Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Unarmed, in a hostile world
Toronto Sun ^ | 10/10/2002 | Linda Williamson

Posted on 10/11/2002 7:50:51 AM PDT by MD_Willington_1976

October 10, 2002 Unarmed, in a hostile world By LINDA WILLIAMSON -- Toronto Sun


Quick - name a country with uncertain weapons and defensive capability, a fragile, demoralized military and an unpredictable strongman leader whose "emerging hostility" has invited the wrath of the U.S., putting his country's sovereignty at imminent risk.

If you said "Iraq," go sit in the corner with Defence Minister John McCallum.

Try Canada.

That's the chilling picture painted in this week's scathing report by the ex-military men and defence experts who make up the Conference of Defence Associations - a report titled, lest anyone miss the urgency of its content, A Nation at Risk.

The eye-opening document makes the strongest case yet that 30 years of neglect and budget-slashing have left Canada's military dangerously dysfunctional. (This is the same group, remember, that in last year's report, pre-Sept. 11, pointed out our military investment ranks just ahead of Luxembourg's.)

But this is not your usual lament for more military money - the kind Liberals like McCallum and his boss Jean Chretien like to shrug off as whining from special interests.

Rather, it's a clear-eyed look at where years of military neglect leave Canada in the post-Sept. 11 world, and the very real risks we all face thanks to naive leaders who believe a "make-love-not-war" attitude scores them political points.

AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT

I'm going to quote at length from it here, because it was upstaged Tuesday by the coinciding release of Auditor General Sheila Fraser's latest attack on government waste and incompetence (which also included some defence horror stories). And because it is, frankly, a must-read.

For his part, McCallum dismissed the report's "apocalyptic language," while the PM blathered something about how he's received a lot of praise for our troops' work in Afghanistan (huh?). None of which addresses its crucial core message (read it for yourself at www.cda-cdai.ca).

It bluntly warns that the Canadian Forces are in a "crisis" that threatens not just their capability but Canada's sovereignty. To cite just one example, the CDA estimates the navy will be so downgraded in three to five years, it "would have no alternative but to concentrate on homeland defence, and even that would have to be conducted under the direction of the United States Navy." As for the army, in 18 months, i.e., by the time Chretien retires, 50% of its weapons and fleet could be grounded "because the purchase of spares has been neither consistent nor adequate."

The U.S. in particular is not amused with our "defence freeloading," the authors warn."The cumulative outlook from their perspective is that Canada has damaged its relations with its chief ally and trading partner, the USA. This is the result of intemperate anti-American statements made by members of the Canadian government and other senior officials and the sharp decline of the Canadian Forces over the past decade ...

"The U.S. perceives that Canada does not recognize the security problem, let alone assign adequate resources to resolve it ... If Canada does not act to protect itself, others, especially the U.S., will do it for us, with all the adverse consequences this implies ...

"Americans cannot understand why the prime minister seems not to be taking advice on foreign affairs and defence effort. They think it is inconceivable his advisers would overlook the damage he is doing. The U.S. does not understand how Canada can do this to itself ... "

'NEW REALITIES'

In that respect, of course, Americans are not alone. Plenty of us in Canada feel the same way, as do countries like Australia, France and the U.K, all of which have revised their defence strategy and increased spending in recognition of "the new realities," the report notes.

"The USA is preparing for a second terrorist attack. Canada has not considered the consequences of premature detonation on Canadian territory or secondary consequences of weapons of mass destruction," it declares darkly.

Is there a fix? Well, the CDA urges an immediate allocation of $1.5 billion to defence - while noting that of the feds' purported investment of $1.2 billion on "security" in the last budget, only $510 million actually went to the military, $210 million of which had already been spent on the mission to Afghanistan. It also demands a total defence policy review and a new white paper next year. "Only in this way can the serious risks to national sovereignty and well-being be avoided."

Not that the authors are optimistic:

"The only way that the prime minister and his close advisers could be convinced to increase defence spending would be if a major national embarrassment were to occur because of weak Canadian Forces," they write. "In the present situation, this is possible."


Linda Williamson is the Toronto Sun senior associate editor. She can be reached by e-mail at linda.williamson@tor.sunpub.com.


TOPICS: Canada; Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: inahostileworld; unarmed
Well it looks like Canada's military doesn't have a pot to piss in. The leader is a crackhead. And it looks like the liberals are on track to making Canada a 3rd world country..

I am sure glad that I had the opportunity to move to the USA, I've said it before, Canada is a socialist dictatorship that puts up a good front.

Here is the link to the CDA report, it is rather long because it is in both English & French...you know 2 official languages crap to please the Queerbeckers in Quebec

http://www.cda-cdai.ca/english-frame.htm

1 posted on 10/11/2002 7:50:51 AM PDT by MD_Willington_1976
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MD_Willington_1976
Let's face it: this is the best time since 1814 for the U.S. to capture Canada. I say we do it.
2 posted on 10/11/2002 7:53:53 AM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MD_Willington_1976
I don't think our elite is all that bothered that the countries of the West have essentially disarmed save for some useful occupation troops.
3 posted on 10/11/2002 7:54:47 AM PDT by junta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MD_Willington_1976
"The eye-opening document makes the strongest case yet that 30 years of neglect and budget-slashing have left Canada's military dangerously dysfunctional. (This is the same group, remember, that in last year's report, pre-Sept. 11, pointed out our military investment ranks just ahead of Luxembourg's."

When are those Canucks going to figure it out? That's one of the first things that happens when you let Liberals run your country. Thirty years is a long time to be foolish!

4 posted on 10/11/2002 7:59:11 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Let's face it: this is the best time since 1814 for the U.S. to capture Canada. I say we do it.

Might not be a bad idea, but I think we need to capture the U.S. Senate first.

5 posted on 10/11/2002 8:05:32 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
When are those Canucks going to figure it out?

Wise people might read about Canada and say "this shouldn't be allowed to happen here in the US." Then there are the liberals. And their enablers, the greedy people with their hand out ready for your tax dollars. When will they figure it out?

6 posted on 10/11/2002 8:06:44 AM PDT by MichiganConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MichiganConservative
That's a good question!
7 posted on 10/11/2002 8:12:22 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Don't you mean 1812...

http://www.rpsc.org/Library/1812/warof1812.htm
8 posted on 10/11/2002 8:27:27 AM PDT by MD_Willington_1976
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MichiganConservative
Canadians should not only look at their lack of military defense, but also the right to self defense of citizens.
Canada's current gun laws are very closely crafted after the early stages of Great Britains early gun laws. Now in England, unarmed, defenseless citizens have a 55 percent chance of having a crime committed against them.

If national defense is weak, the chances of criminals or terrorist countries are much higher. If personal defense is weak, the same applies. Defense is equally a personal responsibility as well as a government responsibility. Some people will never learn until it is too late.
9 posted on 10/11/2002 8:34:10 AM PDT by o_zarkman44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MD_Willington_1976
The danger isn't that the U.S. will take over Canada, the danger is what happens when the U.S. finally gets a bellyful of spilling blood to protect the interests of those who villify it, and pulls back its own military to protecting strictly its own interests. I mean very strictly - contrary to the hysterical insistence that "it's all about oil," the stakes of the U.S. with regard to domestic petroleum supplies are not particularly high in the Middle East. So we let them throw nukes at one another, so what? China wants the Spratlys? No skin off our nose.

I think that some sort of retrenchment is inevitable whether or not we get tired of the defense freeloaders, and the EU needs to be aware of this much more than Canada. The time for the buildup of regional security infrastructure is now before U.S. economic considerations make it mandatory. The U.S. cannot and will not maintain its worldwide defense expenditure in the defense of a nonexistent empire forever, and self-righteous anti-American rhetoric will not keep the barbarians from the gate.

10 posted on 10/11/2002 8:49:31 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Do we have to take Quebec, too? Can't we just go around them?
11 posted on 10/11/2002 8:51:28 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dark Wing
ping
12 posted on 10/11/2002 8:56:36 AM PDT by Thud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: Blood of Tyrants
Why go around? they will just surrender like their cousins in France...

They'll say something like this...

Oh l'humanité! Nous devons nous rendre ou ils prendront notre vin et fromage. N'hésitez pas à utiliser nos femmes pour votre satisfaction personnelle, mais ne prenez pas s'il vous plaît notre vin et le fromage.

(Oh the humanity ! we must surrender or they will take our wine and cheese. Feel free to use our women for your personal gratification, but please do not take our wine and cheese.)
14 posted on 10/11/2002 9:01:12 AM PDT by MD_Willington_1976
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: middleground
Yep...leaning more towards American though...Every time I go back up there, some one calls me a traitor...
15 posted on 10/11/2002 9:02:35 AM PDT by MD_Willington_1976
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Let's face it: this is the best time since 1814 for the U.S. to capture Canada. I say we do it.

Except Quebec. And I'm not real thrilled with the eastern provinces either. The western ones however.....

16 posted on 10/11/2002 9:03:43 AM PDT by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MD_Willington_1976
Okay, go through there, but don't stop. Otherwise they will try to surrender and then we will have to put up with them forever.
17 posted on 10/11/2002 9:06:21 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MD_Willington_1976
Canada has a military? Who'd a thunk it?
18 posted on 10/11/2002 9:11:19 AM PDT by Lost Highway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill
I think the problem is that we (the US) do not want China (or Russia) creeping into Canada. For all their freeloading faults and fem French accents, the Canuks are a relatively harmless lot. So we have to, for our own sake, save their sorry asses in any such event.

It's like the hard-working brother who has to keep floating his dead beat brother money, just because the family doesn't want to have a homeless relative.

I know that keeps pissing my brother off. 8-)

19 posted on 10/11/2002 9:15:06 AM PDT by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MD_Willington_1976
How badly have the Liberals in Ottawa decimated the Canadian Armed Forces? In 1938, the Cdn army alone had 63,000 men under arms. Plus the navy. The air force hadn't been fully formed yet. In 1945, From a population base of just over 12 million, Canada had sent a MILLION combatants into harm's way.

We had done most of the coastal mop-up, and liberated the low countries while England, Russia, and America chased the Nazi Wehrmacht back to Berlin.

We had the third largest navy on earth.

Today, as we speak, the TOTAL armed personnel in the forces (army, navy and air force combined) is less than 55,000. From a population of just over 30 million.

It's an utter disgrace.

20 posted on 10/11/2002 9:16:55 AM PDT by Don W
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MD_Willington_1976
I've been wondering how long it will take for the rest of Canada to secede from Quebec....
..Or invade it themselves.
21 posted on 10/11/2002 9:56:27 AM PDT by Darksheare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MD_Willington_1976; dd5339
Sounds like Canada is ripe for annexing! But seriously, looks like they've saddled themselves with a liberal who 'loves' his military just like Clinton did... Let us all wish the Canadians good luck in getting rid of the cretin...oops! I meant Chretien...
22 posted on 10/11/2002 11:36:04 AM PDT by Vic3O3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain; Destructor; MichiganConservative; MD_Willington_1976
Seems like there are canadian provicial groups that want to seperate from the rest of canada.


This one wants to form a new country of western provinces:
http://www.westcan.org
(The western provinces have nicer people than quebec)

This one says canada has no reason to exist.
http://www.geocities.com/us_int/USI-Canada.html

I don't know what to make of this one other than it is about an advocate for merging:
http://www.jrn.columbia.edu/studentwork/cns/2002-04-30/518.asp

In the end it works if Canada falls appart and each individual province can become a new star on the flag. The USA would have to "buy out" the pension benefits and Privatize the canadian single payer insurance scheme. The only problem would be amoung leftist who fear individual rights contained in the bill of rights.
23 posted on 10/11/2002 12:38:46 PM PDT by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
Do we have to take Quebec, too? Can't we just go around them?

Couldn't we take Quebec and force them to speak English? tear down all the Frenchie signs?

24 posted on 10/11/2002 12:41:24 PM PDT by TC Rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lost Highway
Yes, they do: and last year, about 2/3rd's of it got repo'd.
25 posted on 10/11/2002 12:50:01 PM PDT by patton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: marktwain; Destructor; MichiganConservative; MD_Willington_1976
Check the animation at the head of this page:

Canada morphes into multiple stars for each province and each becomes part of the USA.

http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/
26 posted on 10/11/2002 12:50:59 PM PDT by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Don W
Give it a couple years & the United States navy will be in charge of the coastal defense of Canada & will go after smugglers right into Canada's ports & when the Canadian govt. tries to make a stink the Sec of State willsimply state for the world to hear that Canada is America great freind BUT it is Not able to defend itself as it has so mismanaged it's affairs & as that is the case the United States Navy is now defacto running Canada's maritime security. That would get a whole lot of folks in the great white north seriously embarassed
27 posted on 10/11/2002 2:15:03 PM PDT by Nebr FAL owner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MD_Willington_1976
Canada is a socialist dictatorship

This does not pass for rationality.

28 posted on 10/11/2002 3:13:33 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson