Opposition questions PM on military spending spree

[kilekaldar]

Opposition questions PM on military spending spree
Updated Sat. Jul. 21 2007 10:14 PM ET
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070721/military_spending_070721/20070721?hub=TopStories


CTV.ca News Staff

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has spent more than $20 billion so far on his military spending spree. But the Opposition is accusing Harper of an American-style defence buildup that seems "more attuned to offensive warfare" than peacekeeping.

Aerial drones are on the Armed Forces must-have list, although the unmanned aircraft won't be ready until the Afghanistan mission is due to wind down in 2009.

It's part of a multi-billion dollar spending spree to create a Canadian Forces that can land a mighty punch.

"It's my list: Restoring ships, Arctic ships and frigates and airplanes and trucks," Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor said earlier this week.

The list also includes tanks, jumbo aircraft, frigate upgrades, new troop carriers, heavy-lift helicopters and new airbases.

The total cost so far is more than $22 billion, which doesn't include the billions more for operations and maintenance.

It's the biggest build-up since the Second World War.

"There has been no other time since then that we have had such a concentrated way in a new generation of weapons, a new generation of equipment," said military analyst Col. (ret'd) Michel Drapeau.

The Conservative government is buying enough hardware to support a military much larger than the current force of 64,000.

"The equipment we are buying is capable of supporting a force twice the size," Drapeau said.

The opposition leaders agree the military needed an upgrade, but they accuse Harper of a U.S.-style defence buildup.

"We have a prime minister who has George W. Bush as American Idol," Liberal Leader Stephane Dion said.

"This seems much more attuned to offensive warfare than Canada's role of peacekeeping," NDP Leader Jack Layton said.

The prime minister is gambling Canadians will support this massive defence spending after decades of neglect.

But the Opposition says the leader of a minority government doesn't have the mandate to reshape the military in this way, especially when there hasn't been a proper debate in Parliament or in the country.

With a report from CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife


________________________


WOW. I have used major pieces of equipment like vehicles that just came appart in my hands from shear age and use. I assume that most serving members of the military have had similar experiences. My life and the lives of people I work with DEPENDS on it not falling to pieces. This is the first Prime Minister that has tried to seriously address this problem before it starts killing us. But apparently certain politicians and media networks would rather try to score cheap political points.

BTW Mr. Fife called Harper a 'military chauvenist' for trying to get us modern equipment. Now THAT's professional.

I am just DISGUSTED. :-X

 

[Franko]

I always thought that Robert Fife had a head on his shoulders and was very "on the level"....tonight just blew me completely out of the water.

I didn't know we were winding down in 2009....was there a vote I missed somewhere?

Anyways after the "report"....which it wasn't, I bloody near through my TV out the window.

IMHO I should throw it at the retired Col shooting off his mouth...ever hear of actually building up the CF, not maintaining the status quo? Obviously not.

What was this guy when he was in anyways?

/rant

Regards

 

[McG]

Opposition questions PM on military spending spree
....
"This seems much more attuned to offensive warfare than Canada's role of peacekeeping," NDP Leader Jack Layton said.

This from a fool who does not even understand what is required to enforce peace.  Unfortunately the Canadian fascination, with the false image of peacekeeping, will result in people being convinced by this stupid sound bite.

 

[cameron]

Somebody needs to remind the honourable members of the opposition that if the CF hadn't been neglected to the point of near extinction for the past four decades, there would be no need for the current government to embark on a "spending spree".  And I am damn glad that we finally have a government whose defence policy, as Mr. Layton pointed out "...seems more attuned to offensive warfare than Canada's (weak and stereotypical) role of peacekeeping."  About high bloody time I say.

As I type this terrorist and insurgent groups are literally crawling out of the woodwork, Putin is doing his best to go down in history as the man who started Cold War II, China is becoming a superpower and pirates are ravaging shipping off the coast of Africa and and elsewhere.  Oh and I haven't even mentioned Iran and North Korea yet.  Apart from World War II, I can think of no other time when Canada so desperately needed to embark on a "military spending spree".

"The  Conservative government is buying enough hardware to support a military much larger than the current force of 64,000."  God, I certainly hope so Col. Drapeau.

 

[Franko]

Little diggin on Drapeau....

http://www.espritdecorps.ca/new_page_124.htm

Colonel Drapeau served for 34 years in the Canadian military, retiring in 1993 as Director, National Defence Headquarters Secretariat as well as Secretary, Armed Forces Council.  Upon retirement, Michel accepted a 2-year appointment as executive in thePublic Service. Since then, Michel has gained a national profile as a media analyst and columnist on military affairs.  He now practices law with Barrick Poulsen LLP. His practice deals with security and military law, access to information and privacy law, human rights law, and civil litigation.

In the 1997 Federal General Election, Michel ran as the Progressive Conservative Candidate in Ottawa-Orleans.

Colonel Drapeau is the co-author of an authoritative legal text titled ''Federal Access to Information and Privacy Legislation – Annotated”. He is also the author of a comprehensive article titled ''Sentencing under the National Defence Act: Perspectives and Musings of a former soldier'' published in August 2003 in the Canadian Bar Review. He serves on the an Advisory Board, for the publication of ‘Canadian Public Security Law Guide’, a two-volume reference guide providing complete and continuing coverage of more that 130 federal, provincial and territorial enactments relating to the field of public security law in Canada.

Colonel Drapeau teaches ‘Media and the Law’ to journalism students at Cité collégiale, Ottawa, Ontario. He lectures also in public law at the Law Faculty, University of Ottawa.

He writes occasionally for Esprit de Corps military magazine. He writes a weekly column in the Journal de Montreal on global and military affairs.

Seems that Mr Drapeau forgets his so-called loyalties when it's convenient for a sound bite on the news. Well done for alienating the CF and your past political supporters.

Regards

 

[McG]

I wonder if the quotes are not out of context wrt Mr Drapeau to get the editor's slant.  He comes across as more supportive in other articles:

Rapid-response air unit seen as policy shift
...

"We're acquiring the capacity to project forces overseas into difficult areas by buying the equipment that will allow us to go there, and by creating units such as this," said Colonel Michel Drapeau, a Canadian Forces veteran and military analyst.

"Obviously this government intends to have Canada back to where it was a number of years ago, in playing a more active role as a middle power in security operations, wherever these may take place — which is a departure from what we've done for the last 20 years."

Saddly, the NDP still comes off as confused:

Rapid-response air unit seen as policy shift
...
"It appears that we're becoming more focused on being prepared to participate in missions around the world, in coalitions of the willing, rather than following an independent Canadian foreign policy — and I find that troubling," NDP defence critic Dawn Black said.

Maybe if the NDP were to talk to Mr Drapeau, they would understand that we are acquiring the ability to act independently.  Our current capabilities do not allow us to do anything by ourselves.

 

[retiredgrunt45]

As history clearly shows, the Liberals and NDP would rather we throw stones at the enemy, because that's about all we had left before Harper took over.

Are these clown actually that anti American to think that we could actually spend tit for tat with the US military budget. The US spends 20 Billion dollars in as long as it takes to say "pass the bullets and hold the beef".

I just don't get these people anymore, there's just no pleasing them on anything. In the next election we really have to send these idiots a clear message and that message should be to go crawl back under the rock on which you crawled out from under and stay there.

 

[CE621]

This governments so called spending spree is simply money which should have been spent years ago,rearming is expensive.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

I always thought that Robert Fife had a head on his shoulders and was very "on the level"....tonight just blew me completely out of the water.

I didn't know we were winding down in 2009....was there a vote I missed somewhere?

Anyways after the "report"....which it wasn't, I bloody near through my TV out the window.

IMHO I should throw it at the retired Col shooting off his mouth...ever hear of actually building up the CF, not maintaining the status quo? Obviously not.

What was this guy when he was in anyways?

/rant

Regards

Agreed....Robert Fife over stepped his place as a journalist last night. i will say that he prefaced at least three statements with "i think...." or "In my opinion.." to which I loudly said "Who cares what you think pal?" (my wife kept reminding me that only she could hear me and I was keeping her awake.) It shows the left wing liberal agenda of the press corps though doesn't it?
I'd be interested to know how our friend and sometime poster David Akins feels about this blatant bias on the part of his network???

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

CTV got a blast of s**t from me over this non-story.  They asked no pertinent questions and merely served as a mouthpiece for ill-defined partisan "concerns".  As I have said previously, there's a lot not to like about the Conservatives' strategic defence plan - why not do some research and ask some real questions?  Instead we get Layton's abject stupidity regarding "offensive" weapons and yet another "expert" with practically no credentials and a political axe to grind spewing forth. 

What garbage.

 

[cameron]

This governments so called spending spree is simply money which should have been spent years ago,rearming is expensive.

EXACTLY!!!

 

[Kiwi99]

Can omeone tell me how a guy who left the military 14-15 years ago be considered an expert on the miltary.  Seriously, I need to be a military specialist too, I bet I know far less than he does which makes me more qualified.  It really gets me going to see these ancient old cold war veterans who havent worn the uniform for 10 or more years speak on my behalf and the behalf of others.

 

[Flip]

The problem with CTV news is that people watch it.
And they believe it!

I'm pretty sure there was some sound bite as well
as expert "selection" going on - you know to "balance" the piece.

 

[George Wallace]

Can omeone tell me how a guy who left the military 14-15 years ago be considered an expert on the miltary.  Seriously, I need to be a military specialist too, I bet I know far less than he does which makes me more qualified.  It really gets me going to see these ancient old cold war veterans who havent worn the uniform for 10 or more years speak on my behalf and the behalf of others.

Don't worry.  In fifteen or so years, you can fill their boots, and some young sob can say the same about you.  Life goes on.

 

[Shec]

$20 Billion already spent they say?  That equates to about $1/2 billion/year for each year of Liberal neglect.  The legacy of the false economies of the Trudeau years.

 

[MarkOttawa]

This opposition crap about planned defence spending is simply mindless anti-American spew; we're talking mainly transport aircraft, supply ships, patrol ships for Canadian waters, and trucks--not things that go bang overseas:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070721/military_spending_070721/20070721?hub=TopStories

The opposition leaders agree the military needed an upgrade, but they accuse Harper of a U.S.-style defence buildup.

"We have a prime minister who has George W. Bush as American Idol," Liberal Leader Stephane Dion said.

"This seems much more attuned to offensive warfare than Canada's role of peacekeeping," NDP Leader Jack Layton said...

What a disgusting, cretinous level of political discourse.  My outrage grows. Of the major current planned defence expenditures the only ones that were not under serious consideration by the previous Liberal government were the C-17 strategic airlifter and the Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships. Surely then President Bush was also Paul Martin's idol, Citoyen Dion? Or maybe you just ignored defence issues whilst in that Cabinet and have not bothered to brush up on the facts since. Immoral, political fool.

And what of our journalists who are so ignorant and unenterprising that they do not call our politicians on simple facts? What a bunch of unprofessional mediocrities. Should any one of them care to ask for references for my point above, I will gladly oblige. Fat chance.

One reference here.
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2005/11/11/1302614-sun.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Brad Sallows]

>"There has been no other time since then that we have had such a concentrated way in a new generation of weapons, a new generation of equipment," said military analyst Col. (ret'd) Michel Drapeau.

That's what happens when replacement dates are allowed to slide.  Jackasses.

 

[SiG_22_Qc]

Well he could simply reply that he's catching up the the Liberals 90's CUTTING SPREE.