• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Justin Trudeau - Timelines

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
 
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.
 
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.

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.

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

---Staff---

 
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????
 
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...."
 
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.
 
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.
 
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....
 
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.
 
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!
 
+ 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.

 
 
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?
 
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.
 
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
15 Sep 2014

Retired lieutenant-general Andrew Leslie was last seen making Conservative and Sun News heads explode with criticisms of Israel's "indiscriminate" and "dumb" bombing of civilians in Gaza. But on Saturday at the general meeting of the Liberals' Ontario wing in Markham, during a foreign policy session for delegates, Mr. Leslie did not talk like a man on a leash.

He did cede a question on Gaza to co-panelist Kirsty Duncan, the Liberals' international development critic. But on Canada's shuttered embassy in Tehran, he suggested the Conservatives aren't just uninterested in diplomacy, but hope to "exacerbate [the] situation ... as a way to either anger, or get excited, their base." And on radicalized young men shipping out to fight for ISIS, he called it "a tragedy for [the] families that have lost their young men." He even dared mention the need to "deal with some of the root causes - disaffection, disenfranchisement, whatever it might be."

He said nothing remotely outrageous, don't get me wrong. He sounded intelligent, experienced and reasoned. But now that he's in politics, he's gunpowder for the Conservatives' dumb-dumb fundraising blasts: "Can you believe what [INSERT NAME] said? Send $5 to help us save Canada from [INSERT NAME]!"

Unfortunately for the Conservatives, Mr. Leslie is not an airhead sociology major who thinks Israel is evil and terrorists need hugs, but a highly decorated soldier. Smart, confident, eloquent people needn't worry so much about contrived freakouts from panicked opponents. The panicky opponents tend to wind up look silly. Mr. Leslie calmly stood by his comments on Israel. Maybe the Tories raised a few bucks, but they're still in no position to win an election.

If we could measure the gaps between reality and partisan rhetoric in Canadian politics, the widest might be found on foreign policy. To Conservatives, the Chrétien-Martin Liberals were ineffectual, anti-Israel milquetoasts; to Liberals, Stephen Harper's Conservatives are ineffectual, stridently pro-Israel chest-thumpers who've been dragging Canada's good name through the mud.

"We have lost our place in the world," Ms. Duncan intoned at the Saturday session. "Multilateralism mattered to Canada, and Canada mattered to the world." After an awkward pause, she came up with some examples: the anti-land mines treaty, opposition to apartheid, support for Africa (which she said the Conservatives have "abandoned") and ratifying the Kyoto Protocol.

It's not a terrible list, I suppose. But OECD figures do not support the common refrain that the Tories abandoned Africa - quite the opposite. The 32 non-signatories to the land mines treaty include Russia, China and the United States. And in a rational universe, no Liberal would ever boast about Kyoto. In 1998, Jean Chrétien committed Canada to reducing carbon emissions to 6% below 1990 levels. In the last year of Liberal government, emissions were 23% higher.

The Liberals assembled in Markham were in an ebullient mood. Elizabeth Wood McDonald, who is seeking the Liberal nomination in Sarnia-Lambton, told me she had been to these meetings since John Turner's time, and had never seen such enthusiasm. You can understand why: After two failed experiments with bookishness, they have a telegenic leader who bats away Conservative smears with a roll of his eyes.

But underneath, is it a new party? Has it come to terms with its past failures? Is it willing to confront sacred myths? On the foreign file, will Liberals keep banging on about peacekeeping, honest-brokering, Kyoto and not going to Iraq, or are they ready to turn the page?

Ms. Duncan's comments might make you wonder. But Mr. Leslie is clearly not cut from that cloth, and neither, it seemed, were most in the room.

The Liberals aren't the only party that traffics in myth, needless to say. Conservatives probably exaggerate the effects of their "strong, principled" foreign policy even more than Liberals exaggerate their great feats of multilateralism. But the latter may have enabled the former, one astute delegate argued - because "to be honest," he said, "Canadians did use to want to have their cake and eat it when it came to the military."

"They wanted to have a military that they were sort of proud of, but they wanted to think of it as only doing the nicest kind of peacekeeping," he continued. While the party should avoid "the jingoism that Harper sometimes goes in for," he argued it needs "a more frank and realistic view" of the military's role.

"I could not have said that better myself," Mr. Leslie responded, and asked if anyone disagreed.

Ms. Wood McDonald's was the only hand I saw. "I wish Justin were like his father," she told me later, sounding wistful. She'd like to see him questioning "why we're still in NATO," for example. She thinks it has needlessly antagonized Russia.

There's nothing even half that dramatic to differentiate Liberal and Conservative foreign policy nowadays. But as Andrew Leslie knows, there is an awful lot of screeching over small differences. If the Liberals can leave the Suez crisis and Kyoto in the past and come up with a foreign policy that mostly does what it says and mostly says what it does, it would be a remarkable and welcome chapter in the party's reinvention.
 
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.
 
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!
 
Like, let ISIS continue to generate, by butchery, more victims. We have and endless supply of cold weather advice, parkas and toques.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top