Search results

Yes, but there's a difference.  Without diminishing what happened during the Cold War, Afghanistan is currently where the rubber meets the road and where NATO is engaged in a shooting war.  There's a difference between making a political decision that there wasn't a significant enough of a...

That's only partially correct.  We got stuck with the PRT in Kandahar because we dithered.  We decided to go heavy in the province afterwards - a Canadian decision. The Germans do need to step up - they've contributed nothing substantial to the real effort thus far, as many, many posts on this...

Ruxpin predicts: Our mission will indeed "end" in 2009.  By that time we'll have transitioned almost exclusively to an ANA mentoring role (of a brigade no less) and can wind up the "combat role".  A matter of semantics if you ask me. By Feb 2009, we'll have a large (perhaps even larger than...

I posted the background to the video here: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/30860.0.html Still one of the good ones.

Gimpy:  Mortar Guy has been doing a helluva lot more than "research" on this subject, as I should have thought you would have found obvious had you read the comments following up his posts.  It isn't a college essay or a peer-reviewed article requiring footnoting, fer chrissakes - give us all a...

+10 Kiwi99 Those posting need to place this very minor "issue" in context.  We are engaged in an increasingly large effort to professionalize the ANA and to have them play a greater part in the fight.  Until recently, they've participated using secondhand US-surplus trucks, Mongolian artillery...

Not a major point, but I find it disconcerting when people refer to military equipment as "toys".  To me, it harkens back to the "toys for the boys" mantra bleated by various far-left peace groups.  This is expensive, dangerous and deadly equipment. Pet peeve, I suppose.

As do I.  I was under the impression that the Conservative defence platform was largely the product of O'Connor as the resident defence "expert" and I have long felt that platform was riddled with hare-brained schemes, politically motivated "ideas" and out and out pointless concepts. I believe...

+1 Roy All:  this is a trolling effort by an Ann Coulter wannabe (perhaps in more ways than one) and his only goal - in common with the Rush Limbaughs and Coulters of the world - is to get a reaction.  By posting here, where the vast majority of members - despite some internal differences - are...

Thanks CWilson...Best laugh I've had in weeks!  "Rod Majors"... :rofl: It's pretty obvious he isn't deserving of anyone's time or attention.

Here's the actual article: http://www.matt-sanchez.com/2007/08/the-military-mi.html#comment-79106970 He's a total, xenophoic, ass.

:rofl: "The People" - heh...consider the source...

Heh..well spotted.  However, the "fake war" is something the media seems to be determined to make real.

The Minister should have known better than to - for purely political reasons - even hint that we would be out of the fighting business by next February.  Despite the media's hue and cry and spin (and there is spin here, attempting to create controversy), the level of true "disagreement" is...

Common sense prevails?  This makes me cautiously optimistic. Now if only we can sum the whole stupid TDBG concept up and get on with real operational planning...

Nope, they're all still there.  The RCMP uses them as a training facility.  See here: http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/learning/prtc/facilities_e.htm

Strictly speaking, this isn't true.  There's one here in Edmonton at the Aviation Museum on Kingsway.  It used to stand in Churchill Park on the Garrision.  I have no idea what (if anything) is inside the fuselage, though.

CTV got a blast of s**t from me over this non-story.  They asked no pertinent questions and merely served as a mouthpiece for ill-defined partisan "concerns".  As I have said previously, there's a lot not to like about the Conservatives' strategic defence plan - why not do some research and ask...

It's hardly "complaining" - most of the opinion posted thus far reflects the operational and manning realities faced by the entire CF.  My original critique still stands, even if this is touted as an Air Force capability.  I could care less about which party does what; I'm quite non-partisan in...

Of course, the cynic would ask:  what "rapid deployment unit"?  Where are these soldiers coming from?  We cannot man current and newly-created units, how are we manning this one?  What role will this "unit" fill?  Why (aside from politics) Bagotville?  What operational need is driving this...