Super Genius
Posts: 1,416 
May 8th, 2007, 12:26 AM
I have to admit I can't believe how expensive this stuff is either. Remotely piloted vehicles should be dirt cheap. Instead of spending hundreds of millions on helicopters and tanks, the Canadian forces should visit the various Remote Control clubs across the country and enlist the services of people who play with this technology as a hobby. How expensive can it be to mount a video camera on a remote controlled airplane? Add a few instruments and an uplink to a satelite and now you have a vehicle which can be flown in Afghanistan be controllers in Canada. Add a little more horse power and the remote controlled aircraft can carry a bomb or a missile. I can't see why these systems should cost more than 30K.
Tanks cost about 30,000K. We could put a 1000 RPVs in the air for the cost of a single tank. The insurgents could shoot them down, but when they do we loose a cheap expendible vehicle and no Canadian soldiers. Tanks have their place, but they aren't the biggest bang for the buck.
I have to admit I can't believe how expensive this stuff is either. Remotely piloted vehicles should be dirt cheap. Instead of spending hundreds of millions on helicopters and tanks, the Canadian forces should visit the various Remote Control clubs across the country and enlist the services of people who play with this technology as a hobby. How expensive can it be to mount a video camera on a remote controlled airplane? Add a few instruments and an uplink to a satelite and now you have a vehicle which can be flown in Afghanistan be controllers in Canada. Add a little more horse power and the remote controlled aircraft can carry a bomb or a missile. I can't see why these systems should cost more than 30K.
Tanks cost about 30,000K. We could put a 1000 RPVs in the air for the cost of a single tank. The insurgents could shoot them down, but when they do we loose a cheap expendible vehicle and no Canadian soldiers. Tanks have their place, but they aren't the biggest bang for the buck.
Member
Posts: 139
May 8th, 2007, 04:53 AM
Earth: You are not wrong in your assumptions, but a trip to Afghanistan by an aircraft might leave it a little travel worn, and out of fuel. Believe it or not, you can build a man carrying plane for under $10,000. Of course, in this age of experts, everything has to be carried to ridiculous extremes. When I see a fighter pilot reduced to the job of controlling a ridiculously overpriced model plane, it makes me want to cry. I suppose my main gripe is the workforce itself, everyone wants to be classified as an expert, when their job was previously regarded as superfulous knowledge for a well trained tradesman. I guess that is what makes these toy planes so expensive, instead of one well trained person building the whole thing, we have to employ 100 plus, so called experts.
Earth: You are not wrong in your assumptions, but a trip to Afghanistan by an aircraft might leave it a little travel worn, and out of fuel. Believe it or not, you can build a man carrying plane for under $10,000. Of course, in this age of experts, everything has to be carried to ridiculous extremes. When I see a fighter pilot reduced to the job of controlling a ridiculously overpriced model plane, it makes me want to cry. I suppose my main gripe is the workforce itself, everyone wants to be classified as an expert, when their job was previously regarded as superfulous knowledge for a well trained tradesman. I guess that is what makes these toy planes so expensive, instead of one well trained person building the whole thing, we have to employ 100 plus, so called experts.
disturber of the peace
Posts: 1,546
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada...after growing up in Thunder Bay, Ontario.
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada...after growing up in Thunder Bay, Ontario.
May 15th, 2007, 01:38 AM
Quoting Tim Hamilton
Um...if you were the gentlemen that posted "Who cares what you think" in my reps...kindly **** off.
What you think of the losses isn't important. The lives being lost are the lives of the soldiers, and those soldiers are overwhelmingly in favor of the mission. It's nice that you seem to want to protect them, but they don't want your protection and they don't need your concern.
You say nothing will be gained to justify the losses, yet the only people who are risking their lives disagree with you and feel it's well worth it. If a solider feels the benefits he can bring to an entire country is the worth the possibility of him dying, who are you to tell him he's wrong? It's not your life, it's theirs, and they feel the losses will be worth it.
You say nothing will be gained to justify the losses, yet the only people who are risking their lives disagree with you and feel it's well worth it. If a solider feels the benefits he can bring to an entire country is the worth the possibility of him dying, who are you to tell him he's wrong? It's not your life, it's theirs, and they feel the losses will be worth it.
Metal King
Posts: 886
Location: Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
Location: Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
May 15th, 2007, 08:56 AM
I got a grey "lol" for something I posted in this thread but it didn't concern me too much, still, seems like a "rep troll" about lately eh?? I "sign" all the stuff I drop on folks just cos I'm not a coward like some folks
I got a grey "lol" for something I posted in this thread but it didn't concern me too much, still, seems like a "rep troll" about lately eh?? I "sign" all the stuff I drop on folks just cos I'm not a coward like some folks
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,604
May 15th, 2007, 09:43 AM
What’s the rationale for Afghanistan again?
Let’s see if I’ve got this issue in focus…
A radical Islamic group orchestrates and executes a criminal attack on the WTC. The target was chosen one can reasonably surmise because there isn’t any other suitable symbol of western greed…globalization and economic corruption…capable of symbolizing the depth and breadth of this corruption as eloquently as the financial capital of the city that greed built. (With all apologies to Las Vegas of course)…
NATO agreement declares that if one member nation is attacked that all member nations will be called upon to “defend” against this military incursion….
The United Sates was attacked by a gang of criminals not the attacking military of another nation…Afghanistan/Iraq or any other….
Did Canada send troops to Belfast to assist in quelling the IRA? Did Canada invest in sending troops into any other nation involved in secular violence/turmoil (after the second world war) that wasn’t in some way serving the interests of the United States….Bosnia….
Didn’t the United States organize and arm the mahujadeen in Afghanistan under the aegis of assisting the Afghan people in expelling Soviet troops…now for the narrow of mind and dim of wit…. Were there any other reasons at play why the United States voluntarily involved itself in Afghan Soviet debacle….perhaps a pipeline of some kind….?
So we have the United States supplying arms and intelligence (once again) to a nation for the purposes of protecting the fossil fuel market balance in the world….
East Timor, assasination attempts on Chavez (potential in the mind of the American oil cartels for socialization of petroleum interests in Venezuela)…incursions into Nicaragua to combat the “Red Menace” (included of course an entirely illegal deal for missiles guns and money with the Contras and Iran…brokered through Israel of course…the worlds historical middle-man in everything from slavery to the proliferation of weapons of all kinds…. If the lesson of America with respect to Suharto Pinochet and the Marco’s family wasn’t convincing enough for the Canadian government to invest Canadian lives and money in “regime-change”…assassination attempts and the rape and pilliage of several nations around the world on the many many occasions when the United States was the government instigating and fomenting war and destruction in other nations…..what makes the war in Afghanistan any different?
America our great ally provides WMD to Saddam Hussein…then invades the Iraq nation under the rationale that this government (Saddam Hussein) constituted a “threat to world peace”….
But what can you really expect after all from a nation of sheep like Canadians?
Despite spending one hundred and thirty million dollars to find out that the RCMP and CSIS and the members of parliament responsible for the ineptitude and possibly… corruption that cost 329 lives in the Air India tragedy…that successive Canadian governments have stolen millions from the taxpayer….Liberals padding the Quebec question…
That the petroleum cartels of the United States have established in effect a petroleum monopoly that scams billions into the bank accounts of American petroleum companies…That the loony-tunes of both America and Canada can have their attention swayed from the corruption and ineptitude that both nations call …government….by focusing attention on the “gun” as the source of all evil…..
It’s misdirection all around….and Canadians and Americans lap it up….
Oh yeah…Afghanistan…..a nation (America) that lies to the world can legitimately lay claim to Canadian lives because of the NATO agreement…but this same nation (America) can forgo the nasitness of the Geneva Conventions whenever it feels like it…
Crap….all of it….
What’s the rationale for Afghanistan again?
Let’s see if I’ve got this issue in focus…
A radical Islamic group orchestrates and executes a criminal attack on the WTC. The target was chosen one can reasonably surmise because there isn’t any other suitable symbol of western greed…globalization and economic corruption…capable of symbolizing the depth and breadth of this corruption as eloquently as the financial capital of the city that greed built. (With all apologies to Las Vegas of course)…
NATO agreement declares that if one member nation is attacked that all member nations will be called upon to “defend” against this military incursion….
The United Sates was attacked by a gang of criminals not the attacking military of another nation…Afghanistan/Iraq or any other….
Did Canada send troops to Belfast to assist in quelling the IRA? Did Canada invest in sending troops into any other nation involved in secular violence/turmoil (after the second world war) that wasn’t in some way serving the interests of the United States….Bosnia….
Didn’t the United States organize and arm the mahujadeen in Afghanistan under the aegis of assisting the Afghan people in expelling Soviet troops…now for the narrow of mind and dim of wit…. Were there any other reasons at play why the United States voluntarily involved itself in Afghan Soviet debacle….perhaps a pipeline of some kind….?
So we have the United States supplying arms and intelligence (once again) to a nation for the purposes of protecting the fossil fuel market balance in the world….
East Timor, assasination attempts on Chavez (potential in the mind of the American oil cartels for socialization of petroleum interests in Venezuela)…incursions into Nicaragua to combat the “Red Menace” (included of course an entirely illegal deal for missiles guns and money with the Contras and Iran…brokered through Israel of course…the worlds historical middle-man in everything from slavery to the proliferation of weapons of all kinds…. If the lesson of America with respect to Suharto Pinochet and the Marco’s family wasn’t convincing enough for the Canadian government to invest Canadian lives and money in “regime-change”…assassination attempts and the rape and pilliage of several nations around the world on the many many occasions when the United States was the government instigating and fomenting war and destruction in other nations…..what makes the war in Afghanistan any different?
America our great ally provides WMD to Saddam Hussein…then invades the Iraq nation under the rationale that this government (Saddam Hussein) constituted a “threat to world peace”….
But what can you really expect after all from a nation of sheep like Canadians?
Despite spending one hundred and thirty million dollars to find out that the RCMP and CSIS and the members of parliament responsible for the ineptitude and possibly… corruption that cost 329 lives in the Air India tragedy…that successive Canadian governments have stolen millions from the taxpayer….Liberals padding the Quebec question…
That the petroleum cartels of the United States have established in effect a petroleum monopoly that scams billions into the bank accounts of American petroleum companies…That the loony-tunes of both America and Canada can have their attention swayed from the corruption and ineptitude that both nations call …government….by focusing attention on the “gun” as the source of all evil…..
It’s misdirection all around….and Canadians and Americans lap it up….
Oh yeah…Afghanistan…..a nation (America) that lies to the world can legitimately lay claim to Canadian lives because of the NATO agreement…but this same nation (America) can forgo the nasitness of the Geneva Conventions whenever it feels like it…
Crap….all of it….
disturber of the peace
Posts: 1,546
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada...after growing up in Thunder Bay, Ontario.
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada...after growing up in Thunder Bay, Ontario.
May 15th, 2007, 02:10 PM
Actually I should start signing as well. I haven't been. It's not so much that it bothers me...well, it does, to be honest...but, it's unfortunate. He can disagree with me, and he can express that in the reps...but, you know...well...I think you know...
Actually I should start signing as well. I haven't been. It's not so much that it bothers me...well, it does, to be honest...but, it's unfortunate. He can disagree with me, and he can express that in the reps...but, you know...well...I think you know...
Metal King
Posts: 886
Location: Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
Location: Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
May 15th, 2007, 04:32 PM
I know, I know..
Back on topic now then shall we??
MikeyDB- as usual, an almost cubic slab of arranged material, much of it totally pertinent
I agree with the summation tho, entirely- "crap"
The whole "new government" promise of "transparency and accountability" is the sham many feared it would be, the treatment of practically every aspect of the "war" is shabby beyond belief.
The "war" should be blocking Harper from a lot more than just a majority government- I do believe it should block Harper from claiming much beyond a strong interest in supporting the military-industrial complex.
Humanitariansim?? Nope. Altruism?? Nope.
The desire (and heck, actual stated F-ING "goal") to allow women to not wear a Burkha, to send "little girls to school for the first time", to "free the people of Afghanistan from the rule of ruthless dictators"??
ALL LIES
Still don't know what we're doin there, but it's only a matter of time before we (by way of Co OR O mission) actually are guilty of war crimes
Pure Crap
OH and fore the F-ing stupid areseholes who will no doubt slam this post for "not offering solutions" WE NEED TO GET THE HELL OUT OF THERE AND A LOT OF OTHER PLACES LIKE HAITI AND GET TO THE ACTUAL BUSINESS OF MONITORING THREATS AND CONTAINING THEM ABROAD AND THEN SERIOUDLY TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN F-ING COUNTRY AND CITIZENS HEREIN
So SHUT UP about no options- I'm sure the loudmouths will not like my suggestion but there is no disputing that it IS an "option" and I HAVE tabled it along with my gripes
So you can stuff the "they offer no solutions" garbage right up your pucker
I know, I know..
Back on topic now then shall we??
MikeyDB- as usual, an almost cubic slab of arranged material, much of it totally pertinent
I agree with the summation tho, entirely- "crap"
The whole "new government" promise of "transparency and accountability" is the sham many feared it would be, the treatment of practically every aspect of the "war" is shabby beyond belief.
The "war" should be blocking Harper from a lot more than just a majority government- I do believe it should block Harper from claiming much beyond a strong interest in supporting the military-industrial complex.
Humanitariansim?? Nope. Altruism?? Nope.
The desire (and heck, actual stated F-ING "goal") to allow women to not wear a Burkha, to send "little girls to school for the first time", to "free the people of Afghanistan from the rule of ruthless dictators"??
ALL LIES
Still don't know what we're doin there, but it's only a matter of time before we (by way of Co OR O mission) actually are guilty of war crimes
Pure Crap
OH and fore the F-ing stupid areseholes who will no doubt slam this post for "not offering solutions" WE NEED TO GET THE HELL OUT OF THERE AND A LOT OF OTHER PLACES LIKE HAITI AND GET TO THE ACTUAL BUSINESS OF MONITORING THREATS AND CONTAINING THEM ABROAD AND THEN SERIOUDLY TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN F-ING COUNTRY AND CITIZENS HEREIN
So SHUT UP about no options- I'm sure the loudmouths will not like my suggestion but there is no disputing that it IS an "option" and I HAVE tabled it along with my gripes
So you can stuff the "they offer no solutions" garbage right up your pucker
Bright Spark
Posts: 417
October 5th, 2007, 02:00 AM
The mission in Afghanistan has UN backing, but the US has lost interest there-they were the ones who asked for the UN to support their invasion. So Cdns wonder, "Why are we in Afghan if the Americans have lost political interest there?" I feel a bit ripped off.
Yet, a few thousand US troops from Iraq would knock back the Taliban a step or two and help rectify the situation. Say 25,000. But are they coming? Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
The mission in Afghanistan has UN backing, but the US has lost interest there-they were the ones who asked for the UN to support their invasion. So Cdns wonder, "Why are we in Afghan if the Americans have lost political interest there?" I feel a bit ripped off.
Yet, a few thousand US troops from Iraq would knock back the Taliban a step or two and help rectify the situation. Say 25,000. But are they coming? Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,680
October 5th, 2007, 06:04 AM
1.) If we left Afghanistan it would not "stabilize"
It wasn't stabilized when we went in, it was in a massive civil war.
2.) We cannot rebuild without fighting. The Taliban are like violent Amish, they don't want our secular and blasphemous schools, hospitals or anything of the sort.
3.) France and Germany take less casualties because they don't fight. They also don't help in any policing (peacekeeping) duties nor do they do any reconstruction.
1.) If we left Afghanistan it would not "stabilize"
It wasn't stabilized when we went in, it was in a massive civil war.
2.) We cannot rebuild without fighting. The Taliban are like violent Amish, they don't want our secular and blasphemous schools, hospitals or anything of the sort.
3.) France and Germany take less casualties because they don't fight. They also don't help in any policing (peacekeeping) duties nor do they do any reconstruction.
A Mad Mulligan
Posts: 2,766
Videos: 3
Location: The Moonsine Cafe
Videos: 3
Location: The Moonsine Cafe
October 5th, 2007, 07:06 AM
The Afghans need to step up here. There needs to be an end to the massive coruption of the Afghan government too.
The Afghans need to step up here. There needs to be an end to the massive coruption of the Afghan government too.
Hawkings former plumber
Posts: 8,422
Videos: 1
Location: RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia Drive Apt 911
Videos: 1
Location: RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia Drive Apt 911
October 5th, 2007, 07:48 AM
If the Afghans could "step up" who would they step up against? They've been stepping up for thirty years that I can remember and everytime they've been slapped down by the same pinstripped pirates and murderers presently occupying the land under the cover of benevolent reconstruction by munitions. The corruption of the Afghan government is a necessary condition of any western reconstruction, it mirrors in a crude way the corruption of the occupying nations.
Quoting Unforgiven
The Afghans need to step up here. There needs to be an end to the massive coruption of the Afghan government too.
If the Afghans could "step up" who would they step up against? They've been stepping up for thirty years that I can remember and everytime they've been slapped down by the same pinstripped pirates and murderers presently occupying the land under the cover of benevolent reconstruction by munitions. The corruption of the Afghan government is a necessary condition of any western reconstruction, it mirrors in a crude way the corruption of the occupying nations.
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,604
October 5th, 2007, 08:02 AM
There was another little war raging a few years back, it was called VietNam, and a whole lot of people here and there thought it was the thing to do....
Because a jarhead/grunt/E2 etc. "thinks" he's doing something for a just cause or "doing the right thing", that isn't necessarily the case. The gung-ho "be all you can be" , "better dead than red", mindset for killing is drummed into young people who're regarded by their families communities and local friends as "serving" the greater interests of the majority....
This has been the case in many conflicts so I can't say it's a falsehood, but like South East Asia and many other "actions" by Canadians and Americans, its all hype to keep the machinery of arms production and nationalism humping along while a select few make millions.
Harper doesn't have a clue about "foreign policy" nor has he any experience of living through the kind of life he's claiming as a "moral victory".
It's hogwash no matter what way you look at it.
Leave Afghanistan and let those people deal with their own problems.
Quoting Tim Hamilton
Tim..greetings!
What you think of the losses isn't important. The lives being lost are the lives of the soldiers, and those soldiers are overwhelmingly in favor of the mission. It's nice that you seem to want to protect them, but they don't want your protection and they don't need your concern.
You say nothing will be gained to justify the losses, yet the only people who are risking their lives disagree with you and feel it's well worth it. If a solider feels the benefits he can bring to an entire country is the worth the possibility of him dying, who are you to tell him he's wrong? It's not your life, it's theirs, and they feel the losses will be worth it.
You say nothing will be gained to justify the losses, yet the only people who are risking their lives disagree with you and feel it's well worth it. If a solider feels the benefits he can bring to an entire country is the worth the possibility of him dying, who are you to tell him he's wrong? It's not your life, it's theirs, and they feel the losses will be worth it.
There was another little war raging a few years back, it was called VietNam, and a whole lot of people here and there thought it was the thing to do....
Because a jarhead/grunt/E2 etc. "thinks" he's doing something for a just cause or "doing the right thing", that isn't necessarily the case. The gung-ho "be all you can be" , "better dead than red", mindset for killing is drummed into young people who're regarded by their families communities and local friends as "serving" the greater interests of the majority....
This has been the case in many conflicts so I can't say it's a falsehood, but like South East Asia and many other "actions" by Canadians and Americans, its all hype to keep the machinery of arms production and nationalism humping along while a select few make millions.
Harper doesn't have a clue about "foreign policy" nor has he any experience of living through the kind of life he's claiming as a "moral victory".
It's hogwash no matter what way you look at it.
Leave Afghanistan and let those people deal with their own problems.
October 5th, 2007, 08:44 AM
A corrupt government is inevitable when you overthrow a regime and basically inject democracy. Baby steps.....they didn't have to fight for what they have now, how can we expect them to just accept us lecturing them on what they should do because of something we ultimately did?
A corrupt government is inevitable when you overthrow a regime and basically inject democracy. Baby steps.....they didn't have to fight for what they have now, how can we expect them to just accept us lecturing them on what they should do because of something we ultimately did?
