great one to be on staff as an advisor.


----------



## a_majoor (22 Aug 2014)

Since the Young Dauphin presumably also has advisors for economics, foreign policy and so on and STILL manages to come across as a person with 0 knowledge and intellectual curiosity about the world around him, I doubt that even having the "smartest person in the room" as his advisor for defense matters will make much of a difference; the Young Dauphin either does not listen or simply cannot understand what he is being told....


----------



## Edward Campbell (22 Aug 2014)

I _think_ his apparent disinterest is part of an emerging campaign narrative: "vote for me because you _*like*_ me, don't worry about all that boring old policy stuff. That (policy) is Harper's _shtick_ and you know you don't like him."

It's an indisputable fact that Canadian are fascinated with M. Trudeau; he's a rock-star; he is, honestly, likable; and, for a whole host of reasons (some real, many contrived) he has _charisma_.

My guess is that his campaign brain trust wants (needs) to deemphasize _policy_ (largely because there are, still, HUGE and potentially fatal policy disagreements within the Liberal Party) and focus on "niceness." They think, and I agree, that it may be enough.

Canadians, broadly and generally, neither know nor care about their national defence ... they just don't like spending money on it. M. Trudeau and LGen (Ret'd) Leslie will not disturb their dreams.


----------



## Lightguns (22 Aug 2014)

Transporter said:
			
		

> Didn't the Libs recently recruit a retired Army GO to advise them on such issues? Don't worry, he'll nail it for them.



Yes, the policy is simple but effective:  Spending cap of $500 without the signature of the PM.  It must work, it is the only thing that defines Leslie leadership at all levels and it made Leslie a General!


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (22 Aug 2014)

+ 1 ERC.

I don't think that the Liberal Party of Canada has had an actual defence "policy" since the late 60's. That was Unification and we all know how many decades (and compromise of the original idea) it has taken DND to make it work.

I wish I could say the Conservatives were better, but I can't really.

Other than that, what passes for military policy in the various policy papers of the Liberal is a bunch of platitudes such as "continue to defend Canada here and abroad, collaborate in collective security through NATO and NORAD, contribute to peace through peace keeping, etc." 

Those are not really policy, just regurgitated feel good PR for public consumption.


----------



## Shrek1985 (24 Aug 2014)

So i'm not just ignorant, not being able to find word-one on JT's defence policy? Shiny pony, really has none and Leslie is just a deflection from the fact?


----------



## Edward Campbell (24 Aug 2014)

Andy Leslie may have, in fact almost surely does have an interesting, perhaps even useful and imaginative _defence policy_ in draft, on his notebook ... the problem is that Gerald Butts and the Trudeau campaign team don't want to talk about policy. Policy, they know, is Stephen Harper's strong suit, one doesn't, normally, like to 'play' to one's opponent's strengths; also, policy can be, and is for Liberals, deeply divisive; the Liberal Party of Canada is united around one, and only one thing: regaining political power. _Most_ of the party believes that Justin Trudeau is the ticket to getting power back. They also agree that he is a nice guy, a great campaigner (so far), and has the right mix of _royal jelly_ and _charisma_. What they don't agree on is any policy on any important subject. My guesstimate is that _Team Trudeau_, being ferociously bright political operatives, will avoid policy like the plague and LGen (Ret'd) Leslie's ideas, many of which many of us might like, will remain hidden on his notebook computer's hard drive.


----------



## McG (17 Sep 2014)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> ... LGen (Ret'd) Leslie's ideas, many of which many of us might like, will remain hidden on his notebook computer's hard drive.


It seems he might have the opportunity to speak and shape things publicly within the party.



> *A Liberal myth on its last legs*
> Leslie may herald realistic foreign policy
> Chris Selley
> National Post
> ...


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (7 Nov 2014)

This is sooooooooo unbelievable I didn't want to post it in the ongoing ISIS thread and totally derail it.
So, in his mind, as long as they get massacred warm they will be happy?? :facepalm:

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/11/07/trudeau-drop-parkas-not-bombs
Josh Skurnik, QMI Agency 

First posted:  Friday, November 07, 2014 11:02 AM EST  | Updated:  Friday, November 07, 2014 11:08 AM EST  

EDMONTON — Never mind airstrikes. Victims of ISIS just need warm cocoa and woolen touques, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau suggested to a crowd in Edmonton on Thursday.
Trudeau, who opposes Canada's part in airstrikes on Islamic States targets in Iraq, says we'd be more helpful offering “cold winter” advice for victims of the militants.

“There's a lot of people, refugees, displaced peoples, fleeing violence who are facing a very, very cold winter in the mountains. Something Canada has expertise on is how to face a winter in the mountains with the right kind of equipment," Trudeau said.
Since Oct. 28, Canada has had six CF-18 Hornet fighters, in Kuwait, as well as a CC-150 Polaris tanker and two CP-140 Aurora surveillance aircraft being supported by almost 600 military personnel on the ground.

The planes have made several sorties into Iraq as part of an international airstrike campaign to stem the tide of ISIS militants marching through the country.


----------



## Staff Weenie (7 Nov 2014)

What a tool...... :facepalm:

I often wonder if his 'handlers' suffer strokes every time he opens his mouth and goes off script.

Now remember Justin, just stand there and look stylish, and for God's sake, don't try to speak!


----------



## Rifleman62 (7 Nov 2014)

Like, let ISIS continue to generate, by butchery, more victims. We have and endless supply of cold weather advice, parkas and toques.


----------



## Kilo_302 (7 Nov 2014)

Well, according to a couple reports, US aircraft are sitting on the tarmac because they can't find much worth bombing. So the addition of 6 (7) CF-18s isn't really contributing is it? If we ARE really concerned about the plight of civilians on the ground, we should look at what gaps need to be filled, and then fill them.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (7 Nov 2014)

The threat of airstrikes reduces the effectiveness of ISIS, allowing opposing forces to stand up to them. So they are effective even when not bombing, plus there is also the collection of intel that will help the Kurds and Iraqi Army fight them.

 A 5 second Google search shows we have already donated 16 million worth of humanitarian aid this year alone to the Iraqi refugees. they should keep their shiny pony in a petting zoo where he can't do any real harm.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (7 Nov 2014)

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> Well, according to a couple reports,


Where are they??


----------



## Marchog (7 Nov 2014)

This has gotten to the level of self-parody. I had to double check that it wasn't a satire article.


----------



## George Wallace (7 Nov 2014)

Its not? 


Should be.


----------



## Tibbson (7 Nov 2014)

Any electoral brownie points he hoped to make by declaring his stance on marijuana (which I personally don't agree with but I'm not the one trying to get elected PM) gets eroded by every other time he opens his mouth.  He's in over his head and when combined with Mulcair's declaration that Bibeau's actions were not terrorism are just setting Harper up for re-election.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (7 Nov 2014)

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> Well, according to a couple reports, US aircraft are sitting on the tarmac because they can't find much worth bombing. So the addition of 6 (7) CF-18s isn't really contributing is it? If we ARE really concerned about the plight of civilians on the ground, we should look at what gaps need to be filled, and then fill them.



Is this a serious post?


----------



## Tibbson (7 Nov 2014)

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> Well, according to a couple reports, US aircraft are sitting on the tarmac because they can't find much worth bombing. So the addition of 6 (7) CF-18s isn't really contributing is it? If we ARE really concerned about the plight of civilians on the ground, we should look at what gaps need to be filled, and then fill them.



The biggest gap that needs to be filled is to stop these people from being killed in the first place.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (7 Nov 2014)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/somnia/article21473466/

“ISIS can only expand in areas where it can enter into partnerships with the local population, and that largely limits the scope of the expansion of ISIS to Sunni, disenfranchised areas,” said Lina Khatib, the director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.

It is in Iraq, where coalition forces began bombing in August, that the Islamic State has lost the most ground. In recent weeks, combinations of Iraqi government units, Kurdish peshmerga forces, Shiite militias and armed Sunni tribesmen have seized the Rabia crossing with Syria; taken back the area of Zumar in the north and Jurf al-Sakr south of Baghdad; opened crucial roads in the country’s center; and held off Islamic State advances elsewhere.

For the first time since the jihadists seized Mosul and much of northwestern Iraq in June, an Iraqi military vehicle can drive from Baghdad to the northern city of Irbil on a main highway.

Hisham Alhashimi, an Iraqi researcher and an expert on the Islamic State, said those changes had broken up the group’s territory, making it harder for it to move its forces and for its couriers to relay messages among the leadership and the field commanders.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Nov 2014)

We need to drop crates of parkas on the heads of ISIS terrorists.  After they land crushing the freedom-haters the locals can go and pick up the parkas and use them while taking the wood for fires and building materials.


----------



## daftandbarmy (7 Nov 2014)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> This is sooooooooo unbelievable I didn't want to post it in the ongoing ISIS thread and totally derail it.
> So, in his mind, as long as they get massacred warm they will be happy?? :facepalm:
> 
> http://www.torontosun.com/2014/11/07/trudeau-drop-parkas-not-bombs
> ...



An astute political move no doubt designed to curry favour within the Quebec textile industry... or not


----------



## BorisK (7 Nov 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> We need to drop crates of parkas on the heads of ISIS terrorists.  After they land crushing the freedom-haters the locals can go and pick up the parkas and use them while taking the wood for fires and building materials.



:spilled my coffee laughing: 
Now that's a practical idea I must say.


----------



## a_majoor (8 Nov 2014)

If aircraft are sitting on the ground due to lack of targets it mostly indicates that ISIS fighters have learned to disperse and hide much better than the Taliban or Free Syrian Army (two other forces which suffered much from enemy airpower). The obvious follow up is boots on the ground to root them out of their hiding places, but there isn't a "Northern Alliance", or a remotely competent local army waiting in the wings to be unleashed, so ISIS can stay hidden like rats and cockroaches until the Allies pack up their airplanes and go home.

Of course, the Young Dauphin misses the point that we also need "boots on the ground" to ensure that toques and parkas go to where they are needed and to the people who need them. His strategic thinking is on par with a clever and well meaning six year old....


----------



## Haggis (8 Nov 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> We need to drop crates of parkas on the heads of ISIS terrorists.  After they land crushing the freedom-haters the locals can go and pick up the parkas and use them while taking the wood for fires and building materials.



I never took you for a Liberal.


----------



## Old Sweat (8 Nov 2014)

Surely clothing the locals implies [snow] boots on the ground, including establishing a local control apparatus to issue the parkas, toques, mittens, etc to individuals and families instead of turning them over to the local thrift shop. Or does JT intend to merely insert the gear into the local distribution system, which could result in it being sold on the black market at whatever the market will bear. His statement suggests he is talking about teaching the locals how to shovel snow and scrape windshields and . . .

The whole thing has the air of something dreamed up on the fly. Maybe it gives a whole new meaning to snow job.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (8 Nov 2014)

Perhaps, back in the day, we should have resorted to paper snowflakes and hopscotch to stop the Nazis.  I mean, if parkas and boots work for |SIS, hindsight and all that...


----------



## Haggis (8 Nov 2014)

So, has JT figured out how we would ensure that the winter clothing dropped for freezing refugees doesn't find it's way into the hands of ISIS fighters?

Nope?  Didn't think so.


----------



## FSTO (8 Nov 2014)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Surely clothing the locals implies [snow] boots on the ground, including establishing a local control apparatus to issue the parkas, toques, mittens, etc to individuals and families instead of turning them over to the local thrift shop. Or does JT intend to merely insert the gear into the local distribution system, which could result in it being sold on the black market at whatever the market will bear. His statement suggests he is talking about teaching the locals how to shovel snow and scrape windshields and . . .
> 
> The whole thing has the air of something dreamed up on the fly. Maybe it gives a whole new meaning to snow job.



Similar to his response to the harassment allegations. I seem to recall from my HA training that his response was textbook on the way "NOT" to handle the situation.


----------



## OldSolduer (8 Nov 2014)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Perhaps, back in the day, we should have resorted to paper snowflakes and hopscotch to stop the Nazis.  I mean, if parkas and boots work for |SIS, hindsight and all that...



Maybe a nice cup of hot chocolate with a nice friendly chat.......


----------



## Edward Campbell (8 Nov 2014)

This is not M. Trudeau doing an "open mouth, change feet" routine. This, coming out strong against military intervention in Iraq, is a calculated thing.

Early poling _suggests _that ⅔ of Canadians support going after IS**. My _guess_, and the Liberals' _guess_, too,is that number will fall off, rapidly and, if we are still there in Oct 15 support will be more like ⅓ and a consistent anti-bombing stance will have worked for the Liberals.


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Nov 2014)

Napoleon said 'Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake"


We should just quietly move away then....  :nod:


----------



## Brad Sallows (9 Nov 2014)

Don't bother.  If we're not going to defend people from annihilation or subjugation by IS*, then don't prolong the misery with half-assed feel-good measures.


----------



## DBA (11 Nov 2014)

I guess  "responsibility to protect" which was first presented in a report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) which was set up by the Canadian Government in December 2001 means nothing to the new Liberal leader, a stark contrast to the Liberal led Canadian government that set up the commission. 

ref: http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/rwanda/about/bgresponsibility.shtml


----------



## x_para76 (11 Nov 2014)

I can't see what good parkas will do them if ISIS has cut their heads off. Perhaps we could drop bombs and parkas? That would keep everybody happy.


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Nov 2014)

X_para76 said:
			
		

> Perhaps we could drop bombs and parkas? That would keep everybody happy.


One hopes not in the same drop, right?


----------



## Old Sweat (11 Nov 2014)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> One hopes not in the same drop, right?



Drop the parkas first, then when the bad guys come out to pick them up . . .


----------



## Shamrock (11 Nov 2014)

X_para76 said:
			
		

> I can't see what good parkas will do them if ISIS has cut their heads off. Perhaps we could drop bombs and parkas? That would keep everybody happy.



Fine. Parkas with detachable hoods.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (11 Nov 2014)

I see what you did there....


----------



## a_majoor (11 Nov 2014)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Don't bother.  If we're not going to defend people from annihilation or subjugation by IS*, then don't prolong the misery with half-assed feel-good measures.



But the entire point of modern Progressiveism is to make people "feel good" about themselves, and to tell themselves and others they are "doing the right thing".

There is no actual need for results, (pointing out real consequences of Progressive policies is considered rude, and usually results in a diatribe about how the plan would have worked except for interference by anti-Bolshevik saboteurs and wreckers unnamed parties), just the ability to preen about the moral actions you support.


----------



## McG (5 Jan 2015)

Lee Berthiaume anticipates the Liberals will seek to give greater prominence to the military in their efforts this year.  I wonder if a four year reservist really brings much of a veteran's perspective, and a candidate in Peter MacKay's riding is more likely a throw-away candidate, not expected to be arriving in the house to capitalize on his military perspective.  However, some of these new candidates will probably make it through the election and there is definitely one big name in the group.

I suspect Andrew Leslie sees the MND position much the same as Paul Hellyer did.  The MND is a post one where an individual can do great things and set himself up as a future contender to lead the party (and then country).  We could probably look at his CF transformation report to get an idea of the great things we should expect if a Liberal victory comes this year.


> Liberals hope to escape past, chart new future with military candidates
> Lee Berthiaume
> Ottawa Citizen
> 04 Jan 2014
> ...


----------



## PuckChaser (5 Jan 2015)

They've still yet to show me any sort of plan or leadership on veterans/military issues. Until they do something more than "We're better", I find it laughable they assume they're going to swing anyone to their side on these issues.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Jan 2015)

I refuse to listen to pre election promises from any party. As is shown throughout history, most promises are never carried through on once the politician or party has been elected. Sometimes they are attempted, however by the time they're rolled out, they bear no resemblance to the initial promise.


----------



## cryco (5 Jan 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I refuse to listen to pre election promises from any party. As is shown throughout history, most promises are never carried through on once the politician or party has been elected. Sometimes they are attempted, however by the time they're rolled out, they bear no resemblance to the initial promise.



It does however give you an indication of how desperate a party is to get votes. I don't expect the promises to be kept, but I use them as an indicator. Realistic, reasonable promises let me know the party is grounded (this rarely happens) whereas insane tax cutting, money throwing nut job promises, well, entertain me at best.


----------



## Happy Guy (5 Jan 2015)

All parties have defence policies or lack of.

Having retired military members does not mean that they will be influential and make a positive change to the Liberal Party.  They are window dressing much like the MPs of the current parliament where the real power only lies with the PM, his COS and small circle of advisors.  The conservative MPs just do as they're told.

The Conservatives like to show that they are pro military despite what their  actions now shows.  They demonize the Liberals for the "Decade of Darkness" and unification.
The Liberals have not yet published their defence / foreign policy despite parading the leader surrounding himself with experts.  I would agree with Mr. Campbell - dissention with the Liberal Party.
The NDP wants the CAF to concentrate on peacekeeping and defence of North America.

I destest the NDP policies but I like Mr. Mulcair with regards to his performance in Parliament (http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/04/michael-den-tandt-tom-mulcair-is-ottawas-best-parliamentarian-and-yet-hes-the-only-party-leader-likely-to-lose-his-job/).

I will need to really assess the party policies and their willinginess to actually go through with them but I vote next time.


----------



## OldSolduer (5 Jan 2015)

As my grandmother used to say - the proof of the pudding is in the eating. 

There are few lousy puddings out there.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (5 Jan 2015)

MCG said:
			
		

> I suspect Andrew Leslie sees the MND position much the same as Paul Hellyer did.  The MND is a post one where an individual can do great things and set himself up as a future contender to lead the party (and then country).  We could probably look at his CF transformation report to get an idea of the great things we should expect if a Liberal victory comes this year.



I would also say that Leslie is harbouring a lot of sour grapes over what he likely views as a slight in Gen Natynchuk being picked as CDS over him.... Leslie lacks many things, but confidence is not one of them. If he becomes CDS there is going to be a lot of "wrongs" righted


----------



## George Wallace (5 Jan 2015)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> .... Leslie lacks many things, but confidence is not one of them. If he becomes CDS there is going to be a lot of "wrongs" righted



You mean Minister of Defence, not CDS, and "wrongs" as perceived by him, not others; right?


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (5 Jan 2015)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> You mean Minister of Defence, not CDS, and "wrongs" as perceived by him, not others; right?



Yes... MND, not CDS and the wrongs perceived by him


----------



## stealthylizard (5 Jan 2015)

To accomplish that goal, the Liberals will have a number of former and *currently serving military members* running under their banner


I thought that currently serving military members couldn't run for a seat in the government.  Am I mistaken?


----------



## Lightguns (6 Jan 2015)

stealthylizard said:
			
		

> To accomplish that goal, the Liberals will have a number of former and *currently serving military members* running under their banner
> 
> 
> I thought that currently serving military members couldn't run for a seat in the government.  Am I mistaken?



Class A can, anyone on full time (B or Reg) cannot run federally or run for a full time seat provincially or municipally.  Reg For require permission of DND, Class B do not, for part time political positions.


----------



## McG (6 Jan 2015)

More calls for Trudeau to put details (as opposed to just faces) on his defence vision/policy:



> *Time for Trudeau to explain defence and foreign policies*
> On the defensive: Garneau critical of Conservatives, but where do the Liberals stand?
> Matthew Fisher
> Vancouver Sun
> ...


----------



## Brad Sallows (6 Jan 2015)

It is untrue that the Liberal party does not keep its promises regarding the CF.

Remember Chretien's helicopters?


----------



## a_majoor (10 Jan 2015)

Based on the Young Dauphin's published statements, he is good with Chinese authoritarian rule, has no issues with Russia invading Ukraine (thought it was the appropriate matter to make jokes about on TV) and feels deploying military force to fight ISIS barbarians reflects some sort of psychological issue.

So I think we have a good understanding of his view of the military and foreign policy.....


----------



## rmc_wannabe (10 Jan 2015)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Based on the Young Dauphin's published statements, he is good with Chinese authoritarian rule, has no issues with Russia invading Ukraine (thought it was the appropriate matter to make jokes about on TV) and feels deploying military force to fight ISIS barbarians reflects some sort of psychological issue.
> 
> So I think we have a good understanding of his view of the military and foreign policy.....



So pretty much this?


----------



## Edward Campbell (11 Jan 2015)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Based on the Young Dauphin's published statements, he is good with Chinese authoritarian rule, has no issues with Russia invading Ukraine (thought it was the appropriate matter to make jokes about on TV) and feels deploying military force to fight ISIS barbarians reflects some sort of psychological issue.
> 
> So I think we have a good understanding of his view of the military and foreign policy.....




In fairness, M. Trudeau must fight a "two front war:" he must, simultaneously, beat the Reds (the NDP) on his left flank and the allies (the CPC) on his right (Western) flank. That was tricky for some pretty good strategic thinkers in the 1940s, it's still tricky today. 

His musings, to date, have, _it seems to me_, been aimed at his left flank ~ both at the NDP and at the big, strong, anti-America/anti-military wing of the Liberal Party of Canada.

M. Trudeau's dilemma is worsened because Canadians seem, to date, to approve, broadly (albeit, probably not deeply) with Prime Minister Harper's _strategy_ of doing just a few bits and pieces.


----------



## MilEME09 (11 Jan 2015)

I suspect the Liberals might know that, and at present are wanting to simply bounce back rather then hope for a chance at taking government, I suspect we might end up with a situation of the Liberals and NDP trading a few seats the next election. No party in my opinion is positive for DND any more, we are a political tool used when seen fit. It is more a case of which party will do the least amount of damage to DND and the CAF.


----------



## a_majoor (11 Jan 2015)

Re reading the election 2015 thread, talking to people who are connected to various parities and looking at other sources, I am coming to the conclusion that the entire election really revolves around two areas: 905 and Quebec. (not that it takes a real pundit to figure that out   )

It seems unlikely that the CPC is going to make big gains in Atlantic Canada, nor the Liberals dislodging the CPC in the West, so we are really reduced to two key battles: the Liberal/NDP cage match in Quebec (with a possible Quebec party acting as a spoiler), and the CPC digging in the 905 belt to retain their hold on Ontario.

The issue of the military will have virtually 0 impact on either campaign, so in some sense it really does not matter what the Young Dauphin, Tom Mulcar or Stephen Harper actually think. Voters don't care and the actual number of military voters is so small and dispersed that they effectively have no impact at all. This is rather strange and sad; Canada has spent more blood and treasure on military operations since the Korean War in the last two decades, and the evolving world situation is fraught with more changes and dangers than it has seen for a long time (take your pick, some analysts are comparing it to the period prior to the start of WWI, and the other popular meme is Cold War II) so you would think that the issues of Defense of the Realm should be up for discussion.

While this should be a possible opening for anyone who is quick off the mark and clever enough to come out with a well thought out defense strategy for the public to see and discuss, given the unfortunate information environment we live in (use of "narrative", "Gotcha" journalism, poll tracking, etc.) the risk isn't that defense won't be examined, the risk is that anyone who advocates for something will be shot at from all angles and for things which are so completely out of arc (think of the scientist who landed a space probe on a comet recently; his press conference was interrupted by someone who complained about the _shirt_ he was wearing) that it is hardly worth taking a position. Far better to say nothing or expend a few platitudes than be caught in the vortex.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (12 Jan 2015)

I always wondered about that word "Pundit"

Interesting history via Wiki

Origins

The term originates from the Sanskrit term pandit (paṇḍitá), meaning "knowledge owner ". It refers to someone who is erudite in various subjects and who conducts religious ceremonies and offers counsel to the king and usually referred to a person from the Hindu Brahmin caste but may also refer to the Siddhas, Siddhars, Naths, Ascetics, Sadhus, or Yogis.

From at least the early 19th century, a Pundit of the Supreme Court in Colonial India was an officer of the judiciary who advised British judges on questions of Hindu law. In Anglo-Indian use, pundit also referred to a native of India who was trained and employed by the British to survey inaccessible regions beyond the British frontier.


----------



## McG (14 Jan 2015)

More calls for the Mr Trudeau's stance on foreign and defence policy, but I am not sure I am a fan of the "liberal internationalism" that this article describes for him to endorse.


> Trudeau must address foreign policy; He must define himself before Tories do it for him
> Andrew Cohen
> Ottawa Citizen
> 
> ...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (14 Jan 2015)

foreign policy is Trudeau weakness and the NDP's. Both are only fit for internal politics. Trudeau would likely do well running in Provincial politics, people can clearly see he is not ready for the big leagues. Chretien was tough and smart and he used that to his advantage, notice how his popularity improved after he roughed up the heckler, that was pure gold for him. Trudeau tried with the boxing stunt, not bad but still it's a controlled fight and no one thought he was going to get pounded into the ground. Now had he done MMA with a opponent that did not hold back, then people' s opinions might change.


----------



## Rifleman62 (14 Jan 2015)

From the article: 





> But when it comes time to choose, in a campaign Trudeau will have to prove he has what it takes to stand beside the president in the Rose Garden. He will have to show he has gravitas.



Both Trudeau and Obama are alike: Both are always looking for a raised stage to stand on so the masses can applaud them.

As I stated before: Can you see Trudeau on the "world stage" with the other leaders in the world? I cannot.


----------



## a_majoor (15 Jan 2015)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> From the article:
> Both Trudeau and Obama are alike: Both are always looking for a raised stage to stand on so the masses can applaud them.
> 
> As I stated before: Can you see Trudeau on the "world stage" with the other leaders in the world? I cannot.



Of course the Young Dauphin cannot even allow himself to be interviewed by a Sun Media journalist, if he wilts under that much pressure imagine him in the same room as Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping.

IT would be amusing if it wasn't so frightening


----------



## OldSolduer (15 Jan 2015)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> That would be a disaster of epic proportions. He'd be laughed at.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 Jan 2015)

He would make a speech at the UN saying "That's not fair" in the whiny 6 year old kind of way


----------



## Eye In The Sky (24 Jan 2015)

Article Link

Justin Trudeau’s hidden agenda

While the federal Liberals continue to maintain strict silence over the details of their election platform, some worrisome elements are beginning to slip out.

Liberal finance critic Scott Brison revealed elements of the plan to Postmedia’s Lee Berthiaume in London, where the party is holding a caucus retreat. Referring to a recently-announced agreement between the Quebec government and the Caisse de Dépot et Placement, he suggested the Liberals see Canadian pension plans as a convenient source of money to finance the party’s ambitious infrastructure program.

The Liberals have made clear that they view a national program to rebuild roads, bridges and transit as a key means of stimulating job-creation and economic growth. Although they have attached no firm figure to the plan,  the party approved a resolution in March calling for spending of up to 1% of GDP a year, or about $20 billion.  Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne, an ally of federal leader Justin Trudeau, this week argued for combined federal and provincial spending of $100 billion a year.

The challenge is where to find the money, without pushing the country deep into deficit again. Mr. Brison hinted at the party’s thinking when he told Mr. Berthiaume much of the work could be done “off the government balance sheet” by tapping funds from pension plans, including the Canada Pension Plan, into which all working Canadians contribute.

 “There are other ways of working with the pension funds to do something really big on infrastructure and at the same time create a more competitive economy,” Mr. Brison said.

 “If you look at the CPP [investment board], Omers, Teachers, AIMCO – pension funds in Canada are building infrastructure around the world. Is there the potential to engage them, and to engage global pension funds, in helping us to rebuild our infrastructure in Canada? I believe there is that potential.”

He referred specifically to the Quebec agreement, under which the Caisse, Canada’s second-biggest pension fund manager after the CPP, agreed to take on ownership of selected government infrastructure projects, which it will plan, finance, execute and operate.  In effect the province is privatizing projects before they’re built, but always with the same owner.

As Mr. Brison noted, pension funds often invest in infrastructure such as toll roads, airports or other revenue-generating projects. They are seen as less risky and more predictable than financial markets. As the National Post editorialized recently, there is no problem with this as long as the fund has the ability to operate wholly independent of the government, and is able to make decisions based solely on their potential to generate a maximum return for the pensioners it serves. But there’s real reason to doubt this would be the case in the Liberal scheme.

Pension plans exist for the benefit of the pensioners, not for governments in search of cheap and easy capital pools.

The Caisse has long had a close and co-operative relationship with the government, unique among Canadian provinces. Other provinces should be wary of adopting a similar practice. Ontarians already have reason to be concerned at Ms. Wynne’s plan to introduce a new Ontario-only retirement plan, which her government says could be used to provide capital for “Ontario-based projects.”

Pension plans, it needs to be repeated, exist for the benefit of the pensioners, not for governments in search of cheap and easy capital pools. While Mr. Trudeau will no doubt insist his Liberals would maintain a strict hands-off approach to the CPP, allowing it to make investment decisions free from government influence, recall that previous Liberal governments also pledged to abolish the GST, enforce the Kyoto protocol and create a national daycare system. None of which came to pass.  Governments routinely break promises made while out of power, particularly where finances are concerned. There is no reason to believe Mr. Trudeau’s Liberals would be any different.

Opponents long claimed Prime Minister Stephen Harper harboured a “hidden agenda.” Now we know the Liberals are the ones with the covert plan: to use Canadians’ pensions as a handy means to finance election promises.  Canadians considering a vote for Mr. Trudeau may want to consider whether they’re willing to bet their retirement income on him.

--------------------------------------------------------

As for Mr Brison, and how important his constituents are to him, I know personally of one serving members wife who tried to contact him during a time of extreme trial in this families' life which was service-related.  

She called, emailed the Constituency Office.  He never returned a single word to her.  Not even "I am sorry, but I can't help you with this".  Well done, Liberals.  

If you think a Liberal-lead DND and VAC will care more about serving members, veterans and their families, you go ahead and think that.  Just be prepared to be disappointed.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Jan 2015)

The agenda itself - to increase public spending - is in plain sight.  What they (Liberals and NDP alike) would like to hide (from) are the pay-for methods.

Much election sparring stems from one central theme: the Conservatives have deliberately squeezed government revenue sources as much as they could to make it harder for parties out of power to buy votes with promises.  The Liberals and NDP can't promise to throw a party with a budget surplus that isn't there.


----------



## ModlrMike (24 Jan 2015)

I think the theory of pension funds investing in infrastructure is essentially sound. What it depends upon is that those investments occur offshore where foreign governments provide the return on investment. For us to invest in domestic projects will mean that we have to use our tax revenue to provide he profits to the pension plan, effectively doubling the cost of the projects for Canadians.


----------



## a_majoor (24 Jan 2015)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> I think the theory of pension funds investing in infrastructure is essentially sound. What it depends upon is that those investments occur offshore where foreign governments provide the return on investment. For us to invest in domestic projects will mean that we have to use our tax revenue to provide he profits to the pension plan, effectively doubling the cost of the projects for Canadians.



Perhaps the ultimate irony of that plan is we would have to find the foreign "Mike Harris" who is building needed infrastructure like the 407 on time and on budget so *our* investment would pay off. It worked for Spain when they bought the 407, but sadly there is no Spanish Mike Harris providing infrastructure or other investments in Spain.....


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Feb 2015)

PM's take on Justin's take on the military:


> Prime Minister Stephen Harper has accused the Liberal leader who aims to replace him of harbouring a "deep distrust" of the Canadian military.
> 
> Harper made the charge at Justin Trudeau in an interview with London, Ont. radio station AM980 on Sunday.
> 
> ...


----------



## Cloud Cover (5 Feb 2015)

"They can't even get their act together enough to replace the army's fleet of trucks," he said. "How tough can it be to buy a fleet of trucks?"
Leslie said the prime minister has also allowed the size of the core of the army to drop to one-third less than what it was three or four years ago and “choked off recruiting” for the reserve force.
"Mr. Harper's track record for defence since the end of the Afghan war has been abysmal," he said ....

Can't argue with that....


----------



## Monsoon (5 Feb 2015)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> They can't even get their act together enough to replace the army's fleet of trucks," he said. "How tough can it be to buy a fleet of trucks?"


Gee, I dunno, Andy. You spent four years as CLS trying to buy them: why don't you just tell us yourself?


----------



## Kirkhill (5 Feb 2015)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Leslie said the prime minister has also allowed the size of the core of the army to drop to one-third less than what it was three or four years ago and “choked off recruiting” for the reserve force.
> "Mr. Harper's track record for defence since the end of the Afghan war has been abysmal," he said ....



Nothing like a nice little war to boost recruiting.....


----------



## Loachman (5 Feb 2015)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Mr. Harper's track record for defence since the end of the Afghan war has been abysmal," he said ....



No worse than those guys who were running things before then, nein? Who were they again? What do we call that period?

Will those guys swear on their mothers' graves to do better next time?

Didn't think so.


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Feb 2015)

"They can't even get their act together enough to replace the army's fleet of trucks," he said. "How tough can it be to buy a fleet of trucks?"

Is that a governmental shortcoming or a departmental shortcoming?  If the Conservative party in government is responsible, by all means hang them; but if this (and, for example, the VA kerfuffle) results from the underperformance of people in uniforms and/or civil service suits, let's address the problems where they truly lie.


----------



## TCM621 (5 Feb 2015)

hamiltongs said:
			
		

> Gee, I dunno, Andy. You spent four years as CLS trying to buy them: why don't you just tell us yourself?


Didn't want to rock the boat when he thought he had a chance of being CDS? There is no doubt government procurement is broken but was it the liberals fault it took 12 years to get a backpack through the system? A freaking rucksack that we could have gotten cheaper and faster by showing up at the north face or Patagonia, and saying I need 20,000 of that model in Cadpat .  What kind of volume deal will you give us?  The only party who is blameless is the NDP and that is only because they haven't had a chance email to screw up.


----------



## Rifleman62 (14 Feb 2015)

http://epaper.nationalpost.com/epaper/viewer.aspx?noredirect=true
    
John Ivison - National Post - 14 Feb 15
*
Liberals change course on ISIS mission *

Public support for combat damages Trudeau’s reputation

The Liberal party’s position on the war against ISIS in Iraq is beginning to look like an egregious case of mission creep.

As polls continue to suggest that three out of four Canadians support the use of force to stop the Islamic State — including a similar percentage in Quebec, where support for combat missions has historically been lower — the Liberals are shifting their stance in subtle fashion.

Marc Garneau, the Liberal foreign affairs critic, took to the airwaves Thursday with a much softer line of opposition to the mission his party voted against last October.

He said the Liberals backed sending 69 special forces soldiers to Iraq and were supportive of the idea of training and advising the Kurdish peshmerga.

*“The part we had a problem with was the involvement of the CF-18s, and the reason for that was we had nine other countries providing strike aircraft. It was overkill,”* he said on CBC TV’s Power and Politics. *“There were better ways to use Canadian military resources.”*

What is needed is to train Peshmerga fighters more quickly, he said. When pressed on how this should be done without involving Canadian forces in front-line fire-fights, he suggested they could be trained in Canada at CFB Gagetown or CFB Shilo.

Quite apart from the far-fetched nature of transporting Kurdish militia to bases in New Brunswick or Manitoba, this is a dramatic evolution of Liberal policy from that espoused by leader Justin Trudeau in a recent interview. He said he has been “unequivocal” that Canada should concentrate on such measures as humanitarian aid, refugee support and medical aid.

The current mandate for the mission in Iraq runs out in early April and the Liberals, sensing they are on the wrong side of public opinion, appear to be gearing down in preparation for a screeching U-turn.

The Liberal thinking was that this fight bore all the hallmarks of a classic quagmire — where Western countries are drawn into battle by increments until too much blood and treasure had been expended to easily back out.


----------



## Ostrozac (14 Feb 2015)

So, is this Marc Garneau going renegade on his leader's policy? Unlikely.

So as I understand it the Liberals have been successfully maneuvered by the Tories and the NDP into admitting that they have no real foreign/defence policy -- if elected they will bomb people based mostly on opinion polls.

You've got to hand it to the Tories and the NDP -- at least they have some principles and policies. Or at least are better at pretending they do.


----------



## a_majoor (16 Feb 2015)

Both the Tories and NDP are "Transformative" political parties. Every policy and platform plank can (in theory) be traced back to their philosophical roots, and potentially can be defended as being true "Tory" or NDP policy flowing from these roots. They cynical among us can suggest that their policies and process are more in the breach than representing any Transformational values (and of course any real political party needs to be somewhat transactional to get things done), but the thread is there, regardless of how tenuous it may be.

The Liberals have been a "Transactional" party for a very long time (possibly as far back as the 1960's), essentially buying support from various interest groups, which explains the incoherent mishmash of policies over the years. The clearest evidence has during the last Liberal Leadership race, where Marc Garneau presented a platform which would have been right at home with Jack Layton, while Martha Hall-Findley's policy proposals would have been right at home with the CPC. Since there was nothing particularly "Liberal" about them, the party went for the blank slate of no policy at all....

The Young Dauphin will need to avoid any serious policy debates during the election campaign (or for that matter, avoid any serious or semi serious journalists as well), which should be entertaining to watch as he ducks, slides and equivocates his way through the campaign....


----------



## Rifleman62 (16 Feb 2015)

Thucydides: 





> The Young Dauphin will need to avoid any serious policy debates during the election campaign (or for that matter, avoid any serious or semi serious journalists as well), which should be entertaining to watch as he ducks, slides and equivocates his way through the campaign....



If, a big if, his ineptitude is reported fairly and not as an edited sound bite on the back page, or at the end of a hit job on the CPC.


----------



## a_majoor (19 Feb 2015)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Thucydides:
> If, a big if, his ineptitude is reported fairly and not as an edited sound bite on the back page, or at the end of a hit job on the CPC.



True, but the Blogosphere is becoming a bigger and bigger slice of the information environment, and it becomes harder to hide things when they are going viral on YouTube or social media platforms. While the legacy media may hate this, it is the new environment, and CBC news with a royal 7% of the viewing audience isn't in a position to compete (it will be interesting to add up the totals of Legacy media vs New Media and look at the changes over time).


----------



## Fishbone Jones (19 Feb 2015)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> True, but the Blogosphere is becoming a bigger and bigger slice of the information environment, and it becomes harder to hide things when they are going viral on YouTube or social media platforms. While the legacy media may hate this, it is the new environment, and CBC news with a royal 7% of the viewing audience isn't in a position to compete (it will be interesting to add up the totals of Legacy media vs New Media and look at the changes over time).


.........and the loss of Sun News, no matter anyone's thoughts on them, has effectively put a damper on anything other that a left handed slant on the whole political realm. The CPC is fending (quite well, I think) on there own, with no help. Meanwhile the Libs have the whole weight of the MSM behind them with no dissenting voices. They trump up his faux pas, hair and lack of policies as the epitome of the type of leader Canada should have.

Just like McWynnety, shame on us as a society if the young dauphin gets elected PM


----------



## Rifleman62 (22 Feb 2015)

From the _*Toronto Star*_ no less:

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2015/02/19/liberal-leader-justin-trudeau-is-running-out-of-second-chances-goar.html#
*
Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is running out of second chances: Goar*

Canadians have shrugged off Justin Trudeau’s slips and stumbles for three years but they want a competent national leader now.

By: Carol Goar Star Columnist, Published on Thu Feb 19 2015 


Eight months from today, Canadians will wake up to a new — or re-elected — government.

This would be a fine time for Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau to start demonstrating the maturity, self-discipline and competence to lead the nation.

His political record to date has been marred by misjudgments, ill-considered remarks and discarded promises. He has put forward few substantive policies to counteract these eyebrow-raising moves. His admirers are getting nervous; his detractors are rubbing their hands.

Trudeau is not a callow youth He is a 43-year-old father with seven years of parliamentary experience.

Nor is he a political naïf. He knows how to use his charm and good looks to attract followers. He understands that Canadians are hungry for hope. He speaks with passion about restoring a robust middle class, cleaning up Canada’s sorry environmental record, upholding human rights around the world and winning back global respect. He has brought the Liberal party back from the brink of extinction, filled its coffers and increased its membership fivefold in less than two years.

But he keeps triggering alarm bells. His eager embrace of Tory turncoat Eve Adams last week left grassroots Liberals shaking their heads in bewilderment and Conservative organizers chuckling. The Mississauga MP, known chiefly for her sharp elbows and her disregard for party rules, was a dubious prize. The Tories were relieved to get rid of her.

Apparently Trudeau and his aides thought they’d scored a brilliant coup: Dimitri Soudas, Adams’s fiancé, was executive director of the Conservative party until March of last year. He might be willing to spill Stephen Harper’s secrets.

If the prime minister is worried, he’s hiding it well. If political analysts are impressed, they’re holding their praise. At this point, no one discounts Trudeau’s chances of toppling a chilly, divisive Conservative prime minister. He represents both generational change and — as the son of Canada’s 15th prime minister — the values many Canadians cherish. But questions about his fitness to govern keep popping up. To review the record:

Four months into his leadership campaign, he was found to be charging hefty speaking fees to non-profit organizations. He hastily offered to give the money back to any group that asked. “I’m proud of the work I did as a professional public speaker. But I also realize that Canadians expect more from me and I am glad to use what I can, to do what I can, to deal with these organizations,” he said, shrugging off the ethical lapse.

In November 2013, the Liberal leader mused at a women’s event: “There is a level of admiration I actually have for China. Their basic dictatorship is actually allowing them to turn their economy around on a dime.” Asian Canadians, many of whom had fled repression in China, cringed and human rights activists urged him to apologize.

In January 2014 he expelled all 32 senators from the Liberal caucus, without warning or consultation. Even those who share Trudeau’s goal — to “end partisanship and patronage in the Senate” — were taken aback by the way he treated seasoned Liberals who had worked for the party in good times and bad. “There were some good organizers who won’t be active anymore but we’re getting in so many more that it’s not something I think about too much,” he told the Star’s Susan Delacourt nonchalantly.

A month later, he made light of Russia’s incursion into Ukraine. “Since Russia lost in (Olympic) hockey, they will be a bad mood and we fear Russian involvement in Ukraine.”

In April, he tossed aside his pledge to allow “open nominations for all Liberal candidates in every single riding in the next election,” blocking a bid by Christine Innes to seek the nomination in Trinity-Spadina. He claimed her workers were bullying volunteers. It subsequently emerged there was a favoured candidate. Now all would-be contenders need the approval of the party’s “green light committee” to run under the Liberal banner.

In May, he took away the long-standing right of Liberal MPs to vote according to their consciences on wrenching moral issues. Under his leadership, he declared, members of the Liberal caucus would be required to vote pro-choice on abortion, forcing several to choose between their personal/religious convictions and their political allegiance.

Then came the Eve Adams episode.

Initially Canadians were willing to give Trudeau a second — and a third and a seventh — chance. But now they’re starting to weigh their electoral choices. The Liberal leader needs a solid platform, a dependable moral compass and someone in his inner circle who can persuade him to pause and think.

Carol Goar’s column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday.


----------



## a_majoor (1 Mar 2015)

Watching the news today, it seems the Young Dauphin is willing to "whip out" an extension to Canada's military mission in Syria. 

If they ever get in power, look for more poll following military missions abroad, as the Liberals "whip out" the CAF whenever it might be briefly popular. The effects on the actual members and our operational capabilities be damned; only the polls will drive our deployments under the Young Dauphin.


----------



## Jed (3 Mar 2015)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Watching the news today, it seems the Young Dauphin is willing to "whip out" an extension to Canada's military mission in Syria.
> 
> If they ever get in power, look for more poll following military missions abroad, as the Liberals "whip out" the CAF whenever it might be briefly popular. The effects on the actual members and our operational capabilities be damned; only the polls will drive our deployments under the Young Dauphin.



Unfortunately, this is what I fear.


----------

