[andyt]

Lemmy Lemmy:

andyt andyt:

So will the righties here now switch from calling Trudeau a pussy to calling him a chicken hawk?

That's what I was getting at earlier. This thread began with conservatives outraged that Trudeau shutting down the 6 jets means he's soft on ISIS. But as soon as it was revealed that the new mission is actually getting tougher on ISIS, it suddenly switches to Trudeau being a flip-flopping liar because he said "no combat".

They rip Trudeau for not spending enough money to fight ISIS, but now that Trudeau has committed a bunch of money to fight ISIS, wait for it, they'll be ripping him for pissing away money doing exactly what they wanted him to do in the first place! So yeah, Obama.

Did you write this before reading FD's post just above yours. Then you are indeed prescient. If you di read it, that would be cheating.

[N_Fiddledog]

All that was revealed is they'll be spending more money. Surprise. Surprise.

And no, nobody ever complained about Trudeau's ability to spend money. It might be the only thing he can do.

[Lemmy]

andyt andyt:

Did you write this before reading FD's post just above yours. Then you are indeed prescient. If you di read it, that would be cheating.

I don't see anything IddlyDiddly posts anymore. And life is better for it.

[andyt]

Lemmy Lemmy:

andyt andyt:

Did you write this before reading FD's post just above yours. Then you are indeed prescient. If you di read it, that would be cheating.

I don't see anything IddlyDiddly posts anymore. And life is better for it.

Apparently the argument is: don't spend money, but ramp up the effort to fight ISIS.

[N_Fiddledog]

Lemmy Lemmy:

I don't see anything IddlyDiddly posts anymore. And life is better for it.

I like it too. Professor Butt-Gerbil gets tiresome. I prefer it when I don't have to waste time slapping him around.

But apparently Andy wants to play the schoolyard game of "He said... so whatayou think?"

Oh well...

[Freakinoldguy]

Analysts pan Canada's plan to arm Kurds

http://www.cambridgetimes.ca/news-story ... arm-kurds/

Thank fuck our leader only listens to people like Gerald Butts and not the experts since concerns like this might make him reconsider his position on world affairs.

I wonder if our new decision maker made the call.

0:

12705591_931176256970902_5222847304571183793_n.jpg [ 26.83 KiB | Viewed 337 times ]

[Nuggie77]

You do know what a coalition means right? Our trainers on the ground will get needed air support form our coalition partners. That's how it works.

[andyt]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Analysts pan Canada's plan to arm Kurds

http://www.cambridgetimes.ca/news-story ... arm-kurds/

Thank fuck our leader only listens to people like Gerald Butts and not the experts since concerns like this might make him reconsider his position on world affairs.

I wonder if our new decision maker made the call.

0:

12705591_931176256970902_5222847304571183793_n.jpg

And he's been warned that arming and training the Kurds will "destabilize" Iraq. Ie Turkey and the Baghdad govt will be pissed at us because this puts the Kurds in a more powerful position to have their own country.

[Guy_Fawkes]

Keeping the jets in theater is like putting spinning rims on a pick up truck. Sure it might look nice, but it is a meager contribution that is essentially doing nothing but giving the pilots some stick time. Instead the money is going to expand JTF and CSOR operations, so it's not like we are taking a step back; we just not taking a step forward. In reality why should we increase the tempo? The military was a foot note in the election, and the only one who did speak of it was Trudeau. Even then his promises were to pull back the fighters, to increase support for the VAC and to end lump disability payments for soldiers. In the end the military is likely to slip into another decade of darkness, though not nearly as dark as in the 90's (I hope). This would have happened regardless of who was voted in. The Cons had the military reduce spending so that surpluses could be used as an argument for a balanced budget and this would have likely continued for several years. Trudeau won't be investing much or anything in the military and the worse case scenario would be starting up peace keeping missions again, but that is unlikely to happen because of the peace time state of the CAF.

Personally I think we should pull out completely, don't get me wrong I would like to put an end to ISIS but the rest of Canada does not want to make the sacrifices it would take to make a considerable investment into the military to make this a reality. So until the country is able and willing to maintain a military to back up it's NATO commitments we should sit at the kiddy table.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada- ... -1.3242611

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nat ... e28494855/