The "LOLCANADA" thread...again
So what's new?
I've noticed the Liberals are now ahead in all major polls and Trudeau hasn't even started to campaign yet...i'd be shocked if they lost the election now.
Just shows just how incompetent Conservatives are.
Btw lozen u love speaking at that 2% target for nato and I will adress it since u seem to think you have found something substantial…..
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6817309
The 1990s and the dissolution of the Soviet Union saw those numbers fall off a cliff. Defence budgets were gutted and Canada was spending about 1.2 per cent of GDP on defence — which is where roughly where the defence budget stands today.
Simple question lozen .
If Russia isn’t a problem like u claim and we shouldn’t do anything about it .
Why u complain about the % target when it is the same today as if the 1990s with no Russia threat ?
Consequently, the two per cent target has been, throughout most of its existence, more of a suggestion than an actual target. Many countries, Canada included, largely ignore it.
It was 2006 before the precise pledge figure was first mentioned in a NATO document (at the Ministerial Guidance of the Defence Planning Committee).
"Although the target is not mentioned in the summit declaration of the 2006 NATO summit in Riga, the heads of state and government made an oral pledge even then," researcher Karl-Heniz Kamp wrote in a German academy policy paper entitled Myths Surrounding the Two Per Cent Debate: On NATO defence spending.
All that changed in 2014 with Russia's invasion of Crimea. At the NATO summit in Wales in 2014, the alliance communique said that NATO members whose contribution was below two per cent "must move towards it" over the next decade — by next year, in other words. At the time, Canada was spending only 0.9 percent of its GDP on defence.
Any reason we never hear complain about that talking point when Harper or Mulroney were PM ?
Ah yes it’s Trudeau , so now it’s bad …..
What exactly is the point of the NATO 2% target if you refuse to join the rest of NATO in sending weapons to support ukraine decimate the armies of NATO's #1 enemy?
Like you can't be both mad at Trudeau for not achieving a 2% target AND mad at Trudeau for wasting money on Ukraine. The contradictions and leaps of logic your worldview has to go through to stay alwayas mad at Trudeau is amazing.
+1 but lozen logic isn’t what it use to be , before he became an adept of Qanon and MAGA.
That covid crisis did mess up a lot of people .
What exactly is the point of the NATO 2% target if you refuse to join the rest of NATO in sending weapons to support ukraine decimate the armies of NATO's #1 enemy?
Like you can't be both mad at Trudeau for not achieving a 2% target AND mad at Trudeau for wasting money on Ukraine. The contradictions and leaps of logic your worldview has to go through to stay alwayas mad at Trudeau is amazing.
This is correct. We can be mad at Trudeau because he faked wanting to help Ukraine, without actually helping it much. IE the worst of both world.
Truly an horrible individual
It's simply not accurate to describe Canadian military aid to Ukraine as just a bunch of equipment we were going to mothball anyway. A lot of it has been spent on the procurement of brand new military equipment. For example, of the 40,000 rounds of 155mm ammunition for the M777 Howitzer half came from existing stock, and half we purchased from the US. A National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System at a cost of 406 million was purchased from the US. 200 Armored Vehicles were purchased through procurement at a cost of 92 million. 39 armoured combat vehicles were procured. And of the equipment which we did have, most of it is presumably getting replaced anyway, so the taxpayer is on the hook again.
Haven't you people learned anything from history? Look at what happened when Obama et. al decided to intervene in Syria. There is always some bad person in the world doing some bad thing. What you people are advocating for is perpetual war for perpetual peace. Foreign intervention, even "just" in the form of military aid, has unintended consequences. Efforts to destabilize the Assad regime simply lead to millions of Syrians being displaced and a civil war that saw hundreds of thousands of casualties. And this is just the latest interventionist disaster. Sending military equipment to Ukraine is causing the needless death and suffering of the Ukrainian people, in order to bleed the Russians. That is the real intent behind the military aid, not to enable the Ukranians to win, but to ensure that the Russians endure a devastating war of attrition a la the Afghan trap of the 1980s (ironically a trap the United States would walk into themselves two decades later). Absent the aid, Zelensky would have been forced to settle the war long ago, or have been defeated already. Either way the war would be over and the people of the region could go about resuming their lives.
It's none of our business what goes on in the middle east, or Kyiv, and the Canadian taxpayer shouldn't be forced to subsidize idiotic geopolitical power struggles. The Trudeau Liberals have bankrupted Canada, and it is going to be up to the next government to start picking up the pieces of returning our nation to a state of fiscal stability and prosperity. This means dramatic reduces to all areas of government spending. Reducing the size and scope of the state, and looking into other means of balancing the budget and financing tax cuts, like the privatization of crown corporations, the sale of crown land and government buildings (once the bureaucrats within them are fired), salary reductions for the public service, putting an end to junkets, and otherwise looking for creative ways to reduce government expenditures.
Suppose the west chose not to arm Ukraine as you seemingly desire. Now all of Ukraine is taken over by Russia, and they (and the rest of the world) know that there is zero consequences to militaristic aggression in the isolationist dystopia you advocate for. Which country do you think they take over next? And which one after that? And at what point do you dig your head out of the sand and recognize that there is a moral imperative to support the defense of nations like Ukraine even were it not for the obvious benefits it has to the west to prevent such aggression.
Ultimately, Canada despite low deficit to GDP numbers, and despite low NATO contributions, still is only spending (yes, including procurement) a tiny fraction of its annual military budget on Ukraine. If you only care about cost, the bang for the buck at decimating Russian offensive capacities for a generation is remarkable.
It's simply not accurate to describe Canadian military aid to Ukraine as just a bunch of equipment we were going to mothball anyway. A lot of it has been spent on the procurement of brand new military equipment. For example, of the 40,000 rounds of 155mm ammunition for the M777 Howitzer half came from existing stock, and half we purchased from the US. A National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System at a cost of 406 million was purchased
remember when US didnt intervene in europe from 1939-42 ans how costly it was ?
at the beginning it was one country and then 2 ,etc..
to believe putin is benevolent is incredibly naive.
U seem to think letting invading countries by dictator is a good thing.
u must be very young if u think a big russia is a good thing for the world.
As for trudeau bankrupting canada lol...
Canada still has one of the best debt ratio compare to its economy in the developed world.
Stop drinking the koolaid...
U know europe are good allies to us, i dont understand why u think having allies is a bad thing ????
but fwiw u are right in one thing.
Obama was terrible in the conflict with syria.
the red line fiasco created lots of problem and he didjnt had the balls to finish the jobs.
Putin saw that and took that occasion to invade Crimea not long after....knowing obama was weak.
that is what dictator do, they see weakness and they go forward.
what u think happened in ukrayne aftwerwards in 2022 ?
putin thought NATO was weak , thx to trump... and Putin invaded in 2022 thinking Trump had made a good job destabilizing NATO.
Ho boy what a surprise Putin got tho....
But as you letting those people (XI in China) , Putin, etc. is a very bad idea....
fwiw look at what China is doing presently in the south China sea while the US is too Busy with Russia and other issues at home....
they bullying the entire region , not respecting international laws and trying to gain domination on all the maritimes commerce access and militarizing many little island for that issue.
You probably have no idea how profitable for Canada the world is when the west, lead by the US, control the world economy and to what extent...
The US did intervene in 1939 , 1940, 1941 (sending MASSIVE aid to UK, France, and Russia) even before joining WW2 as a participant in full (which only happened because of Pearl Harbor).
remember when US didnt intervene in europe from 1939-42 ans how costly it was ?
at the beginning it was one country and then 2 ,etc..
to believe putin is benevolent is incredibly naive.
U seem to think letting invading countries by dictator is a good thing.
u must be very young if u think a big russia is a good thing for the world.
As for trudeau bankrupting canada lol...
Canada still has one of the best debt ratio compare to its economy in the
Destabilizing NATO Trump held all the countries accountable and we saw more countries step up with their 2% commitment. Also Trump supplied Ukraine with weapons while Obama gave them blankets
Its amazing we cry over 20,000 -30,000 Palestine's many who sympathize with Hamas like Uke yet no calls for ceasefires or stop sending weapons to Ukraine were the death tolls are staggering
Destabilizing NATO Trump held all the countries accountable and we saw more countries step up with their 2% commitment. Also Trump supplied Ukraine with weapons while Obama gave them blankets
Its amazing we cry over 20,000 -30,000 Palestine's many who sympathize with Hamas like Uke yet no calls for ceasefires or stop sending weapons to Ukraine were the death tolls are staggering
the pro-Russian disinformation from you is staggering. I never expected this level of treasonous cheering for the enemy and uncritically repeating the talking points their bots on social media repeat. Very sad to see.
Lozen, stopping sending weapons to Ukraine is equivalent to Ukraine not existing. Is that what you want? The comparison to Palestine is inept.
And no, the Obama administration did a lot of work supporting Ukraine with weapons not blankets after the invasion of crimea and Donbas, although I believe their escalation management philosophy failed and they should have done more, it is a lie to act as if they did nothing. As for Trump, Trump was ****ing terrible at supporting Ukraine and his destabilizing actions on NATO may well have further enabled Putin. Stop spreading lies.
Trump pushing European countries to spend more on their militaries hasn't helped Russia jfc.
Obama started operation Atlantic resolve, and Trump kept it in full continuity with the Obama admin on that topic.
Big Bi-election tonight hope the liberals hold onto the seat because if they lose it Trudeau may be done
lozen, why do you keep ignoring your russian disinformation about recent NATO countries having nuclear weapons?
You said it.
Why are you ignoring it?
lozen, why do you keep ignoring your russian disinformation about recent NATO countries having nuclear weapons?
You said it.
Why are you ignoring it?
I’m not ignoring sadly you do not realize neither you nor I has no clue which NATO countries have weapons based on them
Sadly you can’t comprehend that fact
Yet you keep believing Justin that 8 out of 20 families get more back than they pay totally false
So one sec, your Russian propaganda was based on something you have “no clue” on?
Why did you say it then?
As for me, well I’m fully aware of the public information that lists the five NATO countries that have us tactical nukes - none of them newly ascended nato countries - and hence why I knew your claim was nonsense.
Destabilizing NATO Trump held all the countries accountable and we saw more countries step up with their 2% commitment. Also Trump supplied Ukraine with weapons while Obama gave them blankets
Its amazing we cry over 20,000 -30,000 Palestine's many who sympathize with Hamas like Uke yet no calls for ceasefires or stop sending weapons to Ukraine were the death tolls are staggering
That post make no sense at all ….
First , trump was not even president when Russia invade Ukraine .
Second why Putin invade ? Because he didn’t want Ukraine to be armed with western weapon correct and join NATO right ?
And now you say trump was great for Ukraine by arming with stronger weapon that was unacceptable to Putin ?
So in a sense trump gave putin cause to start this war I suppose lol ….
Yes , trump by menacing to put an end to nato , regardless of the reasons , is a destabilizing act .
I have no idea how is that controversial at all.
That post make no sense at all ….
First , trump was not even president when Russia invade Ukraine .
Second why Putin invade ? Because he didn’t want Ukraine to be armed with western weapon correct and join NATO right ?
And now you say trump was great for Ukraine by arming with stronger weapon that was unacceptable to Putin ?
So in a sense trump gave putin cause to start this war I suppose lol ….
Yes , trump by menacing to put an end to nato
Trump was president after Russia invaded Ukraine. Do you not remember the phone call that led to the Dems trying to impeach ?
Putin was not warranted to invade Ukraine but we can speculate why
No I said Trump provided some weapons . The key point is Putin invaded Ukraine under two Democratic Presidents and not Trump.
There is no justification for why he invaded Ukraine . Could it have been prevented? All we can do is speculate
How bad are the Liberals scrambling today? I just hope they don't do anymore damage before they get punted from the Federal office.
I'm not sure resigning is the right move. While not much has changed on policy, it is clear that in the inflation era that angst rightly or wrongly - I think largely the latter - has made the Liberals entirely untenable in the next election. Perhaps worse than 2011. But I don't know that stepping down and putting a new person is going to change that. I think it might accomplish nothing more than just burning a potential future candidate. I think hanging on for the next year, keep the clear policies moving in the right direction as they have been, take the L and build back with a new leader is the right move. Liberal insiders will definitely be split on that one.
Trump was president after Russia invaded Ukraine. Do you not remember the phone call that led to the Dems trying to impeach ?
Putin was not warranted to invade Ukraine but we can speculate why
No I said Trump provided some weapons . The key point is Putin invaded Ukraine under two Democratic Presidents and not Trump.
There is no justification for why he invaded Ukraine . Could it have been prevented? All we can do is speculate
Crimea was invaded in 2014 , trump too office in 2017 .
No idea what you talking about .
If u don’t get Putin wanted a demilitarized Ukraine and by arming Ukraine , trump did create problems . What else can I tell you .
Yes Putin invade Ukraine during democrat presidents so what ?
WTF did Joe Biden did different then trump to entice Putin to invade ?
You think Putin decided just like that , in 3 months to go into war on his borders ? Really ?
It was probably something he prepared over a long period ….
Help by Ukraine getting arms , perception nato being weakened , bad military intel to Putin , and other economic reasons .
