Search results

Fair And us and them collectively selling more Gripens and Global Eyes to others.

Re: Confidence in cabinet ability- maybe I'm putting too much confidence in Fuhr and/or projecting my desire for him to have greater influence than he actually has. If a Saab partnership is coupled with Canada, Germany and Sweden committing to a 6th gen alternative with us as a 20-30% partner...

My observation is from my neck of rural SW Ontario is that the primary driver of current financial security (controlling for variables like generational wealth, extremely upper percentile incomes, etc) is the timing of entering the housing market, which is primarily driven by age, with secondary...

Exactly what I'm thinking/ hoping is happening behind the scenes- but it would be nice to figure it out without the Gripens. I would argue the depending on the scope and vision of implementation the second bolded segment contradicts the first. I'm very likely wrong. This is just a theory...

I remain convinced/ hopeful that the Saab discussion has a lot more depth than people are giving it credit for. I think people are letting their contempt for Joly/the LPC/elbows up and the obviousness of the pure fighter/fighter vs fighter decision cause them to underestimate the combined...

You've essentially convinced me of the wrongess of the Gripen for the RCAF outweighing the rightness of a Saab partnership for Canada- specifically with respect to getting involved in the bolded. Is there a path to getting the best of both worlds?

As I recall the last LPC caucus revolt on this file was in the the other direction when the anti-'s pushed farther than popular opinion would take with Chiang amendment. Seems like public sentiment is building that way on the confiscation. My read is that there's a public opinion split on...

It's an attempt to try an get you to engage in the actual premise rather than getting lost in the us vs them rage. I'll boil it down- is there any off ramp, any compromise, that you would find palatable other than a full rollback to 2019?

Change the who then. Make it a CPC proposal to try and find a compromise that protects current gun owners without tanking the next election. Would you see it as pragmatic advocacy or selling out?

Question for the field. If Carneybowed to the weight of not being able to implement the buyback and off ramped by grandfathering all 2500+ models as a special class firearm that is prohib unless registered by Oct 31 2026, in which case they function as NR's for use/storage/transport etc...

@Underway @Rainbow1910 - thanks for humouring me and the insight So A, B, D covered off, no follow up. C- Underway I found your comments interesting in couple of ways. Firstly- the 12 vs 24 self defense missiles as the primary point of comparison. My brain went to the multirole mixed...

A couple of questions for you nautical types A-"VLS" vs. VLS Reading up on this project there's a lot of discussion of whether it's VLS equipped, but it seems like pretty close to a done deal that it will have local area air defense capability via ESSM. My interpretation is that having ESSM in...

We really only differ in that I think some "what's" are worthy of tracking more closely so that more scrutiny can be applied to the "who's" efficiently

I wonder if the tenor of this discussion would be different if a given number of F35's had actually been executed by the Harper government. Like if we were sitting at 65 and were faced with today's geopolitical situation, looking to expand the overall fleet while prioritizing a defense industry...

Depends how hard they want to push. But I think it would be hard to argue against any of the conditions/groupings I listed being reasonable grounds. The ammo one is by far the weakest.

Also a realistic understanding of the different risk tranche's and approaches the government may take Tier 1 Risk - Information that is in the government's hands, that they can use easily and relatively non-controversially People who have registered restricteds that became prohib People who...

No, I'm trying to make you understand that any consultation that comes after the PMO/Parliament makes a declaration of "We're doing this under 92 10a, decision made and final" will rightfully be seen as pretend. There's no proponent yet. There's no proposal. Pre-emptively trampling over key...

Maybe- but to play that card and be able to use the "in good faith" premise you need have atleast a plausible presentation of Asking -> Listening -> Evaluating > Deciding Deciding -> Asking -> Pretending to Listen and Evaluate , doesn't cut it. Hence MOU, hence actually engaging. Pushing...

...... Surely you can grasp that checking a box for a decision already made and being "rammed through urgently with all the power a constitutional confederation can muster" just might not pass muster as a "good faith consultation"? Put on the adult pants, do the work. Your Premier seems to...

You're correct in that he could use 92 10a to declare Federal jurisdiction and bully it through. But BC could put up a creative legal fight (which it would likely eventuallylose), the impacted first nations could put up a legal fight (which they might actually win). There would be fights about...