Canada goes to War
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
Oh 8!
So after all the well deserved criticism of the brits showing up late and with practically nothing they scrape up two more 1970's jets.
Pathetic.
Sure but Blackleaf isn't an ally. I somehow doubt even the British would see him as such.
"1970s" planes which have been massively upgraded several times over the years with all the latest weaponry, including the Brimstone missile, much sought after by the Yankee Doodles because they don't have anything as good as it.
10 Cold War aircraft and one destroyer... and late as usual. The brits are taking a back seat to pretty much every other nation.
What's with this missile only you've been saying it is sought after. We've been using similar missiles for years now. Our old Mavericks are better than that.
Even your own countrymen are laughing at the briddish effort.
The brits are late and are having little if any impact.
What's with this missile only you've been saying it is sought after. We've been using similar missiles for years now. Our old Mavericks are better than that.
Even your own countrymen are laughing at the briddish effort.
The brits are late and are having little if any impact.
Depends how they use them. The Tornados should be better, they are years newer. The SuperHornet would likely be superior to the Tornado. Hopefully, they are on the same side,
I liked Rae when he ran for the Leadership.
Kelly McParland: Justin Trudeau’s failure to launch | National Post
Bob Rae must wish he’d waited a few days before publishing his views on the threat of ISIS, and Canada’s role in dealing with it. If he had, he might not have to figure out how he can make his views sound like they mesh with those of Justin Trudeau, the man who succeeded him as Liberal leader
Notice Mr. Rae did not suggest Canada should withhold military assistance. He took for granted that Canada would need to contribute to such an obvious cause. He simply felt it should go farther than just a military role. And he explained his view in some detail:
There are some who quite mistakenly compare any decision to engage militarily against IS with the invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. This is hardly the same issue. The government of Iraq has asked for military assistance. The regional government of Iraqi Kurdistan has done the same. The Kurdish, Christian, and other minorities in northern Iraq and Syria are under siege. To equate this with the invasion of Iraq over a decade ago is wrong.
Some also say that what is happening in the Middle East is essentially a battle within Islam itself, and that those opposing violent extremists should simply be encouraged to band together. This is a little too easy, since the threat to security doesn’t fall within such simple boundaries.
This is not a holy war, nor is it a crusade. It is about providing tangible help to people and governments who need it. Will it happen elsewhere ? Almost assuredly, yes, because this kind of violence is always testing the resilience of democracy.
This is not about “peace” versus “war”. This is about something different – the collective capacity of governments and international institutions to deal effectively with perpetrators of violence. In some distant future, the rules of engagement and enforcement may be clearer, the capacities of international police forces may be stronger. In the meantime, we have to deal with the worst examples, and the greatest threats. The rule of law requires nothing less.
Two days later Mr. Trudeau rose in the House of Commons to announce the Liberal party would vote against the government’s proposal to offer military assistance, before a debate (demanded by Mr. Trudeau and NDP leader Thomas Mulcair) could take place. In doing so he specifically compared the current situation to the 2003 war.
The 2003 Iraq war was waged on false pretenses and flawed intelligence. It was a mission that destabilized the region, sowed further conflict, cost our allies around three trillion dollars, and cost thousands of people their lives. The world is still dealing with the consequences of that mistake.
.He added that “ we cannot make the wrong decision now because the wrong decision was made then,” but then went on to make the wrong decision.
As Mr. Rae pointed out, the two situations are in no way similar. Canada is responding to the pleas of an elected government for assistance against a terrorist organization that has made specific threats to export its barbaric attacks to Canada. It is aiding brutalized minorities whose very existence is under threat. In his words, “it is about providing tangible help to people and governments who need it.”
Kelly McParland: Justin Trudeau’s failure to launch | National Post
Bob Rae must wish he’d waited a few days before publishing his views on the threat of ISIS, and Canada’s role in dealing with it. If he had, he might not have to figure out how he can make his views sound like they mesh with those of Justin Trudeau, the man who succeeded him as Liberal leader
Notice Mr. Rae did not suggest Canada should withhold military assistance. He took for granted that Canada would need to contribute to such an obvious cause. He simply felt it should go farther than just a military role. And he explained his view in some detail:
There are some who quite mistakenly compare any decision to engage militarily against IS with the invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. This is hardly the same issue. The government of Iraq has asked for military assistance. The regional government of Iraqi Kurdistan has done the same. The Kurdish, Christian, and other minorities in northern Iraq and Syria are under siege. To equate this with the invasion of Iraq over a decade ago is wrong.
Some also say that what is happening in the Middle East is essentially a battle within Islam itself, and that those opposing violent extremists should simply be encouraged to band together. This is a little too easy, since the threat to security doesn’t fall within such simple boundaries.
This is not a holy war, nor is it a crusade. It is about providing tangible help to people and governments who need it. Will it happen elsewhere ? Almost assuredly, yes, because this kind of violence is always testing the resilience of democracy.
This is not about “peace” versus “war”. This is about something different – the collective capacity of governments and international institutions to deal effectively with perpetrators of violence. In some distant future, the rules of engagement and enforcement may be clearer, the capacities of international police forces may be stronger. In the meantime, we have to deal with the worst examples, and the greatest threats. The rule of law requires nothing less.
Two days later Mr. Trudeau rose in the House of Commons to announce the Liberal party would vote against the government’s proposal to offer military assistance, before a debate (demanded by Mr. Trudeau and NDP leader Thomas Mulcair) could take place. In doing so he specifically compared the current situation to the 2003 war.
The 2003 Iraq war was waged on false pretenses and flawed intelligence. It was a mission that destabilized the region, sowed further conflict, cost our allies around three trillion dollars, and cost thousands of people their lives. The world is still dealing with the consequences of that mistake.
.He added that “ we cannot make the wrong decision now because the wrong decision was made then,” but then went on to make the wrong decision.
As Mr. Rae pointed out, the two situations are in no way similar. Canada is responding to the pleas of an elected government for assistance against a terrorist organization that has made specific threats to export its barbaric attacks to Canada. It is aiding brutalized minorities whose very existence is under threat. In his words, “it is about providing tangible help to people and governments who need it.”
Yes we have to do something about thugs in these countries because we are not immune
from them training fighters to destroy our facilities at home. Having said that if we can afford
the war effort we can no longer claim we can't afford post secondary education for our young
people, we can afford to look after seniors, veterans and those on the marginal edge of society.
If we can afford to destroy things with weapons we can afford to enrich the lives of Canadians.
The government must stop taking us backwards and they must cease the dismantling of our
social infrastructure. Me thinks however that that will only happen once the current government
becomes the Canadian Government once again and not Harper's Government as he has laid
claim to.
Even viewing these slim forum vote numbers as unscientific as they are they paint a slight
Canadian picture of what citizens are thinking and if I were Mr Harper I would be careful as
to what he commits too. Most Canadians do not support outright war at the moment and
they will support it less once the discussion is held. As much as i don't like the Tories and I
don't support Harper, this is a genuine case of we had better stop it there than have it here.
from them training fighters to destroy our facilities at home. Having said that if we can afford
the war effort we can no longer claim we can't afford post secondary education for our young
people, we can afford to look after seniors, veterans and those on the marginal edge of society.
If we can afford to destroy things with weapons we can afford to enrich the lives of Canadians.
The government must stop taking us backwards and they must cease the dismantling of our
social infrastructure. Me thinks however that that will only happen once the current government
becomes the Canadian Government once again and not Harper's Government as he has laid
claim to.
Even viewing these slim forum vote numbers as unscientific as they are they paint a slight
Canadian picture of what citizens are thinking and if I were Mr Harper I would be careful as
to what he commits too. Most Canadians do not support outright war at the moment and
they will support it less once the discussion is held. As much as i don't like the Tories and I
don't support Harper, this is a genuine case of we had better stop it there than have it here.
Oh we can afford all of that. Taxes go up. I am OK with that.
And no way in hell will Harper put troops into combat roles.
I excluded the air force from this but they are in a combat role.
True enough. What McParland doesn't say here is that he was one of the primary purveyors of that pretence.
True enough as many were. I cannot recall the name of the reporters working for a paper in Colorado, I think that laid out clearly the lies being fed to the public.
And yes they were attacked nation wide.
Now we are in differing situation.
John Ivison: Trudeau’s support slipping after failing to back mission against ISIS, poll indicates | National Post
OTTAWA — The Liberals have done a good job portraying Stephen Harper as the corkscrew prime minister — cold, sharp and twisted.
The contrast with their own leader, Justin Trudeau, has been stark. While Mr. Harper has been engaged in the murky fog of government, Mr. Trudeau has been telling fables about “sunny ways” – “persuasion is superior to force; kindness trumps aggression.”
Unfortunately for the Liberal leader, though, voters don’t seem to agree that kindness trumps aggression when dealing with the Islamic State of Al-Sham.
A new poll by Nanos Research suggests that the unparalleled lead Mr. Trudeau had established, when Canadians were asked about their preference for prime minister, has been whittled down, after his party opted not to back the government’s plan to send CF-18 jets to Iraq.
What was an eight percentage point lead on the leadership question is now down to just five points. Even that-three point drop in one week is misleading, since the leadership poll is a four-week rolling average.
OTTAWA — The Liberals have done a good job portraying Stephen Harper as the corkscrew prime minister — cold, sharp and twisted.
The contrast with their own leader, Justin Trudeau, has been stark. While Mr. Harper has been engaged in the murky fog of government, Mr. Trudeau has been telling fables about “sunny ways” – “persuasion is superior to force; kindness trumps aggression.”
Unfortunately for the Liberal leader, though, voters don’t seem to agree that kindness trumps aggression when dealing with the Islamic State of Al-Sham.
A new poll by Nanos Research suggests that the unparalleled lead Mr. Trudeau had established, when Canadians were asked about their preference for prime minister, has been whittled down, after his party opted not to back the government’s plan to send CF-18 jets to Iraq.
What was an eight percentage point lead on the leadership question is now down to just five points. Even that-three point drop in one week is misleading, since the leadership poll is a four-week rolling average.
The Typhoon, of which the RAF has ordered 160, will be the best fighter aircraft in the world once it is equipped with the RAF Brimstone missiles that the Tornados currently use.
Ten "Cold War aircraft" that have been massively upgraded with all the latest weaponry - including the much sought after Brimstone missile - and the most powerful air defence destroyer on the planet, which is guarding a US aircraft carrier.
The RAF's Brimstone missile is much sought after by many countries, including the Americans (who are thinking of using it on the Super Hornet) and the French. The missile has a small blast area which minimises collateral damage. The Yanks don't have any missile like it. That's why RAF Tornados, which are equipped with the missile, are able to hit targets that the USAF and other air forces refuse to go after, because they are scared of inflicting collateral damage.
In April 2011, the RAF's Assistant Chief of the Air Staff Air Vice Marshal Baz North reported that the missiles were "being sought by both the United States of America and the French" in the light of Brimstone's success in Libya.
Brimstone Evaluation Trial - YouTube
British Brimstone Missile in Action: A Tank's Worst Nightmare....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo6M1ZQcsh0&feature=player_detailpage
In early 2014 the US Congress' House Armed Services Committee showed interest again in the missile; high-ranking members of the US armed services have stated they "like it" and if they do choose it they "need it out soon". The French Air Force were still thinking about a purchase in March 2012, with a prime consideration being lower collateral damage compared to the AASM. India has made a request for information about integrating Brimstone on their Sukhoi Su-30MKI fleet. MBDA hopes that firings conducted in the U.S. intended for the U.K. to test the feasibility of arming British MQ-9 Reaper UAVs with the missile will persuade the U.S. military to purchase the Brimstone 2. In July 2014, it was revealed that the United States Navy was beginning environmental and integration analysis of the Dual Mode Brimstone for use on the F/A-18 Super Hornet.
We're also laughing at the American effort, too. What effect have your airstrikes had?
Last edited:
America's Awkward Alliance With Turkey Just Got More Awkward - Defense One
On Tuesday, Turkey finally launched its first airstrikes since the United States formally announced its campaign against Islamic State forces in Syria and Iraq. The only catch was that Turkish planes targeted the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (best known as the P.K.K.) in southeastern Turkey rather than Islamic State forces in Syria.
Turkey and the P.K.K. have done decades-long battle over the latter’s aspiration to create a Kurdish state, violence that has only tapered off recently after the two sides signed a ceasefire last spring. The timing of the Turkish airstrikes were meaningful: Syrian Kurds (with the help of American-led airstrikes) are trying to fend off an ISIS advance in nearby Kobani while Washington is trying to wrangle Turkey into finally committing to the fight against Islamic State forces.
Turkey claimed the airstrikes, the first in two years, were prompted by a P.K.K. attack on a military outpost, but as The Times reports, analysts say “Turkey’s leaders see the battle for Kobani mostly as a chance to let two of its enemies duke it out, rather than as a cause for alarm.”
On Thursday, things got a little stranger. The State Department announced that it had held direct talks with the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (P.Y.D.), a Syrian Kurdish group that is linked to the P.K.K. In other words, American diplomats met with the Syrian affiliate of a group that Turkey had just bombed and that the United States has listed as a terrorist organization since 1997.
http://rt.com/news/196828-isis-withdraw-kobani-fight/
Islamic State fighters have been driven out of Kobani, the Kurdish town that straddles the Syrian-Turkish border, after weeks of heavy fighting, according to Kurdish sources speaking to RT.
A Kurdish commander said that ISIS retreated overnight – withdrawing by 2 km east and 9 km west.
The Kurds are now clearing the city. The Islamists have left behind suicide bombers hiding in the ruins of the various buildings in the city.
"We can still hear sporadic gunfire and explosions coming from Kobani," RT's Murad Gazdiev reports from the Turkish-Syrian border.
On Tuesday, Turkey finally launched its first airstrikes since the United States formally announced its campaign against Islamic State forces in Syria and Iraq. The only catch was that Turkish planes targeted the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (best known as the P.K.K.) in southeastern Turkey rather than Islamic State forces in Syria.
Turkey and the P.K.K. have done decades-long battle over the latter’s aspiration to create a Kurdish state, violence that has only tapered off recently after the two sides signed a ceasefire last spring. The timing of the Turkish airstrikes were meaningful: Syrian Kurds (with the help of American-led airstrikes) are trying to fend off an ISIS advance in nearby Kobani while Washington is trying to wrangle Turkey into finally committing to the fight against Islamic State forces.
Turkey claimed the airstrikes, the first in two years, were prompted by a P.K.K. attack on a military outpost, but as The Times reports, analysts say “Turkey’s leaders see the battle for Kobani mostly as a chance to let two of its enemies duke it out, rather than as a cause for alarm.”
On Thursday, things got a little stranger. The State Department announced that it had held direct talks with the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (P.Y.D.), a Syrian Kurdish group that is linked to the P.K.K. In other words, American diplomats met with the Syrian affiliate of a group that Turkey had just bombed and that the United States has listed as a terrorist organization since 1997.
http://rt.com/news/196828-isis-withdraw-kobani-fight/
Islamic State fighters have been driven out of Kobani, the Kurdish town that straddles the Syrian-Turkish border, after weeks of heavy fighting, according to Kurdish sources speaking to RT.
A Kurdish commander said that ISIS retreated overnight – withdrawing by 2 km east and 9 km west.
The Kurds are now clearing the city. The Islamists have left behind suicide bombers hiding in the ruins of the various buildings in the city.
"We can still hear sporadic gunfire and explosions coming from Kobani," RT's Murad Gazdiev reports from the Turkish-Syrian border.
I am so not shocked by this development. lol
ISIS: From guerrillas to conquerors - CNN.com
Given the disorganized state of the ground forces arrayed against them, and the limitations of airpower for rolling back such an enemy, this may well be enough to allow ISIS to maintain control of most of its newly declared Caliphate for a long while yet.
ISIS: From guerrillas to conquerors - CNN.com
Given the disorganized state of the ground forces arrayed against them, and the limitations of airpower for rolling back such an enemy, this may well be enough to allow ISIS to maintain control of most of its newly declared Caliphate for a long while yet.
