- Reaction score
- 1,710
- Points
- 1,160
It seems as if the CBC have begun an all out campaign to influence decision makers to scrap the sub sub fleet by questioning the utility of these platforms in the role of sovereignty enforcement and peace keeping operations.
This afternoon, they interviewed Steven Staples from the Polaris Institute, about the value of submarines in Canadian service. It is important to note that Staples is held out by the CBC to be an expert in defence issues, and he may have some education in that area, probably at the doctorate level, but the simple truth of the matter is that he is a disarmament activist and who has a very close relationship with the NDP. Staples has a habit of getting small papers in the hands of key media personell on various military issues in a time appropriate manner. Often, they ask him questions about things they read right off his papers.
Here are some of the notes I made while listening to the interview:
Notes:
The submarines are cold war relics.
The Brits had a litany of problems with the subs, they were withdrawn because they were technically unreliable and could not be made to function properly.
The sub design was an experimental hunter killer.
The Aussies looked at buying the subs, but rejected them because there were too many problems with them.
Navy lobbied Jean Chretien very hard for the subs, and that he relented under intense pressure.
The subs must be pulled out of service and laid up until the cause of the disaster is confirmed, so that other members are not needlessly put at risk.
Wants a full public investigation and inquiry.
The subs serve no real purpose in defending Canada.
The missions assigned to subs can be accomplished with our existing surface fleet, aircraft and shore based radars.
Hunter killer submarines designed for stealthy operations, they are not a sovereignty tool.
The US pressured Canada to obtain the subs so we could be used as target practice for their ships.
This is a cold war killing tool, not a peacekeeping tool. We don't need them, because we are peacekeepers.
************
Those are the notes I took ... look for all of those points to be pushed by the CBC et al. over the next few weeks. They smell blood, just like with the CAR, watch them go for the kill of another capability by taking advantage of a bad situation.
In addition, the CBC is supposed to bring out a lawyer this afternoon who will lay out possible legal action that can be taken to sue the Brits for the costs of the subs and the loss of life, as well as "what steps can be taken to prevent this from happening again", whatever that means.
If anybody catches that info, please add it to this thread.
Over the next few weeks, look for the following condensation words from the media, so called defence experts like Staples, and more importantly, the defence minister and other political actors:
"questionable neccessity" ; "needless capability"; "hunter killer, not peace keeping" ; "cold war relic" ; "public investigation" [as opposed to S.O.P of BOI] ; "other means to accomplish the job"; "billion dollar sub boondoggle"
Thx ... W 601.
* edit: added the term "billion dollar submarine boondoggle" to the list of terms. We will shortly see a comparison between these ships and the gun registry [already begun]. Has the military learned from the PR mistakes made during the CAR fiasco? Time will tell.
This afternoon, they interviewed Steven Staples from the Polaris Institute, about the value of submarines in Canadian service. It is important to note that Staples is held out by the CBC to be an expert in defence issues, and he may have some education in that area, probably at the doctorate level, but the simple truth of the matter is that he is a disarmament activist and who has a very close relationship with the NDP. Staples has a habit of getting small papers in the hands of key media personell on various military issues in a time appropriate manner. Often, they ask him questions about things they read right off his papers.
Here are some of the notes I made while listening to the interview:
Notes:
The submarines are cold war relics.
The Brits had a litany of problems with the subs, they were withdrawn because they were technically unreliable and could not be made to function properly.
The sub design was an experimental hunter killer.
The Aussies looked at buying the subs, but rejected them because there were too many problems with them.
Navy lobbied Jean Chretien very hard for the subs, and that he relented under intense pressure.
The subs must be pulled out of service and laid up until the cause of the disaster is confirmed, so that other members are not needlessly put at risk.
Wants a full public investigation and inquiry.
The subs serve no real purpose in defending Canada.
The missions assigned to subs can be accomplished with our existing surface fleet, aircraft and shore based radars.
Hunter killer submarines designed for stealthy operations, they are not a sovereignty tool.
The US pressured Canada to obtain the subs so we could be used as target practice for their ships.
This is a cold war killing tool, not a peacekeeping tool. We don't need them, because we are peacekeepers.
************
Those are the notes I took ... look for all of those points to be pushed by the CBC et al. over the next few weeks. They smell blood, just like with the CAR, watch them go for the kill of another capability by taking advantage of a bad situation.
In addition, the CBC is supposed to bring out a lawyer this afternoon who will lay out possible legal action that can be taken to sue the Brits for the costs of the subs and the loss of life, as well as "what steps can be taken to prevent this from happening again", whatever that means.
If anybody catches that info, please add it to this thread.
Over the next few weeks, look for the following condensation words from the media, so called defence experts like Staples, and more importantly, the defence minister and other political actors:
"questionable neccessity" ; "needless capability"; "hunter killer, not peace keeping" ; "cold war relic" ; "public investigation" [as opposed to S.O.P of BOI] ; "other means to accomplish the job"; "billion dollar sub boondoggle"
Thx ... W 601.
* edit: added the term "billion dollar submarine boondoggle" to the list of terms. We will shortly see a comparison between these ships and the gun registry [already begun]. Has the military learned from the PR mistakes made during the CAR fiasco? Time will tell.