[saturn_656]

ziggy ziggy:

It is,if you dont like it then you may find yourself out on the tundra naked in -50 or left freezing waiting for fuel that will never come.

I've met the "Don's" of the north,theres a way to get things done,palms to be greased,people to be employed,goods to be distributed.

If you ever fly in the north watch how they unload your baggage if you can,they will rotate it a few times and then stop,if theres a bottle in that bag it's going into the "special section" of the cargo van and when it shows up it will be cleaned out.

The state of policing (and perhaps ethics among airport workers) in the North definately leaves something to be desired...

[ziggy]

Two years ago I kept a camp open over winter,we were low on fuel so had locals from Baker lake sledding it out to us every night on kamitaks,they would start out with 3 drums and arrive with 2,then they would hit the pastry table and clean it out to take home 40 kliks overland.

My Caper buddy stayed in the kitchen one night and caught them on film.
The whitey tax stops at the pastry table.

[Wada]

Gotta draw the line somewhere, eh.

[ziggy]

Wada Wada:

Gotta draw the line somewhere, eh.

We looked the other way when they were scooping hams and roasts but ya,you dont ever touch the pastry table.
Those pastrys were about as famous as the cook that made them so it wasnt a bright move on their part.

Guys used to take pics of the pastry table before flying home.

[bootlegga]

ziggy ziggy:

They use the 303 because it works in allmost any condition.
After watching the episode on hero ships of the nautilus going to the arctic years ago I dont think that nuclear subs are the way to go either.

Supplying the arctic isnt rocket science,its just a logistical nightmare for someone who hasnt been there.
So it makes me wonder why when we have had these shortages for years up there and now all of a sudden everyones worried and has all these solutions when they cant even keep the people supplied with food and fuel.
Theres a brutal amount of red tape involved to do anything up there,you could double that if the CF was involved.
Nothing moves fast in the Arctic is an old saying and very true.

Plus you also have the "whitey tax" to deal with.

Yes, the 303 is an excellent Arctic weapon, but the Rangers and their 303s can't do anything about foreign ships or submarines in our territory, even if they happen to stumble across them, which is rather unlikely given the size of the Canadian Arctic and numbers of Rangers.

Subs are not the way to keep our northern settlements supplied, but they can patrol the waters in the archipelago quite well. If they were nukes, they wouldn't even have to stop anywhere in the North, as their range would enable them to leave Halifax/Esquimalt and not even surface until they came back. Several heavy icebreakers could be used for that (either as transports themselves or helping freighters get to remote communities).

To me, a diamond mine/oil field in the Arctic are nothing more than a giant bullseye for a would-be aggressor. Without a properly equipped CF, we are just begging for someone to take them from us, either through border disputes (like in the Beaufort Sea with the US) or by military force. I'll be the first to say military force is a distant second to border disputes, but who knows what other nations will do in 10 years? 20 years? 50 years? A strong navy and air force makes that possibility even more remote.

Boiled down, defending the Arctic and ensuring sustainability and economic viability in remote Arctic communities are two very different topics. One may assist in the other, but to me, national defence and northern economics are two very different topics.

[RUEZ]

Boot that sign could just as well say "Liberal" Arctic Sovereignty station. They weren't any better.

[bootlegga]

RUEZ RUEZ:

Boot that sign could just as well say "Liberal" Arctic Sovereignty station. They weren't any better.

Most definitely.

Nobody in at least 40 years has given a damn about the Arctic. Perhaps if Harper had followed through on his promise of 3 heavy, armed icebreakers, this never would have made it to print.

But Harper has shown (to me at least), that he isn't any better at managing the defence portfolio than any other PMs since the 1950s. His policy has been to promise big at election time and then back down six months to a year later and scale back or cancel the purchase altogether.

He's simply the latest in a string of politicians who promise big ticket spending on defence and cancel it down the road after the electorate forgets about it (like Mulroney & nuke subs, the liberals and the Bonaventure, Dief and the Arrow, etc). Of course, it's not their fault entirely, we keep electing these bozos and then not holding them accountable.

The last batch of politicians to give fuck about national defence were St. Laurent and Pearson liberals. And that was only because the memory of WW2 was fresh in all their minds. Since the mid-60s, politicians in this country have been decidedly sub-par when it comes to national defence.

[bootlegga]

Better?

[ziggy]

Ya right,no resupply anywhere,they would be dead in the water after the first 1000 miles.Then the rangers would move in with the 303's and pick em off one at a time,like a seal hunt but easier.

[bootlegga]

ziggy ziggy:

Ya right,no resupply anywhere,they would be dead in the water after the first 1000 miles.Then the rangers would move in with the 303's and pick em off one at a time,like a seal hunt but easier.

Subs don't need resupply...icebreakers can escort cargo ships that can carry more than every single Ranger combined.

[ziggy]

bootlegga bootlegga:

ziggy ziggy:

Ya right,no resupply anywhere,they would be dead in the water after the first 1000 miles.Then the rangers would move in with the 303's and pick em off one at a time,like a seal hunt but easier.

Subs don't need resupply...icebreakers can escort cargo ships that can carry more than every single Ranger combined.

Subs can also get sandwiched which would be a nuclear disaster.
Icebreakers and re supply ships would cost millions to deploy.

I could set up remote camps and drilling programs for a fraction of the cost of the CF and do it this year.

Yet you want some nuclear subs,hmmmm,millions of dollars for what?
So you can say you were at the pole?
The Americans allready tried that and I dont think they will again anytime soon.

[bootlegga]

ziggy ziggy:

bootlegga bootlegga:

ziggy ziggy:

Ya right,no resupply anywhere,they would be dead in the water after the first 1000 miles.Then the rangers would move in with the 303's and pick em off one at a time,like a seal hunt but easier.

Subs don't need resupply...icebreakers can escort cargo ships that can carry more than every single Ranger combined.

Subs can also get sandwiched which would be a nuclear disaster.
Icebreakers and re supply ships would cost millions to deploy.

I could set up remote camps and drilling programs for a fraction of the cost of the CF and do it this year.

Yet you want some nuclear subs,hmmmm,millions of dollars for what?
So you can say you were at the pole?
The Americans allready tried that and I dont think they will again anytime soon.

Yeah, remote camps will scare the Americans and Russians out of our territory...

As for getting "sandwiched" I find that highly doubtful. Haven't heard of it yet and several nations have been sailing nuke subs up there for decades. I'd be more worried about Ski-doos falling through ice or our inability to patrol between the islands when the thaw begins.

Based on your rationale, maybe should sell our Halifaxes and hire a bunch of guys in rowboats to patrol the Pacific and Atlantic coasts. After all, we could have thousands of them right? Sorry, but sometimes size does matter.

The Rangers are great for showing the flag and if paratroops ever land, I'll trust them to deal with them, at least until we can fly the CSOR up there. But subs and icebreakers transiting our waters is happening now, not maybe sometime in the future.

[RUEZ]

bootlegga bootlegga:

RUEZ RUEZ:

Boot that sign could just as well say "Liberal" Arctic Sovereignty station. They weren't any better.

Most definitely.

Nobody in at least 40 years has given a damn about the Arctic. Perhaps if Harper had followed through on his promise of 3 heavy, armed icebreakers, this never would have made it to print.

But Harper has shown (to me at least), that he isn't any better at managing the defence portfolio than any other PMs since the 1950s. His policy has been to promise big at election time and then back down six months to a year later and scale back or cancel the purchase altogether.

He's simply the latest in a string of politicians who promise big ticket spending on defence and cancel it down the road after the electorate forgets about it (like Mulroney & nuke subs, the liberals and the Bonaventure, Dief and the Arrow, etc). Of course, it's not their fault entirely, we keep electing these bozos and then not holding them accountable.

The last batch of politicians to give fuck about national defence were St. Laurent and Pearson liberals. And that was only because the memory of WW2 was fresh in all their minds. Since the mid-60s, politicians in this country have been decidedly sub-par when it comes to national defence.

Yes, he's really done nothing for northern defense other than flap his gums.

[ziggy]

Ya ok,you go up there and your tune will change big time,sorry but your grandiose dreams of the CF saving the day wont work.

We cant even keep the people fed and fueled so I dont know why you think the CF can pull off a miracle all of a sudden.

and you want icebreakers and other ships up there now,give me a break!

[Streaker]

Mr. Cannon, why haven't the arctic patrol ships and that port facility been fast-tracked, then?