Harper unveils Arctic plan
- Thread starter Said1
- Start date
Vanni Fucci said:
Well, it seems global warming is going to be a factor whether we like it or not, and thus we have to deal with the consequences.
Now, it is up for debate how much global warming is the result of human activity, and, if it is, exactly how much we can do about it. One thing for sure the Liberals, backed by the NDP, have done nothing, while the neocon United States has kept GHG emissions increase to one half that of Canada (proportionally)
Perhaps you would like to explain how global warming is the fault of conservatives?
BTW, if you actually read most of my posts, it would be obvious to you that I am not a neocon.
It's interesting that, despite everyone claiming Harper wants to climb up Bush's butt, Harper is the one who seems to understand the significance of US subs wandering at will in our territory.
Martin's team seems utterly unable to show that they understand the point here.
Martin's team seems utterly unable to show that they understand the point here.
Martins liberals are a bunch or idiots and will say absolutely anything popular to get into power. I don't know if you have seen the new Liberal ads attacking Harper.......they pictured Harper and Duceppe (Martin and Layton were there too) together at a holocaust memorial, and suggested that they are planning the breakup of Canada together. I actualy think this ad is one of the first signs of the fall of the liberal empire in Canada.
Lasts election campaign Harper and his party were the ones making the bonehead moves, and it seems the Liberals are making them this time around.
Lasts election campaign Harper and his party were the ones making the bonehead moves, and it seems the Liberals are making them this time around.
Apparently you didn't watch the committee meetings on CPAC. The Conservatives dragged things out, insulted witnesses, questioned the credentials of every pro-environment witness while trying to keep the credentials (or lack of) of the anti-environment witnesses secret, insisted that the anti-enviromental lobby got equal time to the people with real plans, pushed the junk science backed by the oil industry, and just generally did everything possible to slow things down and screw things up.
The NDP did their best to counter the insolent, childish damage that the Conservatives were doing and steer the Liberals away from basing everything on corporate wish lists.
You need to pay more attention to what actually goes on and less attention to the latest spin from the Harperites, Colpy.
Re: RE: Harper unveils Arctic plan
Scare tactics.
The Liberals will do anything to hold onto the common peoples vote. But as the polls show the liberals are looking pretty sluggish. I'm not sure if they can make a come back. Also if they don't become the government I could see the liberal party declaring bankruptcy. I don't usually read the sun but there was a report in it that the Liberal party itself is 30 million in debt. Can you imagin what will happen if the goomer report indigates that the liberals pay back all the money they stole from the country!
Though I'm even more pissed off with Harper taking a very liberal/Joe Clarck move by saying he would not form a coalition government. Dick head. I think our politicians should look at Germany and see what comprimises the left and the right did there to form a moderate government!
Roy said:
Scare tactics.
The Liberals will do anything to hold onto the common peoples vote. But as the polls show the liberals are looking pretty sluggish. I'm not sure if they can make a come back. Also if they don't become the government I could see the liberal party declaring bankruptcy. I don't usually read the sun but there was a report in it that the Liberal party itself is 30 million in debt. Can you imagin what will happen if the goomer report indigates that the liberals pay back all the money they stole from the country!
Though I'm even more pissed off with Harper taking a very liberal/Joe Clarck move by saying he would not form a coalition government. Dick head. I think our politicians should look at Germany and see what comprimises the left and the right did there to form a moderate government!
TenPenny posted:
I'm the one that doesn't "understand the significance of US subs wandering at will in our territory" (waters). Please explain it to me so that I'll be able to see the justification for spending billions of dollars detecting and protesting foriegn submarines in our off-shore waters? I'll need more than "protecting our soverignty". I really doubt they plan to plant a flag and claim it for George II.
As I understand it, Arctic waters are very shallow in the ice-free summer passages. What exactly do we envision foriegn submarines doing there that will harm anyone, least of all us? I'm having some trouble working up paranoia over this, I'd rather see the money spent on fixing our Universal Health Care.
:toothy2:
I'm the one that doesn't "understand the significance of US subs wandering at will in our territory" (waters). Please explain it to me so that I'll be able to see the justification for spending billions of dollars detecting and protesting foriegn submarines in our off-shore waters? I'll need more than "protecting our soverignty". I really doubt they plan to plant a flag and claim it for George II.
As I understand it, Arctic waters are very shallow in the ice-free summer passages. What exactly do we envision foriegn submarines doing there that will harm anyone, least of all us? I'm having some trouble working up paranoia over this, I'd rather see the money spent on fixing our Universal Health Care.
:toothy2:
If the Hon. Leader of the Opposition finds himself to be the Prime Minister of a minority Parliament, then he could well rescind that statement. It would be difficult for the Conservative Party to govern, if it were to be overwhelmed by an overwhelmingly centrist-left Opposition.
Then again, let us not forget that just because the Conservative Party comes up with more seats than the Liberals, so long as no party comes up with a majority, the Rt. Hon. Paul Martin has an opportunity to secure the confidence of the House of Commons before he resigns as Prime Minister.
For example, if the Liberals were to return to the House with 105 seats, and the Conservatives with 125, Mr. Martin would still have the prerogative to secure the confidence of the House before Stephen Harper would be given the opportunity to be appointed. This practice is rare, however, and has only occured once in the history of Canada to my knowledge (correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this convention was exercised by the Rt. Hon. Mackenzie King, Prime Minister of Canada, in 1925). So it's possible, even if the Liberal Party "loses" the election, that they could continue to govern Canada.
Then again, let us not forget that just because the Conservative Party comes up with more seats than the Liberals, so long as no party comes up with a majority, the Rt. Hon. Paul Martin has an opportunity to secure the confidence of the House of Commons before he resigns as Prime Minister.
For example, if the Liberals were to return to the House with 105 seats, and the Conservatives with 125, Mr. Martin would still have the prerogative to secure the confidence of the House before Stephen Harper would be given the opportunity to be appointed. This practice is rare, however, and has only occured once in the history of Canada to my knowledge (correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this convention was exercised by the Rt. Hon. Mackenzie King, Prime Minister of Canada, in 1925). So it's possible, even if the Liberal Party "loses" the election, that they could continue to govern Canada.
Re: RE: Harper unveils Arctic plan
Not only that Paradox. Harper has said he will not form any coilition governments now. Basically he has said he will govern on an issue to issue basis. But I think the thing missing here is the poeple will not have given him perssion to govern alone and with Minsters only from the conservative party I think this parliment would be a short one.
Again I state, Harper should look at Germany and what they did there as a possibility for Canada. A unity government wouldn't be a bad thing. Yes he wouldn't be able to put all his programs threw! But not enough Canadians support his idea's anyway. Thats why we are voting in a minority in the first place.
Hopefully the NDP will pick up enough seats to offset the Liberal loses anyhow. If not we will have to hope on some kind of unity government.
FiveParadox said:
Not only that Paradox. Harper has said he will not form any coilition governments now. Basically he has said he will govern on an issue to issue basis. But I think the thing missing here is the poeple will not have given him perssion to govern alone and with Minsters only from the conservative party I think this parliment would be a short one.
Again I state, Harper should look at Germany and what they did there as a possibility for Canada. A unity government wouldn't be a bad thing. Yes he wouldn't be able to put all his programs threw! But not enough Canadians support his idea's anyway. Thats why we are voting in a minority in the first place.
Hopefully the NDP will pick up enough seats to offset the Liberal loses anyhow. If not we will have to hope on some kind of unity government.
Right on, Here is some more information.
The Manhattan voyage in 1969.
http://gunmitor.notlong.com/
SS Manhattan's 1969 Voyage
During the trip, a symbolic barrel of oil was taken aboard at Prudhoe Bay, AK and the mission declared a success. However, the 55-gallon barrel was the only Arctic crude ever shipped back to the East Coast this way. Plans were abandoned for using the Northwest Passage as a shipping route for Alaskan crude. For while the Northwest Passage was technically possible as a shipping route, its use year-round was deemed unfeasible. The Arctic Passage is a crik, useful for canoes, not modern commerce in large ships.
Would some-one pass this on to an intelligent person in the CPC.
Compiled by Durgan
Durgan, I think this policy was a big plunder by Harper. I know as a conservative it usually goes without saying that you will support a wider roll for the military. But even if we were to spend this money sololy on the military, I'm sure it could be better spent on equipment or menpower to help in peacekeeping and fisheries operations.
Well thats my $3.50
Well thats my $3.50
Timetrvlr said:
You have decided that there is no value in controlling, or having any input, into who is in our waters doing what. So, I assume you must support eliminating the immigration dept and our border guards.
There is something important about being the one who decides who and what happens in your own lands, but since you don't see it, I need to know what your address is. I guess it wouldn't bother you if I come into your house at will.
TenPenny wrote:
Pretty weak argument! How can you assume "you must support eliminating the immigration dept and our border guards"? One has nothing at all to do with the other! We were talking about Arctic waters not land incursions. I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to field landing parties in our Arctic, but if they were, I would support sending a small detachment of Canadian military up there to capture what was left of them.
How big of a landing party could anyone put ashore from a sub and why? Our Arctic territories ar immensly vast, virtually uninhabited and uninhabitable. If the mosquitos didn't get them, the cold and muskeg would. The Arctic is it's own best defense.
Harper is incredibly anxious to piss away billions that can't be justified. Like it or not, the Liberals have done an excellant job of mending our economy so that we are now in really good shape financially. Let's keep the grubby fingers of the Conservatives out of it!
Pretty weak argument! How can you assume "you must support eliminating the immigration dept and our border guards"? One has nothing at all to do with the other! We were talking about Arctic waters not land incursions. I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to field landing parties in our Arctic, but if they were, I would support sending a small detachment of Canadian military up there to capture what was left of them.
How big of a landing party could anyone put ashore from a sub and why? Our Arctic territories ar immensly vast, virtually uninhabited and uninhabitable. If the mosquitos didn't get them, the cold and muskeg would. The Arctic is it's own best defense.
Harper is incredibly anxious to piss away billions that can't be justified. Like it or not, the Liberals have done an excellant job of mending our economy so that we are now in really good shape financially. Let's keep the grubby fingers of the Conservatives out of it!
Timetrvlr said:
So you just dismiss the arctic completely. All you're concerned about is a landing party?
I'm out of here, because you're so woefully incapable of thought, it's pointless. Enjoy your Christmas dinner.
Harper is throwing controversey into the air to avoid talking about opening the Canada Health Act and changing it to allow private practice and additional billing.
I see Harper as another Klien driving his own private agenda behind a head of his own wind.
I see Harper as another Klien driving his own private agenda behind a head of his own wind.
i think hes been able to make his agenda loud and clear these past couple weeks. Health Care will eventually become some sort of two-tier system, even if the Liberals win this election. It does not have to be a bad thing, and Harper is not beating around the bush on this one. There are ways to add onto our health care act to further improve it so EVERYONE will benefit.
Just because some Conservatives who have there heart on wasting tax payers money on nothing. Here... Please tell Harper as well.
http://www.img.forces.gc.ca/adm_im/organization/CFIOG/CFS_Alert/index_e.htm
http://www.img.forces.gc.ca/adm_im/organization/CFIOG/CFS_Alert/index_e.htm
Pretty weak argument! How can you assume "you must support eliminating the immigration dept and our border guards"? One has nothing at all to do with the other! We were talking about Arctic waters not land incursions. I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to field landing parties in our Arctic, but if they were, I would support sending a small detachment of Canadian military up there to capture what was left of them.
...
And without an established base in the area, what would you expect the Canadian soldiers to do, other than operate in the same horrible conditions as the invaders. Should they have a base or a HQ ship, they would do a better job of defending the area.
The Ice-breakers are necessary for our Navy , but it irritates me to see the images of the US sub paraded around like it was breaking news. Anyone who follows naval developments knows that the Yank subs are always up in our Arctic, the same as they were hidden around New Brunswick, and Soviet subs were constantly lurking around Newfoundland hidden beneath Russian trawlers. Militarily, our country is a frickin sieve, and we really do need to beef up our Armed Forces. I just hope the other parties match Harper in his ideas, I'd hate to see the CPC take over the country because they're the only hope for our beleagured military.
...
And without an established base in the area, what would you expect the Canadian soldiers to do, other than operate in the same horrible conditions as the invaders. Should they have a base or a HQ ship, they would do a better job of defending the area.
The Ice-breakers are necessary for our Navy , but it irritates me to see the images of the US sub paraded around like it was breaking news. Anyone who follows naval developments knows that the Yank subs are always up in our Arctic, the same as they were hidden around New Brunswick, and Soviet subs were constantly lurking around Newfoundland hidden beneath Russian trawlers. Militarily, our country is a frickin sieve, and we really do need to beef up our Armed Forces. I just hope the other parties match Harper in his ideas, I'd hate to see the CPC take over the country because they're the only hope for our beleagured military.
