news Canadian News
Good Morning Guest | login or register
  • Home
    • Canadian News
    • Popular News
    • News Voting Log
    • News Images
  • Forums
    • Recent Topics Scroll
    •  
    • Politics Forums
    • Sports Forums
    • Regional Forums
  • Content
    • Achievements
    • Canadian Content
    • Famous Canadians
    • Famous Quotes
    • Jokes
    • Canadian Maps
  • Photos
    • Picture Gallery
    • Wallpapers
    • Recent Activity
  • About
    • About
    • Contact
    • Link to Us
    • Points
    • Statistics
  • Shop
  • Register
    • Gold Membership
  • Archive
    • Canadian TV
    • Canadian Webcams
    • Groups
    • Links
    • Top 10's
    • Reviews
    • CKA Radio
    • Video
    • Weather

NDP prioritizes ships over jets

Canadian Content
20684news upnews down
Link Related to Canada in some say

NDP prioritizes ships over jets


Political | 206841 hits | Apr 08 4:09 pm | Posted by: Hyack
31 Comment

Jack Layton says the NDP would prioritize investment in naval ships over new fighter jets as part of a broader plan to refocus Canada's defence policy.

Comments

  1. by avatar Arctic_Menace
    Sat Apr 09, 2011 1:48 pm
    While I support a larger navy, we also need a larger air force. At the very least, there should have been/should be a competition for Canada's next fighter.

  2. by avatar Gunnair  Gold Member
    Sat Apr 09, 2011 3:55 pm
    "Arctic_Menace" said
    While I support a larger navy, we also need a larger air force. At the very least, there should have been/should be a competition for Canada's next fighter.


    This doesn't get you a larger navy, this simply slows the rust out that most Canadians are either indifferent to or ignorant of.

    AORs - built in the early 60's - end of life
    DDH's built in the early 70's - end of life
    FFGs - built in the early 90's - undergoing mid life refit (will take years)
    MCDVs - built in the mid 90's - no mid life refit plans
    SSGs - Oh dear God...
    PCs - minimal combat capable and then, only in sheltered littoral waters

    When US coast guard cutters begin patrolling our waters to stop immigrant ships or USN assets look for Russian and Chinese subs in our littoral waters to protect their interests, watch the canadian public pee itself ina tantrum. of course by then, it's too late. Frankly, I think we're getting closer and closer to joining the US every time we need to rely upon them for our defence and security.

  3. by avatar martin14
    Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:13 pm
    Won't matter, the Dippers can say anything they want.

  4. by avatar Gunnair  Gold Member
    Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:27 pm
    "martin14" said
    Won't matter, the Dippers can say anything they want.


    Sure they can. So can the Liberals and the CPC.

    Dross talk for defence and nothing more.

  5. by avatar PublicAnimalNo9
    Sat Apr 09, 2011 7:33 pm
    Hmmm support ships eh? What's he gonna call the first one, HMCS Flapjack?
    Yeah, now we'll be able to provide coffee and donuts even more efficiently to our allies in combat zones world-wide.
    I heard Jack wants to equip them with syrup guns too.

  6. by avatar Scape
    Sat Apr 09, 2011 9:34 pm
    Somolia will have a bigger and more effective navy then us in no time at this rate! ?

  7. by Thanos
    Sat Apr 09, 2011 9:41 pm
    That's why we should buy up as much of the British navy as possible before they mothball or scrap the ones we can use.

    Subject, of course, to full pre-purchase inspection this time just to avoid things like submarines that sink on their own with no assistance at all from the enemy.

  8. by avatar Gunnair  Gold Member
    Sat Apr 09, 2011 10:52 pm
    "Thanos" said
    That's why we should buy up as much of the British navy as possible before they mothball or scrap the ones we can use.

    Subject, of course, to full pre-purchase inspection this time just to avoid things like submarines that sink on their own with no assistance at all from the enemy.


    Buy British?

    Right. Because that worked out so well for us before.

  9. by Thanos
    Sun Apr 10, 2011 2:58 am
    Well hell, I did say inspect them first instead of just relying on the salesman to tell the 'truth' this time. It's just a good opportunity to jump at a chance to get a entire fleet for almost free. We really ought to take a shot at grabbing that carrier before the Brazilians or Indonesians get it first. It'd be goddamn cool to have one of those babies in the fleet again. 8)

  10. by avatar saturn_656
    Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:02 am
    "Thanos" said
    Well hell, I did say inspect them first instead of just relying on the salesman to tell the 'truth' this time. It's just a good opportunity to jump at a chance to get a entire fleet for almost free. We really ought to take a shot at grabbing that carrier before the Brazilians or Indonesians get it first. It'd be goddamn cool to have one of those babies in the fleet again. 8)


    I can picture the Liberal ad that would come out of that purchase.

    *cue ominous sounding music*

    "Stephen Harper actually announced he wants to buy an aircraft carrier for our Navy."

    "An aircraft carrier... carrying planes... planes with missles... planes with guns... in our Navy. The Canadian Navy."

    :wink:

    "We did not make this up."

    :lol:

  11. by avatar Gunnair  Gold Member
    Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:14 am
    "Thanos" said
    Well hell, I did say inspect them first instead of just relying on the salesman to tell the 'truth' this time. It's just a good opportunity to jump at a chance to get a entire fleet for almost free. We really ought to take a shot at grabbing that carrier before the Brazilians or Indonesians get it first. It'd be goddamn cool to have one of those babies in the fleet again. 8)


    No manpower for it.

  12. by Bruce_the_vii
    Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:24 am
    "Gunnair" said


    This doesn't get you a larger navy, this simply slows the rust out that most Canadians are either indifferent to or ignorant of.

    AORs - built in the early 60's - end of life
    DDH's built in the early 70's - end of life
    FFGs - built in the early 90's - undergoing mid life refit (will take years)
    MCDVs - built in the mid 90's - no mid life refit plans
    SSGs - Oh dear God...
    PCs - minimal combat capable and then, only in sheltered littoral waters



    Gawwd. How many billions are they going to need?

  13. by avatar Gunnair  Gold Member
    Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:29 am
    "Bruce_the_vii" said


    This doesn't get you a larger navy, this simply slows the rust out that most Canadians are either indifferent to or ignorant of.

    AORs - built in the early 60's - end of life
    DDH's built in the early 70's - end of life
    FFGs - built in the early 90's - undergoing mid life refit (will take years)
    MCDVs - built in the mid 90's - no mid life refit plans
    SSGs - Oh dear God...
    PCs - minimal combat capable and then, only in sheltered littoral waters



    Gawwd. How many billions are they going to need?

    Oops... forgot the AOPVs - not yet designed or manned.

  14. by avatar CDN_PATRIOT
    Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:45 am
    "Gunnair" said
    Well hell, I did say inspect them first instead of just relying on the salesman to tell the 'truth' this time. It's just a good opportunity to jump at a chance to get a entire fleet for almost free. We really ought to take a shot at grabbing that carrier before the Brazilians or Indonesians get it first. It'd be goddamn cool to have one of those babies in the fleet again. 8)


    No manpower for it.


    How do you figure?



    -J.



view comments in forum
Page 1 2 3

You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news.

  • Login
  • Register (free)
 Share  Digg It Bookmark to del.icio.us Share on Facebook


Share on Facebook Submit page to Reddit
CKA About |  Legal |  Advertise |  Sitemap |  Contact   canadian mobile newsMobile

All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net