Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (1552)	5/28/2003 12:16:02 AM
From: Eashoa' M'sheekha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793572

" I think the further west you go in Canada, the more conservative it gets. " Had she gone any further West,she would have to talk to conservative sea lions.heh heh heh.... But your assumption is indeed wrong Bill. Staunch conservatives dwindle as you leave Alberta and through central BC, and move West towards the Coast.Vancouver and area lean decidedly towards Liberal ideals,as does Vancouver Island. Victoria is the Capital of the Province,but the population and industry base is dwarfed by the Lower Mainland She was in Victoria,a bastion of Socialist and leftist idealogues,and still the epicenter of such thought in Western Canada.It has the major Naval Military Complex,which in the past had been given a very cold shoulder by the locals and not really welcomed by those who thought it was a blemish on their sacred piece of heaven on earth. That changed decidedly when Afghani came on the radar screen and the locals realized, for the first time in their lives for many,that the Military was useful for more than just injecting Federal money into the local econ.Quite an about face actually.That has now subsided with this latest adventure into Iraq,with the vast majority considering it both an illegal and unnecessary adventure. She obviously met people who felt guilt over our self guided decision to go the internationally recognized and legitimate route.They know,as C has pointed out,that they are still friends and neighbours,and much of the industry in Victoria is tourism based,so they would not be eager to disagree or show disregard to American visitors. The papers she sites are both owned by Global,a self assessed conservative leaning network.The Times Colonist, however,has to maintain a balance locally,otherwise go under,like the National Post may. The only real anti-Liberal presence is from a natural central to the Coasts animosity towards Ottawa,much like exists in fly-over country towards Wershinton in the US. There you go Bill.....your geopolitical lesson for the day. You being a Pro And all,thought you might like to have that set straight, lest you appear unprofessional or something…………...;-\|

To: LindyBill who wrote (1552)	5/28/2003 1:35:13 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793572

True to a degree, Bill... BUT then again, nearly all of Canada is socialist...the eastern provinces much more so than the western....AND that alone says something all by itself. The people we talked to were mostly middle class folks....the housekeeping and host staff at the large Inn where we stayed, LOTS of shopkeepers of all sorts, and several folks in an upscale Pub over near the Victoria Golf Club.... <g> Even sat next to a retired professor and his wife...They were more interested in their soda bread than they were us...<another grin> I rather liked his earring. Only ONE guy out of maybe 100 or so folks we chated with was openly irritated with the Americans....and that was because his merchandise was so expensive, you had to be 'belled in'....or have a previously set appointment.... and the Americans just weren't buying like they did a couple of years ago... He was a total kick...told us that since the American market had shut down, that people weren't buying many of the $150,000+ pieces of furniture, etc very often...He seemed to be at odds with his socialist views on one hand and and his business efforts on the other. Spent the last couple of months in England and Europe buying high end reproductions to bring to his shop...LOL! He sorta reminded me of a craggy old replica of an 1800's sailor...

To: LindyBill who wrote (1552)	5/28/2003 1:48:42 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793572

Here's the article I spoke of...number of troops in Canada... McCallum will not hire more soldiers 'The army has a picture of a body, and the old army has a tiny little head and a huge body': Brains better than brawn Sheldon Alberts, Deputy Ottawa Bureau Chief National Post nationalpost.com Monday, May 26, 2003 CREDIT: Kevin Frayer, The Canadian Press There may be fewer Canadian soldiers than 10 years ago but today's forces are smarter and better equipped, Defence Minister John McCallum says. ADVERTISEMENT OTTAWA - John McCallum, the Defence Minister, has rebuffed calls for a dramatic increase in the size of Canada's military and says the army must become a modern rapid-reaction force without a significant boost to its existing 20,000 troops. Despite persistent calls for Ottawa to relieve troop burnout by adding thousands more soldiers to Canada's army, Mr. McCallum says he has not been convinced of the need for a major expansion of the current force. "There is no doubt about the strain on the people, and that is a major concern," Mr. McCallum said in an interview on the eve of today's first anniversary of his appointment as Defence Minister. "But if you replace the old kind of equipment with the modern kind of equipment, you need fewer people. And so some people will be freed up to do other things in the military, in the army. In that sense, you won't necessarily have a larger number of people. If you have the same number of people in a reformed army -- where you have more brain compared with brawn -- effectively you do have more resources." Canada's armed forces, and the army in particular, were hit hard by a decade-long decline in military budgets as the Liberal government fought to eliminate the federal deficit. The country's military force dropped from 88,000 in 1989 to just 61,000 today. Of those, only 52,000 are considered fully trained, effective personnel. The army's ranks had fallen to 20,179 as of March, and the chief of land forces said this spring that Canada is barely capable of fielding a brigade-size force of 3,000 soldiers on overseas missions. The Opposition Canadian Alliance issued a defence policy statement this month calling on the government to restore the size of Canada's regular force to at least 80,000. But Mr. McCallum, who has embraced the concept of "transformation" within the military, said the army's problems are better addressed by updating battlefield technology and replacing Cold War-era equipment like the Leopard tanks, purchased from Germany in the 1970s. He is considering purchasing lighter and more mobile direct-fire weaponry like the Stryker, an eight-wheeled vehicle being introduced into the U.S. military. Recruitment of new personnel will focus more on attracting soldiers with skilled trades and medical qualifications -- areas where the army has struggled to retain experienced people. "The ratio of brain to brawn is increasing. The army has a picture of a body, and the old army has a tiny little head and huge body," Mr. McCallum said. "The new army has a much bigger head and a smaller body." Deborah Grey, a Canadian Alliance defence critic, accused Mr. McCallum of taking half measures. She said the army needs a complete overhaul if it is to survive as a combat-capable force. "Shame on this government that they even talk about serious systemic changes in the military," Ms. Grey said. "They are going to try and slap a new coat of paint on this, and put one more piece of equipment in, and think the whole thing is transformed." Ottawa is adding $1.6-billion in new funding to the military over the next two years.<?b> Mr. McCallum has identified the army as the branch in greatest need of financial assistance, so a larger portion of the new funds will be spent on the land force as opposed to the air force and navy. The decision to forego the purchase of new long-range military transport planes will allow money to be spent on more pressing equipment needs, he said. "I have gone away from the old tradition where every group is treated more or less equally. We can't afford to do that," he said. "We have to make strategic choices. I have said we are not going to do strategic airlift. That frees up some number of billions of dollars for other things." Canada is set to deploy 1,800 troops to Afghanistan in August. Mr. McCallum said outdated equipment like the Leopard tanks would be of little use. The Minister said he wants to "get moving" on the purchase of wheeled direct-fire vehicles, but could not provide a timeline or expected cost. salberts@nationalpost.com © Copyright 2003 National Post