It is time to get out of NATO

Personally, I would like to Canada neutral, like Sweden. To this end, I would like to see Canada have defensive weapons not offensive weapons such as the F-35.

To this end I would like the military based on the Swiss model, with everyone doing some sort of military service and continuing with their education at the same time.

Canada's main concern is not Russia, never has been, but the USA, which is more and more looking at Canada's vast natural resources and water to satisfy their largely decaying country.

Staying in NATO and buying US made weapons only contributes to the USA running our show and if the USA decide to cross the 49th, our military will fold as they are part of the US military machine.

Our military needs smaller easier to maintain aircraft, designed to operate in primitive conditions. Stealth coastal patrol ships and smaller coastal type submarines.

Harper, the chocolate soldier he is, is squandering precious defense dollars on politically prestigious items that will be next to useless for home defense. But I guess harper is only doing what his American masters are telling him to do. Make Canada's defense weak by purchasing hugely expensive aircraft and the wrong type of ships.

The 157 died in Afghanistan

[UNSUBSTANTIATED COMMENT REMOVED.]

The Taliban were put into power, financed, feted by, and invited to the US as honoured guests, until they balked on the building of a N and S pipeline across the Western part of the country, when they've suddenly become "enemies".

The vast majority of war casualties are by accidents, long range weapons and, in the case of Afghanistan, by roadside bombs, in other words, there's nothing heroic about them. The killed and injured are not heroes, but victims. As, probably 90% of all war casualties in any war.

The vast majority of the leg amputees I was in hospital and later worked with, after WW2, have lost their legs to frostbites, landmines and accidents. Some heroism. In my 14 months in the hospital as a patient and orderly, of the hundreds I have known, I can only remember a few who were hit by infantry weapons.

The purpose of the fancy, science fiction weapons soldiers fire over walls, as shown on TV , is to make a lot of noise,because they never hit anybody, or anything.

After WW2 it was estimated that only 1 of 30,000 rounds fired by the infantry, has hit anybody. We had more danger from falling branches and the odd ricochets, when the Russians were firing at us with their submachineguns, with tracers whizzing all around the tree branches.

Today the number of wasted shots could be 100,000, or more, before one of them hits. But it looks heroic.

And who are we supposed to fight in any war?

China ? Why should they, or anybody, fight us, when the governments are putting signs up all around the borders "Canada for sale! Come and get it!", and calling it " welcome foreign investment". The Vancouver area real estate market would collapse, without the "ìnvestment" by the communist Mainland Chinese.

Our politicians and economists haven't figured it out yet, that all monetary investments are debts the public has to repay, and foreign investment, including the fraudulent "free trade" racket, is the sale of the country, by putting it under foreign control.

Defended by our military.

Ed Deak.

The only truth about the

The only truth about the F-35 is its uncertainty. The projected cost of the plane keeps rising and John Mcain spoke to scrap the whole program. I can see why Harper could score some points south of the border with the order but I cant see how any of the other countries that have ordered these plane will be able to afford them as the price rises, and if the preliminary orders go down the price will increase.

The other part of this that no-one seems to mention, is the cost of maintaining these planes, which is estimated to be a third higher than the f18. The maintenance fee's alone for the 2000 or so planes the US ordered, is supposed to be roughly a trillion dollars over the next 15 years.

Furthermore, the f-35 will have a range of 600 miles!, jeez im no aviation guy but I thought these fighter jets could fly at least overseas? This plane can only fly from Vancouver to Prince rupert on one tank of fuel.

WAR PLANES!

Maned war planes are a thing of the past. Harper is only buying them to help support the American Military Industrial Complex. He and his buddies will be amply rewarded for their support. We as a country should be developing Drone planes that can drop a gallon of fresh water at someones feet, that can deliver food and medical supplies to those in need without going through the local corrupt regimes that steal the aid before it can reach the people. We could and should become that proud nation that we once were, not a warrior state of the U.S.

What a waste of lives and money!

Now that a second high profile Afghani politician has been killed in just a couple of weeks, it is becoming more of a certainty that our soldiers' lives and the billions of our tax dollars were wasted. As soon as Nato/US forces leave, the Taliban will just take over again and impose their values while using our new roads.

Our forces were using the pilotless drones over there, that can stay aloft for many many hours, so why not here? It makes absolutely no sense for Harper & Co to be spending the ever-increasing billions on these vertical takeoff stealth fighters that have little range and very high maintenance costs. This is just another of the neo-cons' hair-brained ideas, just like the prison building campaign, that is not supported by logic and study outcomes, that so many of the uninformed electorate clap their hands in glee over.

If only the Conservatives hadn't nixed the DeHaviland Arrows in the late 1950s! Then maybe we would have a more substantial aircraft manufacturing industry.

Nasty course and government policies

I repeat the last statement I made in response to Fiat's 'The nazi death..." below the "Norway Nightmare Sounds Alarm Bells..."

"I despise violence and war for empire or economic gain and it absolutely galls me that my taxes are going toward the procurement of attack fighter jets."

Fiat, Yup, that pipeline from central Asia, Channey and Haliburton's dream to avoid Russia, China and Iran, no other route except Afghanistan and Pakistan but the Taliban refused.

Rantnic and Themosheshe, Yup, an obsolete fighter by the time it hits the tarmac, succeeded by smaller, less expensive, more maneuverable, pilotless aircraft.

I debated, on air, about a decade ago, against the Missile Defence Shield, (Cretien kept us out of that fiasco) and where is that now, including the wasted funds that the U.S. could surely use today.

Grumpy, Yup, NATO ceased to have relevance when the Soviet Union collapsed and had to reinvent itself, or there would be a lot of unemployed generals and a massive decrease of military contracts.

Zalm, Yup, Ginger Goodwin was murdered defending organized labour. When people wanted to name that part of the island highway after him, the business elite insisted on "Miners' way" so that people might not investigate more closely. I suppose Dunsmuir street should be called Coal Baron's way.

Pastor J.S.Woodsworth, leader of the CCF, a Jack Layton role model, and part author of the Regina Manifesto, was surely a pacifist, but perhaps, up against the Nazis, he needed to make that exception

The French socialist leader, Jean Jarest noted the waste of resources of "a badly run society" with the buildup of munitions prior to WWI, and he rallied European workers to prevent military action in 1912. Unfortunately, he was assassinated by another version of that twisted Norwegian just as the war began. Read up on this guy, he's one of my heroes.

Propaganda, false public fear and political negligence are surely taking us in the wrong direction.

[OFFENSIVE COMMENT REMOVED.]

So far Norway's response should be our role model

If only we could respond to violence and attacks the way Norwegians are currently doing, instead of going the hysterical, fear mongered, vengeful, totalitarian, U.S. route.

I've heard a couple of times

I've heard a couple of times now that Harper wants Canada so set up military bases around the world. [UNSUBSTANTIATED COMMENT REMOVED.]

One Stinking Day a Year

"as a Canadian citizen, you live in a democratic country where individual rights and freedoms are respected. Thousands of brave Canadians have fought and died for these rights and freedoms. The commitment to Canada of our men and women in uniform should never be forgotten or go un-recognized."

And, on November 11th, as some of us have a "day off" we nod our heads in agreement with the above thought as we take a moment to remember. So, to state that concept very clearly to every new Canadian is somehow a conspiracy?
I would wish that we should be reminded every damn day, maybe people would realize that they are not so damned "entitled".

For whose rights and

For whose rights and freedoms have Canadian soldiers died in Afghanistan ?

Or the tens of millions who died for Hitler's
"Defence of our freedoms, Western civilization and Christianity"

Or for Stalin's "Freedoms and the People's Democracies".

"Freedom" is the most misused, distorted and obscenely used word in all languages in history.

And I've heard them all. As the suicide bombers are also blowing themselves up in the "defence of freedoms", which means putting tents on all women and kill those who learned to read.

So have the boys our sister machinegun squad, whose bodies we found in the woods of Poland, hundreds of km from their already occupied homes, with their throats cut from ear to ear. Their parents and families never found out what happened to them, as to millions of war dead since the beginning of time.

Ed Deak.

go for it guys

Interesting that Harpey, Kenny, and the Potato Boy are so keen on all things military. They are civilians. If they are so frikken gung-ho why don't they put on the uniform, head off to the front lines, and put their overfed asses on the line in defence of whatever-in-the-name-of-Sweet-Bleedin'-Jayzuss they're on about?

Brave bunch, willing to fight to the last drop of everyone else's blood.

I am not a confirmed pacifist. This world doesn't allow us to be fully pacifistic. I'll drink the blood of any creep who tries to get cute with my granddaughters, and gawd help you if you try to assault me or any of mine. And I'm sure every grandmother in Afghanistan feels the same way.

We're buying those ridiculous war toys because the Excited States told us to and the cowards prattling on about the glory of war are too cowardly to stand up to our "friendly neighbour" so don't expect them to get all studdly with an enemy.

Fiat Lux... thank you. Thank you, too, to those others who have denounced this pack of two-faced creeps who would gladly lead this nation down the path to ruin.

My Uncle Tom was the finest man I have ever met, and years ago, with Remembrance Day looming, I asked him about his experiences in the war. He told me "They shouldn't be allowed to make us do that to each other.". He refused to talk about his time in uniform. Lloyd Anderson, a fine and honest man was haunted by what he saw and what he did while in the army. If two of the best had the same opinion about the glory of war, I'd be a fool to think otherwise. The ones who make the most patriotic statements have never experienced the horror.

Put them in uniform, let them demonstrate just how brave they really are.

excerpt from "Warrior" by Steve Earle

"Oh, for another time, a distant field
and there a mortal warrior's lonely grave
But duty charges me remain until
the end of the last battle of the last war
Until that 'morrow render unto me
that which is mine my stipend well deserved
The fairest flower of your progeny
Your sons, your daughters, your hopes and your dreams
The cruel consequence of your conceit."

Aw Shucks

I would like to hear what the writer has to say about Canada's involvement in Bosnia. Was that just to help out the US? Should we have just let them slaughter each other until they just got fed up with it?

As for the CF35. Canada has been involved for years, around 10 years before Stephen Harper became Prime Minister, in fact.

"Canada has been involved in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program from its beginning in 1997, investing US$10 million to be an "informed partner" during the evaluation process. Once Lockheed Martin was selected as the primary contractor for the JSF program, Canada elected to become a level-three participant, along with Norway, Denmark, Turkey, and Australia on the JSF project. An additional US$100 million from the Canadian Department of National Defence (DND) over 10 years and another $50 million from Industry Canada were dedicated in 2002, making them an early participant of the JSF program."

As the writer says, "Yes we need a military; ", so, where would you buy aircraft and from whom, the Russians? Would you still have hard-working Canadian union men and women getting spin-off jobs?

Cboo's one day a year

"So, to state that concept very clearly to every new Canadian is somehow a conspiracy?"

What's been pointed out to you by three commenters now is that it's not true.

If the truth isn't a good reason for Jason Kenny shutting his idiot mouth, what is?

Bosnia and Crete, et al,

Bosnia and Crete, et al, were not Afghanistan.

The only reason for the invasion of Afghanistan was the hope to take control of the country's resources, instead of letting China get them.

Here again, the idea was to exploit the resources and then sell them to China, so they can sell their products back to the sucker West, the multinational corporate mafia making big profits both ways, while calling it "good economics".

The plan failed for the same reason 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam, 4,474 in Iraq and 1,680 in Afghanistan, for nothing.

Interesting to read what US Marine general Smedley Butler had to say abut wars, he received the Congressional Medal of Honour for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket

Ed Deak.

it's worse

The CAF announced in June that Canadian military bases are being established in Kuwait, Germany and Jamaica - with hopes to build more in such places as Senegal, Kenya, Tanzania, South Korea, and Singapore - calling this an "Operational Support Hub Network".

That is, just as the Conservatives are building new prisons for crimes which have not happened yet, they are also intent on establishing forward bases for wars which are not yet declared.

Harper's support for a national identity relying on an operational military posture internationally was clearly articulated in a Maclean's interview earlier in July. He also clearly stated the rationale: "the world is becoming more complex, and the ability of our most important allies, and most importantly the United States, to single-handedly shape outcomes and protect our interests, has been diminishing, and so I’m saying we have to be prepared to contribute more, and that is what this government’s been doing.”

Exactly, what are our

Exactly, what are our "interests" those bases are supposed to protect?

Or the 170 odd US bases around the world, protecting "American interests" while the country is going broke and cutting back on services for its citizens.

There's never any talk about cutting back on military spending, only on services to the public.

The same "interests" as Hitler's Lebensraum ?

Ed Deak.

aw shucks, 'eh!

realisticman (whatever the hell that represents), so your answer is to throw more "good" money after "bad". These F35's are being bought for no other reason then to kiss some good old American ass. Period. They're useless for this country in its traditional role as "peacekeeper". And useless for this country's defence. With our vast uninhabited countryside we have always bought twin engine jets, so if one engine fails the pilot will still be able to land somewhere. F35's are single engine, so if it fails, say goodbye jet, goodbye pilot and goodbye $1,000,000,000! That BILLION by the way. And as they are stealth technology, they are for INVADING forces. You know, aggressive, imperialist powers that want to control everything. Oh, you're right. Just what Canada needs! "Stand on guard for thee"...what a crock of shit!

Oh, gosh and golly!

Now the discussion has sunk into that hyperbole and righteous indignation that always emerge when the talk is of the ugliness of war, which then immediately, in many people's minds, translate into pulling the teeth of our military! We will be permitted to have 'defensive' weaponry only, but nothing for 'offensive' or 'invasion' purposes. When were there ever a sharp line between the two? Is everyone aware that the 2nd WW got as long and ugly and precarious as it did, because most Northern European countries had acted on these sentiments and were in reality unable to defend themselves at the start of the war?

There will always be a Hitler out there. The military-industrial complex did not invent him, nor did it invent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who would restore the grand caliphate if things were not in his way. Things such as a West that has not made itself toothless.

Another thing that gets my goat whenever the talk goes in this direction is that people who wish for us to shift to what they call defense-only mode never acknowledge that reactive measures are always more costly and painful. Nor do they have a lot of suggestions as to how to keep the peace other than turning the other cheek. There will more to riding that saying 'walk', and so peace is a fragile and demanding crop to grow. Reminding of Barouch Spinoza's words:

"Peace is not an absence of war, it is a virtue, a state of mind, a disposition for benevolence, confidence, justice."

And those things surely abound right here in our fair province, yes?

Notably, most of the words we see on this blog are adversarial, critical, combative. Not much is instructive or constructive. So, until such time as we find the philosopher's stone on how to preserve peace 'for good', we must be armed, preferably to the teeth, to stand ready to defend it and maybe more.

No, I have not served in the military, but I have grown up staring at posted slogans occasionally on the house where I lived, with wordings like 'Be active for peace today, or radioactive tomorrow'. Characteristically, no one told us how to 'be active for peace', and I am pretty sure if we had had the means, some of us would have liked to 'nuke' the schoolyard bullies.

Well, the ultimate defensive

Well, the ultimate defensive weapons, the B 52s are back again. One of them just flew North.

Could be a Taliban cell hiding up there?

What are the Canadian bases in Korea and Kuwait etc. supposed to defend ?

Ed Deak.

Dorothy said: "There will

Dorothy said: "There will always be a Hitler out there. The military-industrial complex did not invent him, nor did it invent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who would restore the grand caliphate..."

Dorothy, Hitler's rise to power was abetted in a decisive way by support from financial and industrial organizations within Germany and also other Western countries. They may not have invented him, but they ensured that he came to power. His National-Socialist party never had the means or support otherwise.

You are also confusing the alleged "grand caliphate" plot with different factions within the Islamic world. Ahmadinejad himself has much less personal power within Iran's political system than you seem to be aware. Besides, Iran is a relatively poor country with a relatively small military budget, so fears of Iran's supposed global intentions are quite misguided.

But that brings up another history lesson: Iran had a functioning progressive democratic system before Western (NATO) countries undermined and overthrew it in the 1950s. Then it was considered exactly an action to "single-handedly shape outcomes and protect our interests", much as Mr Harper today sees the role of the CAF.

The first step to peace, at least in my mind, is to recognize that interests which would resort to force to have their way are widely dispersed and are present in our countries as well.

Wealth is the temporary

Wealth is the temporary control of energy.

Wealth can not be created, only taken from others, the environment and future generations.

All forms of life, from bacteria to humans and empires, survive every second of their of their existence through some forms of energy control.

The purpose of all religions, ideologies, theories and especially of all violence and wars is energy control, either to take it, or to defend it from others taking it.

Economic theories are for the purpose of energy control, or rather the legalization of energy theft from others.

We have fences around our ranches to prevent the cattle of our neighbours to come over and eat up our grass, but we don't go around shooting our neighbours' cattle, or our neighbours, to prevent their cattle coming over.

Good fences good neighbours make. The purpose of the "free trade " fraud is the destruction of fences to permit our neighbours to take.

History is the chronicle of incredible human stupidity, always engaged in taking resources and energy from others, justifying the taking and theft with religious, racial, or ideological theories.

Once humanity comes to grips with the fact that wealth can not be created, only taken, it may just have some hope for survival.

Ed Deak.

Fiat lux

Re: Wealth is the temporary.

Very philosophical and unfortunately true.

rant....I would prefer

rant....I would prefer "factual" or "real", as I've left all philosophies, and especially ideologies, behind many years ago and am trying to explain that everything, all economic activities, are based and running on unbreakable physical laws that can not be overturned by theories.

The prime example is "monetary efficiency", which is a lie and doesn't exist, if it is used to deny, or overturn the reality of physical efficiency.

Which means that products, that could be made locally, are not "cheaper", but "more expensive" when the resources used in making them are exported across the oceans and then reimported.

Our whole economic system is built on lies, always have been, and this is why we have hunger, wars, "recessions" and "depressions", not to mention the obscene powers and "earnings" of certain aristocracies, defended and legalized by BS theories.

The beautiful, kissing relationship between capitalists and communists, once set to kill millions, is the best example of the fraud by theories, because the rulers of both systems are only concerned with the enslavement of their followers, under the law of "Wealth can not be created..."

All ruling classes of history have known this
since the beginning of times, yet the sucker public still has to realize the royal screw they're subjected to and can only say "Go carefully by my heart"

Ed Deak.

Scammed

Harper has been Bush's 'butt-boy' from the day they met. And, good 'ol Duh!-bya also taught him to overrule any public sentiment on governing national affairs.

It would seem Harper would have us go the same way as the US: overspending to the point of default. But, of course, he gets to look good during the interim to the US.

It's time for Canada to forget (or moderate) Globalization, and start taking care of our people first, and foremost. That is what the government is for. Not to feed the wealthy, nor play footsy with other countries to gain favour.

I don't want to see Canada as the 52nd state!

Of money and men...

"They may not have invented him, but they ensured that he came to power. His National-Socialist party never had the means or support otherwise."

Wasn't it about getting the votes? I don't believe wealth creates winners. I believe it follows and exploits them. We have enough history in Canada of corporate support shifting according to the political winds and their various directions. Have you read Hitler's book? considering the socioeconomic and political state Germany was in then, his evangelium would have been a sure sell.

Regarding Iran, I don' think they mean to go it alone, but rather to become a catalyst for the gathering of many powers into one larger one. The grand caliphate would involve an alliance of many smaller powers, but they would perhaps work together under the Islamic unity, which we have seen in action within the Taliban forces, composed of many different nationalities. I am not mistaken in believing that they remain a force to be reckoned with, am I? Al Queda, same thing, and even if we decide to believe it is now on its knees, it certainly took a good deal of what we had, didn't it? Would you truly prefer that we accepted dimmitude? Is that better or worse, do you think, than being the 52nd state?

"The beautiful, kissing relationship between capitalists and communists, once set to kill millions, is the best example of the fraud by theories, because the rulers of both systems are only concerned with the enslavement of their followers, under the law of "Wealth can not be created..." "

Ed, you truly baffle me! I have just read 'Mein Kampf' in the interest of understanding history better, and are you aware that Hitler expressed the identical sentiment in practically the same words as you just did in the above paragraph? However, he also identified the culprits as being Jews, thus claiming that they perpetrated the entire plot and there was no kissing between two separate groups, only a brilliant strategy by one. You make no such identification other than the impersonal 'capitalists and communists', but that seems to be the only difference. Do you actually agree with Hitler in this, other than his fixation on Jews as culprits? I am not trying to put you in a corner, but simply interested in understanding! I have great respect for your contributions here, as well as for what I have heard of your life.

Dorothy....I hope Hitler

Dorothy....I hope Hitler burns in the deepest point of hell, having experienced and seen the results of his madness.

However, the way to survival is to learn from anybody. For one thing, Hitler, or rather his Minister of Finance, Hjalmar Schacht, wiped out the depression in Germany within a few months after they took power, and made the country the envy of still depressed Europe, with people making good wages and capitalists goof profits.

How did they do it ?

He may have lumped capitalism and communism into the same pile. I haven't read Mein Kampf for over 50 years, as part of my historical studies, and don't know whether I may have a copy, so I take full responsibility for the statement and stand by it, as both systems survive on the collectivization of economic power in the hands of self appointed ruling classes .

And I have seen enough of ruling classes and dictators to hate the ground any of them walks on.

The real danger is not necessary Canada becoming the 52nd State of the US, but a worldwide corporate dictatorship, under the fraud of "free trade" and "globalization"

Stalin has done it with bayonets, the corporate mafia with the perceived power of imaginary capital, created from the air.

"Control food and you control people", as said by Henry Kissinger.

The world's food supplies are now controlled by a handful of corporations, with Cargill, Tyson, Monsanto et al in the lead. The sole purpose of the deliberate destruction of the family farm system, in the name of "cheap food", is world control, growing by the day, especially now with natural disasters knocking more farmers out and the farms bought up by the agribiz gang.

This has been a long standing plan, supported and executed by politicians, worldwide, on the advice of their so called "economists". East Europe, once kolkhozified by the communsits is now kolkhozified by the capitalists, with hundreds of thousands of farms collectivized .

The capitalists of the world are piling their monies, patents, factories into China, who are supposed to be an ideological enemy ?

The world has always been ruled by predators under the guise of religions and ideologies and never more than right now. When you go shopping, part of your money ends up in the pockets of Cargill, Philip Morris tobacco, et al.

In the name of "competitive free enterprise",
of course. They've destroyed and are controlling the Canadian cattle industry through the control of the feedlots and markets.

Stalin and Mao must be rolling in their graves for not having thought of this racket and called themselves "conservatives"..

Ed Deak.

Head-butting or scapegoating?

"There will always be a Hitler out there."

Yep. Might even be us, one day. Next year. Next decade. Whenever we feel the need to punish someone who doesn't like the way we live our "way of life" and has the temerity to say so.

"We will be permitted to have 'defensive' weaponry only, but nothing for 'offensive' or 'invasion' purposes. When were there ever a sharp line between the two?"

The Israelis seem to have found not only the line between the two, but a unique and inexpensive solution to their problem as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet

Exactly what problem do you have with it? Not "military" enough for you?

"So, until such time as we find the philosopher's stone on how to preserve peace 'for good', we must be armed, preferably to the teeth, to stand ready to defend it and maybe more."

And as long as we're busy arming ourselves with the latest weaponry and tactics and busy devoting all our money, time and attention to learning to assemble and use it, we'll never have any time to search for the ways to preserve peace.

Or were you thinking that perhaps people without any weapons or fighting capability shold be the ones to teach that skill? Karenn tribespeople? Burmese monks? Falun Gong practitioners? Black people living in the Deep South? The Manitoba natives of Cross Lake?

Somehow I doubt very much you'd listen to anything they had to say.

Nothing will change until

Nothing will change until humanity realizes that wealth can not be created, only taken.

Which, of course, is extremely difficult to comprehend and way above the heads of economists and politicians.

Faith conquers all, especially logical thought.

Ed Deak.