Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Nicklan





Joined: 10 May 2007
Posts: 544
Reputation: 16.6Reputation: 16.6
votes: 1

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
Nicklan wrote:
I really suggest you researh Canadian Arms manufacturing, I suggest that My Idea is not as stupid as combining fascistism and liberalism that are opposits, don't make sence to support 2 kinds of government that do not agree on anything.


There are nine spelling and grammatical errors in the above paragraph. Can you find them? Kind of ironic since he is calling someone else stupid.

Seriously Nicklan, we like to keep things professional around here. If you can't take the time to write properly then find somewhere else to post.


Spelling is the best debate you can come up with ?
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nicklan wrote:
Craig wrote:
Nicklan wrote:
I really suggest you researh Canadian Arms manufacturing, I suggest that My Idea is not as stupid as combining fascistism and liberalism that are opposits, don't make sence to support 2 kinds of government that do not agree on anything.


There are nine spelling and grammatical errors in the above paragraph. Can you find them? Kind of ironic since he is calling someone else stupid.

Seriously Nicklan, we like to keep things professional around here. If you can't take the time to write properly then find somewhere else to post.


Spelling is the best debate you can come up with ?


I'm not participating in this debate. I'm telling you to clean up your spelling. Stop acting like a child.
JasonSkald





Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 11
Reputation: 2.8Reputation: 2.8

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:57 pm    Post subject: Re: 4 to 5 billion dollars Reply with quote

Nicklan wrote:
Why not charter our heavy lift needs from a Canadian Contractor who will buy the C-17's. Why not charter ice breaker supply, service and construction ships for the high north. For both of these transports can be much better utillizes by a contractor then the government can buying these them selfs. Not to mention the Canadian mining , oil and gas and other projects that can all be serviced as well as the Military and Canadian Government. The cost is also considerabliy cheaper and will actully provide more capacity to the military and Canadian Government !


Matters of sovereignty - what do we do if fighting ever breaks out and these civilian employees refuse to go to work? Military functions (except for the most banal, such as cooking/cleaning/laundry/etc. in a safe base) should not be privatized.
JasonSkald





Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 11
Reputation: 2.8Reputation: 2.8

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 5:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
What I would like to see is an ice breaking, nuclear powered aircraft carrier, that could operate in the far north even in the dead of winter. Right now Canada does not even have the capability to ice break to the pole during the summer. The Russians are the only ones in the world with this capability. Nothing projects power like an aircraft carrier, and we need to project power if we want to assert sovereignty in the North. We need permanent detection and deterrence for the North.

As for the aircraft leasing, is there anyone willing to do that? These are expensive aircraft. As I understand it, there are a couple of NATO countries that operate them, and they coordinate and do the heavy lifting for everyone. Canada's will be fit into the rotation, and probably fly regular routes between here and Europe.


While I love the idea of Canada resurrecting the naval aviation tradition it lost with the HMCS Bonaventure, the costs will prevent us from running aircraft carriers for the forseeable future - purchasing, manning and operating a single supercarrier and naval air wing would take up more than our entire military budget for the Land Force, Air Force and Maritime Command combined. The Canadian navy also faces a manning problem - we barely have enough to man our frigates and subs, we could never man an aircraft without huge personnel increases.

What Canada needs is a new fleet of frigates, equipped with ice-breaking hulls. They can project power over a wide area with surface-to-surface missiles, control airspace with surface-to-air missiles, and operate Remotely Piloted Vehicles (drones) to perform surveillance and sovereignty patrols in the High North, all at a fraction of the cost of a single aircraft carrier. Canada is currently looking at purchasing a modest fleet of small ice-breaker warships (roughly corvette size), let's hope that an announcement is made soon.
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd forgotten about the potential of UAVs, but you're right - they are an extremely viable option for Northern patrol.
Nicklan





Joined: 10 May 2007
Posts: 544
Reputation: 16.6Reputation: 16.6
votes: 1

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JasonSkald wrote:
kwlafayette wrote:
What I would like to see is an ice breaking, nuclear powered aircraft carrier, that could operate in the far north even in the dead of winter. Right now Canada does not even have the capability to ice break to the pole during the summer. The Russians are the only ones in the world with this capability. Nothing projects power like an aircraft carrier, and we need to project power if we want to assert sovereignty in the North. We need permanent detection and deterrence for the North.

As for the aircraft leasing, is there anyone willing to do that? These are expensive aircraft. As I understand it, there are a couple of NATO countries that operate them, and they coordinate and do the heavy lifting for everyone. Canada's will be fit into the rotation, and probably fly regular routes between here and Europe.


While I love the idea of Canada resurrecting the naval aviation tradition it lost with the HMCS Bonaventure, the costs will prevent us from running aircraft carriers for the forseeable future - purchasing, manning and operating a single supercarrier and naval air wing would take up more than our entire military budget for the Land Force, Air Force and Maritime Command combined. The Canadian navy also faces a manning problem - we barely have enough to man our frigates and subs, we could never man an aircraft without huge personnel increases.

What Canada needs is a new fleet of frigates, equipped with ice-breaking hulls. They can project power over a wide area with surface-to-surface missiles, control airspace with surface-to-air missiles, and operate Remotely Piloted Vehicles (drones) to perform surveillance and sovereignty patrols in the High North, all at a fraction of the cost of a single aircraft carrier. Canada is currently looking at purchasing a modest fleet of small ice-breaker warships (roughly corvette size), let's hope that an announcement is made soon.


Just a thought but Canada could a Ford new modern aircraft carriers if our government had the will to make it happen, you need to camand air land and sea the only thing that does that is a battle group including aircraft carriers !
We seem to be able to find the money to buy and operate the C-17 at a price tag in the billions so money is not a problem !
Nicklan





Joined: 10 May 2007
Posts: 544
Reputation: 16.6Reputation: 16.6
votes: 1

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 12:30 pm    Post subject: Re: 4 to 5 billion dollars Reply with quote

JasonSkald wrote:
Nicklan wrote:
Why not charter our heavy lift needs from a Canadian Contractor who will buy the C-17's. Why not charter ice breaker supply, service and construction ships for the high north. For both of these transports can be much better utillizes by a contractor then the government can buying these them selfs. Not to mention the Canadian mining , oil and gas and other projects that can all be serviced as well as the Military and Canadian Government. The cost is also considerabliy cheaper and will actully provide more capacity to the military and Canadian Government !


Matters of sovereignty - what do we do if fighting ever breaks out and these civilian employees refuse to go to work? Military functions (except for the most banal, such as cooking/cleaning/laundry/etc. in a safe base) should not be privatized.


We will not get our first Heavy Lift aircraft untill Sept. of this year who do you think is providing this service now to our government, I will give you a hint they are not Canadians in fact some are Russians I believe, but none are Canadian Contractors !!!
Nicklan





Joined: 10 May 2007
Posts: 544
Reputation: 16.6Reputation: 16.6
votes: 1

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yet there are Canadian Owned and Operated companied that have offered to supply this service with the same aircraft, it is highly unlikely that a Candian Contractor is likely to offer a Naval Battle Group as is required. I would suggest that our government should be investing those billions into assets that can not be supplied by a Canadian Private Contractor.Not to mention all of the personal that are to be trained for the C-17 program, re asign them to the Navy !!That will get things started, i am shore Canadians will do their duty !!!
Nicklan





Joined: 10 May 2007
Posts: 544
Reputation: 16.6Reputation: 16.6
votes: 1

PostPosted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If Canada can aford to own and operate a fleet of C-17's at a cost in the billions of dollars then we can aford to have 3 battle fleets for our Navy to operate incontrol of air, land and sea !
Rusty Bedsprings





Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 1629

votes: 5

PostPosted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 4:10 pm    Post subject: unfurtunatly Reply with quote

unfortunatly canada can't afford afleet of anything right now with the current military budget it has.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 3

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


4 to 5 billion dollars

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB