Journeyman said:I barely know where to start...... : ....but I'll limit myself to two points:
1. "...a political Agenda"...especially with the upper-case 'Agenda,' sounds so conspiratorial. :Tin-Foil-Hat: anic:
Yes, the agenda is a post-war scaling back of military spending. It happens in pretty much every country after every war -- including the post-Cold War 'decade of darkness.' Democratic governments are responsible to the people -- people who generally don't want higher taxes and can't be convinced to buy "War Bonds" to pay for combat equipment when they perceive no justifiable threat, and see greater utility in paying down debt or adjusting spending towards social benefits and infrastructure. I'm not weighing in here on where Defence monies should be spent, just that cuts are inevitable.
2. And as for my old hobby-horse of "opinions versus informed opinions," where people in various threads here are pointing out the difficulties of sustaining essential family requirements and maintaining critical combat capabilities -- hell, getting boots and mukluks -- you're going to whine about losing a CISM sport?!
Big-picture thinking at its finest. :facepalm:
There's always as silver-lining -- always. Reducing CISM sports frees up more time for people to read, understand, and hopefully inform their thinking. :nod:
We can't afford training but the CF will still send a dozen hockey teams on TD to Borden for Nationals. I am all for CF sports in general but if cuts are to be made there is a good place to start.