[Tricks]

Chagrin wrote:

Jeez man, calm down. I am not trying to insult you guys, I was just saying you guys really don't have good tech, military wise. Not a jab at Canada.

Really we don't have good tech? So the C7 isn't good tech? The LAV 3s aren't good tech? Oh and by the way, when you insult our military, to me, it's the same as insulting the country.

[Tricks]

Gunnair wrote:

Fair enough, and I'll take it under advisement.

But if I chuck shit at him for being an idiot, then all the idiots on the forum will complain.

Hell I chuck shit at him for being an idiot all the time, but that's because he is one. Just don't blame it on age. There are plenty for 40 year old idiots out there. I work with some!

[Chagrin]

commanderkai wrote:

Chagrin wrote:

Jeez man, calm down. I am not trying to insult you guys, I was just saying you guys really don't have good tech, military wise. Not a jab at Canada.

I joined because I like seeing peoples' opinions outside of my own country. Please realize that I am not trying to rag on Canada, and if you do see me doing that, realize that I'm probably kidding.

Actually our technology isn't that bad anymore. The upgrades and new equipment is coming in, we ordered I think about 100 new battle tanks, and not some shitty T-55s from a warehouse in Ukraine. We also have the Chinooks that and new helicopters to replace the Seakings.

However, the equipment we have is usually at least 20-30 years old. CF-18s, Sea Kings, a majority of our ships (Not as big of a deal though, ships are easier to upgrade). The Conservative government we have now is slowly modernizing our armed forces, there are topics somewhere. I'd recommend searching Chinook.

Glad you didn't misunderstand my post.

But that's good the they got some new technology. Now if they get a few battleships they can patrol the Arctic.

[Chagrin]

Tricks wrote:

Chagrin wrote:

Jeez man, calm down. I am not trying to insult you guys, I was just saying you guys really don't have good tech, military wise. Not a jab at Canada.

Really we don't have good tech? So the C7 isn't good tech? The LAV 3s aren't good tech? Oh and by the way, when you insult our military, to me, it's the same as insulting the country.

Well, please know that when I say you don't have good tech, I am not insulting Canada.

[Tricks]

Mr_Canada wrote:

Point me to where anyone freaks out on you (other then me, or Tricks) for ragging on me for my age.

Hey I didn't freak out, I made a suggestion. Freaking out generally makes it worse.

[Mr_Canada]

rhesusman wrote:

Mr_Canada wrote:

Three?

Ever heard of Mexico?

You actually consider that a large economy? How much confidence in Mexico do you have?

Quote:

1) This is Lou Dobbs. Have you actually watched his show on a regular basis? I would take anything he says with a big salty cube.

2) Did you actually listen to this? How does a border security agreement mean the end of a country? How does harmonizing meat inspection amount to the end of Canada? This sounds to me like a minor trade and border security agreement that Lou Dobbs in his paranoia is blowing out of proportion.

http://www.psp-spp.gc.ca/menu-en.aspx

http://www.stopspp.com/

[Tricks]

Chagrin wrote:

Tricks wrote:

Chagrin wrote:

Jeez man, calm down. I am not trying to insult you guys, I was just saying you guys really don't have good tech, military wise. Not a jab at Canada.

Really we don't have good tech? So the C7 isn't good tech? The LAV 3s aren't good tech? Oh and by the way, when you insult our military, to me, it's the same as insulting the country.

Well, please know that when I say you don't have good tech, I am not insulting Canada.

To me you are. If you said something specific sucks, that's different. But saying that the Canadian military is ill-equipped is quite a generalization.

[Mr_Canada]

Tricks wrote:

Mr_Canada wrote:

Point me to where anyone freaks out on you (other then me, or Tricks) for ragging on me for my age.

Hey I didn't freak out, I made a suggestion. Freaking out generally makes it worse.

True enough.

But you knew what I meant,

[Hyack]

ridenrain wrote:

Why does this keep comming up?
Is this some kind of Anti-American circle-jerk or sometthing?

Quote:

tritium CKA Elite
Posts: 3681 Posted: 2006-05-09, 04:35:54

Who thinks it would be good for Canada to join up with the United States to become a United North America.

How would a North American unification effect Economic, Cultural, Defense, Customs, Political, etc..

http://www.unitednorthamerica.org - web site

http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/phpBB2/index.php - forum

post298683#p298683

Exactly....how many times is he going to bring up the same subject.....

[Chagrin]

Tricks wrote:

Chagrin wrote:

Tricks wrote:

Really we don't have good tech? So the C7 isn't good tech? The LAV 3s aren't good tech? Oh and by the way, when you insult our military, to me, it's the same as insulting the country.

Well, please know that when I say you don't have good tech, I am not insulting Canada.

To me you are. If you said something specific sucks, that's different. But saying that the Canadian military is ill-equipped is quite a generalization.

Well then, forget I said anything if I offended you.

[Tricks]

Chagrin wrote:

Well then, forget I said anything if I offended you.

Hokay!

[commanderkai]

Chagrin wrote:

commanderkai wrote:

Chagrin wrote:

Jeez man, calm down. I am not trying to insult you guys, I was just saying you guys really don't have good tech, military wise. Not a jab at Canada.

I joined because I like seeing peoples' opinions outside of my own country. Please realize that I am not trying to rag on Canada, and if you do see me doing that, realize that I'm probably kidding.

Actually our technology isn't that bad anymore. The upgrades and new equipment is coming in, we ordered I think about 100 new battle tanks, and not some shitty T-55s from a warehouse in Ukraine. We also have the Chinooks that and new helicopters to replace the Seakings.

However, the equipment we have is usually at least 20-30 years old. CF-18s, Sea Kings, a majority of our ships (Not as big of a deal though, ships are easier to upgrade). The Conservative government we have now is slowly modernizing our armed forces, there are topics somewhere. I'd recommend searching Chinook.

Glad you didn't misunderstand my post.

But that's good the they got some new technology. Now if they get a few battleships they can patrol the Arctic.

See Canada's issue is manpower. We could easily afford a battleship or something else, but we don't really have the manpower to run the ship itself. Canadians, in my humble opinion, don't really view the military as a viable option, for a variety of reasons, one of the major ones being our misconceptions of it. Canada's armed forces are about 80,000 members. Most nations of similar wealth and population have...if I remember, at least 100,000. Canada's ships aren't major command ships like carriers or battleships, but more like cruisers and destroyers. If we had 5000 more sailors we can easily afford a carrier, and look quite prestigious. However, with the armed forces lacking, we had to prioritize what we really found useful. Smaller ships, soldiers, jet fighters. Things that are more...selective and specific to our needs

[rhesusman]

Mr_Canada wrote:

You actually consider that a large economy? How much confidence in Mexico do you have?

It's the fourteenth largest economy in the world, so yes, I consider that rather large. The fact that Mexico is on the same continent as the United States and Canada makes it look worse off than it is. Mexico is a lot poorer by North American standards than it is by world standards.

Mr_Canada wrote:

1) This is Lou Dobbs. Have you actually watched his show on a regular basis? I would take anything he says with a big salty cube.

2) Did you actually listen to this? How does a border security agreement mean the end of a country? How does harmonizing meat inspection amount to the end of Canada? This sounds to me like a minor trade and border security agreement that Lou Dobbs in his paranoia is blowing out of proportion.

http://www.psp-spp.gc.ca/menu-en.aspx

http://www.stopspp.com/[/quote]

If the best thing Lou Dobbs could come up with to argue that the SPP spells the end to the United States is harmonization of meat inspection (that seemed to be at the top of his list in the video), I don't think you have a whole lot to worry about. I don't doubt that the SPP exists, but as far as I can see it's a collection of relatively minor trade and security agreements, not the end of Canada and the United States as we know them.

[Chagrin]

commanderkai wrote:

Chagrin wrote:

commanderkai wrote:

Actually our technology isn't that bad anymore. The upgrades and new equipment is coming in, we ordered I think about 100 new battle tanks, and not some shitty T-55s from a warehouse in Ukraine. We also have the Chinooks that and new helicopters to replace the Seakings.

However, the equipment we have is usually at least 20-30 years old. CF-18s, Sea Kings, a majority of our ships (Not as big of a deal though, ships are easier to upgrade). The Conservative government we have now is slowly modernizing our armed forces, there are topics somewhere. I'd recommend searching Chinook.

Glad you didn't misunderstand my post.

But that's good the they got some new technology. Now if they get a few battleships they can patrol the Arctic.

See Canada's issue is manpower. We could easily afford a battleship or something else, but we don't really have the manpower to run the ship itself. Canadians, in my humble opinion, don't really view the military as a viable option, for a variety of reasons, one of the major ones being our misconceptions of it. Canada's armed forces are about 80,000 members. Most nations of similar wealth and population have...if I remember, at least 100,000. Canada's ships aren't major command ships like carriers or battleships, but more like cruisers and destroyers. If we had 5000 more sailors we can easily afford a carrier, and look quite prestigious. However, with the armed forces lacking, we had to prioritize what we really found useful. Smaller ships, soldiers, jet fighters. Things that are more...selective and specific to our needs

Nice, informative post.

I think a few aircraft carriers would do your military some good, maybe have like one or two fo those along with some other ships patrolling the Arctic would maybe intimidate the russkies.

[commanderkai]

Chagrin wrote:

Nice, informative post.

I think a few aircraft carriers would do your military some good, maybe have like one or two fo those along with some other ships patrolling the Arctic would maybe intimidate the russkies.

I totally agree. We just need 5000 sailors, airmen, and support staff...along with support ships, and crew for them...probably needing another 5000 sailors...or 1/8 of our armed forces...See the issue? That's just for the fleet. Then we need support bases, like one already being built there, and then maintenance crews for everything. I'm sure we can do it, but there's no will by the populace to go in the navy itself.