I will agree with your statement regarding Vets - but the rest should be in another thread - Thank you for supporting our Veterans.
Veterans wanted dead, not alive, ombudsman charges
- Thread starter Bcool
- Start date
Sorry, I only mentioned those other gripes to underscore how I feel after having listened to Col. Strongran.
Those other points had me ticked off enough already, some more seriously than others, but now I'm mad.
It's inhumane to think of anything less than provide vets with proper care, and it's hammering at the fundamentals of a nation to threaten its ability to maintain healthy forces by creating an incentive for people who would otherwise be naturals for the forces to not sign up.
Last edited:
~~~~snipping a good post only for brevity~~~~
(And you have nothing to apologize for IMO, your post is very appropriate. It's being too damned PC that has let this shameful behaviour happen under our watch in the first place.)
RIGHT ON!! Well said!
Last edited:
Lots of us are more than ticked at Harper - But where I live you could run a Yellow Dog under the Conservative Party and the Dog would get elected.
I grew up in Alberta, so I know of what you speak.
In my Bible-belt part of the province, the joke among the "enlightened minority" (as we'd jocularly describe ourselves) was that "Jesus Christ Himself could not get elected if He didn't run as a conservative", to which, if they overheard us, the mode-locals would respond, "Well, He would not *not* run as a conservative, now would He?"
*sigh*
The irony is, sometimes, in my early 20's, just for a joke, I'd talk to mode-Albertans (by 'mode I mean statistical 'mode', as in 'mean', 'mode', and 'median') about Christianity, and I'd invent fictional Biblical passages just to see if they'd actually read it (which I had, cover-to-cover, twice by that time) and they *never* caught me... not once! It would have been funnier except it was a joke where I was the only one getting it.
So many people in the rest of the country have no idea what they've got there in the form of Harper and Stockwell Day, who's core constituents are mode-Albertans professing devotion to The Word yet cannot tell when they are being fed false scripture... leading to bizarre incongruities like: if there's any Party on the planet one would expect to have a proper policy for taking care of vets, it's the reformed-Reform (aka Conservative) Party...
Yet they don't!
You know, there's a sort of "hierarchy of needs" for nations analogous to how there's a Hierarchy of Needs for individuals (Here's a link to the one defined by Maslow for humans as individuals Maslow's hierarchy of needs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
Has anyone every actually defined a "Heirarchy of Needs for a Nation"? If not, we should do some research to define one, starting with launch a thread and cast the net for wisdom to get some starting points...
But whether or not it's been done already, I know intuitively that there is a Heirarchy of Needs for a Nation, which way at the top has things like an ability to be tolerant and just, then beneath that would be things like fair and adequate economic opportunities for all, etc. etc., until finally you get to the base, and at the base is an ability for the nation to define and defend a border.
Some people will say that forces are irrelevant when faced with an overwhelming opponent against whom one is theoretically guaranteed to loose, therefore why bother having forces; but that's not the point...
The point is, if you invade, you're going to get punched, as hard as we can, so you'd better be very sure you know what you're doing and that you know it's going to have been worth it.
In order to maintain strong, healthy forces, you need good soldiers; the kind who are naturals.
It doesn't matter how technically sophisticated things get; somewhere at the core is a soldier facing the enemy. It doesn't matter if they put up satellites to enable remote control of robots controlled by kids in bunkers at Namao; at some point the satellites are going to get shot down and somebody is going to have to put on a helmet and pick up a rifle.
And you're not going to get enough of the right kind of soldiers if you don't do your part and guarantee they get taken care of if they get hurt.
Last edited:
Of course Harper people are going to bully the people least equipped to fight.... Harper people are the same sort that annointed Mike Harris and his peculiar version of Common Sense. Three of his horsemen have found places in the Harper camp. Provincial governments attack the poor and disabled in the same fashion. Why attack people who make news? Why attack where the waste really lives? It's easier to fight poverty by killing off the poor than to actually investigate the roots of the problem - because the root is Government.
Ever notice how, by looking at just the results, it's very difficult to tell the difference between Stupidity and Evil?
As far as I can tell, the only way to tell the difference is by looking at whether or not the perpetrators move to cover their butts. Those operating from a position of Evil will try to cover their butts, whereas those operating from a position of Stupidity get caught up in the consequences of their actions with befuddlement...
In either case, whether Stupid or Evil, the results of their actions on everyone and everything around them are the same.
Isn't there something in our constitution about Peace, Order and Good Government?
I know that it wouldn't be like the US, where they can turf out a President for having violated their Constitution through appeals to the Senate and Supreme Court, but shouldn't we be able to get the same result by going to the Governor General with petitions that the government is creating disorder and is not doing good government, so she'll dismiss the Prime Minister? (Or go to a lieutenant governor of a province and have a bad Premier dismissed.)
And yes Goober, I know that's off-thread, sorry, but I felt compelled to respond to lone wolf's observations... so, back to the thread...
The main thread-line being...
If Harper isn't going to fix the problem with the the vets, I want to see him dismissed as Prime Minster. I'm that mad.
Anyone else find it odd, that people who want our Air Force to continue flying outdated and near antiquated aircraft, are suddenly outrgaed at the treatment of Soldiers?
Apart from that tid bit of enlightened hypocrisy from the enlightened class.
The process for treating wounded Soldiers hasn't changed much in almost 50 years. I haven't served in almost 20 years, yet I can still access health care programs the Liberals set up.
And for anyone confused by what i just said, I just gave the Liberals props.
As for condemning Harper. Good grief, where were you people when the Liberals were gutting the Armed Forces, which included treatment health care programs?
Why do you think the treatment of Soldiers has gone down since WWII(LWF)?
Apart from that tid bit of enlightened hypocrisy from the enlightened class.
The process for treating wounded Soldiers hasn't changed much in almost 50 years. I haven't served in almost 20 years, yet I can still access health care programs the Liberals set up.
And for anyone confused by what i just said, I just gave the Liberals props.
As for condemning Harper. Good grief, where were you people when the Liberals were gutting the Armed Forces, which included treatment health care programs?
Why do you think the treatment of Soldiers has gone down since WWII(LWF)?
Last edited by a moderator:
Was and is a horrible suggestion, strip and infer what you will. No doubt made by a 'government employee' earning a nice fat pay cheque & benefits whilst working in a Social Services Ministry department.
How exactly is quoting a headline, a brief sentence from the article and an URL "sensationalizing"?
Who are you talking about? I'm the one who said if they have to spend money on combat craft instead of new patrol craft and new helicopters, then they should have tried to wrangle a deal for the F-22s instead of the F-35s?
I really had been taking it for granted that care for vets was the same now as it had been for WWII vets, whom I've known a few of, one of whom had a permanent lower-back injury that put him on crutches for life, and it really did throw me for a loop me to hear Col. Stogran speak, and I really am pissed off about it, partly because I *didn't* *know*!
It was like the revelations about the native residential schools. It had been going on all around me and yet somehow I didn't know - by nobody talking about it I'm guessing - so it was infuriating to learn.
Most of the vets I know are career air-force Americans, except for one, who's retired career US navy and who's main inconvenience is that he had to retire close to a navy hospital for maintenance treatments, and whether receiving injuries benefits or retired on pension, I don't hear them complaining, so I figured it was at least as good here.
The part that got me most was the revelation about lump-sum payments for a permanent debilitating injury. That's just *wrong* in a real civilization.
Last edited by a moderator:
Only after a litany of your posts were sufficiently made fun of did you pick up on the F 22, an unattainable aircraft.
Ya, that was kept hus hush, but the plight of Vets has tons of coverage over the years.
It is. Could be, should it be better? You bet. Is it all Harpers fault? not bloody likely. Should his gov't be doing something about it? You bet.
Really? Insurance companies have been doing it for eons.
Last edited by a moderator:
I know I'm coming in late here but....
Wasn't the point of the 2005 bill a stop gap measure so that futher study could take place for an all encompassing veterens programme at a later date?
2010 is a later date has there been any progress or outline to alleviate the distress?
Wasn't the "one time pay out" in lieu of pension to be in conjunction with a dedicated effort to hire veterens into permenant positions in the civil service? Or am I misinformed?
Wasn't the point of the 2005 bill a stop gap measure so that futher study could take place for an all encompassing veterens programme at a later date?
2010 is a later date has there been any progress or outline to alleviate the distress?
Wasn't the "one time pay out" in lieu of pension to be in conjunction with a dedicated effort to hire veterens into permenant positions in the civil service? Or am I misinformed?
Nope, you aren't misinformed. But you're thinking clearly. Given the reactionary commentary in this thread, I can see why you might feel like you're out of the loop though.
**************************************************************************************
As usual, some people want to make a political football out of Soldiers.
I find that despicable. Every gov't that has held power in the last 50 years, shares the blame. Not a single one has done anything substantial, to correct the issue of the gaps that SOME Soldiers fall through.
Is it true that some Soldiers get over looked? Yes.
Do some Soldiers try and milk the system? You bet.
Is there room for improvement? Oh you better believe there is.
Is Harper to blame? Partly.
But making this a stick, to beat Harper with, is idiotic, counterproductive and asinine. The whole of Parliament Hill is to blame. Full Stop.
Last edited by a moderator:
I've designed banking systems and know how exponential growth works and I've worked with investment managers and I've *built* systems which are still running in places like Arizona - a very red state, so *don't* try to puke my brain about what's really happening with the money when a one-time payment is made versus life-time regular monthly settlements as a function of anticipated life-expectancy...
None of which matters anyway when it comes to the forces.
To investors, permanently injured soldiers are a non-performing liability, whereas to a civilization, they are heroes, and I'm sorry, but in my opinion, when it comes to vets, civilization trumps your quarterly profits.
None of which matters anyway when it comes to the forces.
To investors, permanently injured soldiers are a non-performing liability, whereas to a civilization, they are heroes, and I'm sorry, but in my opinion, when it comes to vets, civilization trumps your quarterly profits.
Last edited by a moderator:
Good Morning Folks. This Thread is closed until the off-topic
and trolling posts, & and quotes of the same have been
removed.
and trolling posts, & and quotes of the same have been
removed.