New Ministers of National Defence in Canada

[Andrew Chaplin]

David Pratt, Member of Parliament for Nepean-Carleton, has just been
appointed Minister of National Defence. In a break from usual practice he
has been appointed to the department for which he had the oversight
committee, the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans
Affairs.
http://www.davidpratt.net/bio_temp.htm

Albina Guarnieri, Member of Parliament for Mississauga East, has been
appointed Associate Minister of National Defence and Minister of State
(Civil Preparedness). This is her first cabinet post also.

Anne McLellan, Member of Parliament for Edmonton West, is appointed
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency
Preparedness. She was variously Minister of Justice and Minister of
Health in the Chrétien ministry.
http://www.annemclellan.ca/about.html
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

[Michael P. Reed]

"Andrew Chaplin" > wrote in message >...
> David Pratt, Member of Parliament for Nepean-Carleton, has just been
> appointed Minister of National Defence.

Martin is supposedly for reconstituting* the Canadian Armed Forces.
Is this considered a step in that direction, and have any
general-specifics been laid out as of yet?


* My term.

--
Regards,

Michael P. Reed

[Carter Lee]

Michael P. Reed wrote:
> "Andrew Chaplin" > wrote in message >...
>
>>David Pratt, Member of Parliament for Nepean-Carleton, has just been
>>appointed Minister of National Defence.
>
>
> Martin is supposedly for reconstituting* the Canadian Armed Forces.
> Is this considered a step in that direction, and have any
> general-specifics been laid out as of yet?

Slow down, he was sworn in only today. :^)

Carter

[J_Harmeson]

"Carter Lee" > wrote in message
...
> Slow down, he was sworn in only today. :^)
>
> Carter
>

+ Christmas break, they be back Jan/Feb, the an election could be called
before April.

[Jack]

Martin today says new replacements for Sea Pigs

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/031212/photos_ca_afp/031212210851_kd769xt3_photo0


"Carter Lee" > wrote in message
...
> Michael P. Reed wrote:
> > "Andrew Chaplin" > wrote in message
>...
> >
> >>David Pratt, Member of Parliament for Nepean-Carleton, has just been
> >>appointed Minister of National Defence.
> >
> >
> > Martin is supposedly for reconstituting* the Canadian Armed Forces.
> > Is this considered a step in that direction, and have any
> > general-specifics been laid out as of yet?
>
> Slow down, he was sworn in only today. :^)
>
> Carter
>

[Dewey]

of course the picture (in the yahoo article) is of a serviceable RAF AEW Sea
King.

....i couldn't resist.

dewey


"Jack" > wrote in message
...
> Martin today says new replacements for Sea Pigs
>
>
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/031212/photos_ca_afp/031212210851_kd769xt3_photo0
>
>
> "Carter Lee" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Michael P. Reed wrote:
> > > "Andrew Chaplin" > wrote in message
> >...
> > >
> > >>David Pratt, Member of Parliament for Nepean-Carleton, has just been
> > >>appointed Minister of National Defence.
> > >
> > >
> > > Martin is supposedly for reconstituting* the Canadian Armed Forces.
> > > Is this considered a step in that direction, and have any
> > > general-specifics been laid out as of yet?
> >
> > Slow down, he was sworn in only today. :^)
> >
> > Carter
> >
>
>

[MOOXE]

I get to do the parade next week! yay............yeah


"Jack" > wrote in message
...
> Martin today says new replacements for Sea Pigs
>
>
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/031212/photos_ca_afp/03121221
0851_kd769xt3_photo0
>
>
> "Carter Lee" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Michael P. Reed wrote:
> > > "Andrew Chaplin" > wrote in message
> >...
> > >
> > >>David Pratt, Member of Parliament for Nepean-Carleton, has just been
> > >>appointed Minister of National Defence.
> > >
> > >
> > > Martin is supposedly for reconstituting* the Canadian Armed Forces.
> > > Is this considered a step in that direction, and have any
> > > general-specifics been laid out as of yet?
> >
> > Slow down, he was sworn in only today. :^)
> >
> > Carter
> >
>
>

[IBM]

(Michael P. Reed) wrote in
om:

> "Andrew Chaplin" > wrote in message
> >...
>> David Pratt, Member of Parliament for Nepean-Carleton, has just been
>> appointed Minister of National Defence.
>
> Martin is supposedly for reconstituting* the Canadian Armed Forces.
> Is this considered a step in that direction, and have any
> general-specifics been laid out as of yet?
>
> * My term.

Well we already know the CAF are likely to lose their heavy armo(u)r.
I expect we'll see another round of cuts disguised as a
reorganization of some sort.
As I've said before, the CAF is evolving into a national gendarmerie
aimed squarely at peacekeeping, foreign and domestic.
Any residual military capabilities will be purely coincidental.

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

[Brian Allardice]

In article >,
says...
>
>"Andrew Chaplin" > wrote in message
>...
>> David Pratt, Member of Parliament for Nepean-Carleton, has just been
>> appointed Minister of National Defence.
>
>Martin is supposedly for reconstituting* the Canadian Armed Forces.
>Is this considered a step in that direction, and have any
>general-specifics been laid out as of yet?
>
>
>* My term.
>

as far as I know, no. And in an instant globe and mail poll, the military came
near the bottom of our priorities. Bloody good for us!

[Dewey]

agreed...

we've seen and heard all this rhetoric before, and it will get worse before
getting better.

Chretien was no friend to the military. Personally, I'm glad he is history.

I can't think of a single PM, who in a space of 10 years, almost
single-handily brought the military to it's knees. Sure, there were
justified cuts throughout the post-WW2 era (front line
soldiers/sailors...etc), but nothing prepared us for the onslaught of cuts
in the 90's. It's one thing to say we went from +150,000 personnel to
90,000, but to go down to around 50,000 (of which 7000 were unusable due to
lack of training, sickness, retirement...etc), from almost a 100,000 and
retain our core capabilities with an increased operations tempo is (was)
near impossible.


dewey (glass half empty until proven otherwise)


"> Well we already know the CAF are likely to lose their heavy armo(u)r.
> I expect we'll see another round of cuts disguised as a
> reorganization of some sort.
> As I've said before, the CAF is evolving into a national gendarmerie
> aimed squarely at peacekeeping, foreign and domestic.
> Any residual military capabilities will be purely coincidental.
>
> IBM

[Allen]

"Brian Allardice" > wrote in message
news:kYDCb.693353$9l5.144730@pd7tw2no...
>
Snip
>
> >Martin is supposedly for reconstituting* the Canadian Armed Forces.
> >Is this considered a step in that direction, and have any
> >general-specifics been laid out as of yet?
> >
> >
> >* My term.
> >
>
> as far as I know, no. And in an instant globe and mail poll, the
military came
> near the bottom of our priorities. Bloody good for us!
>
Prime Minister Martin said yesterday that "it is obvious" that a
complete review of foreign and defence policy is needed. Sounds like a
good place to start.

Allen

[Carter Lee]

J_Harmeson wrote:
> "Carter Lee" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Slow down, he was sworn in only today. :^)
>>
>>Carter
>>
>
>
> + Christmas break, they be back Jan/Feb, the an election could be called
> before April.
>
>
Actually the first cabinet meeting is in progress right now. It
started at 0900 hrs today, 13 Dec 03.

Carter

[Carter Lee]

Dewey wrote:

> agreed...
>
> we've seen and heard all this rhetoric before, and it will get worse before
> getting better.
>
> Chretien was no friend to the military. Personally, I'm glad he is history.
>
> I can't think of a single PM, who in a space of 10 years, almost
> single-handily brought the military to it's knees.

I can, Trudeau and it took him less than ten years.

Actually it was Trudeau who started it.

Carter

[Andrew Chaplin]

Carter Lee wrote:
>
> Dewey wrote:
>
> > agreed...
> >
> > we've seen and heard all this rhetoric before, and it will get worse before
> > getting better.
> >
> > Chretien was no friend to the military. Personally, I'm glad he is history.
> >
> > I can't think of a single PM, who in a space of 10 years, almost
> > single-handily brought the military to it's knees.
>
> I can, Trudeau and it took him less than ten years.
>
> Actually it was Trudeau who started it.

I believe the credit properly goes to Louis St-Laurent, whose
government commissioned John Glassco (who recommended integration)
which was implemented, along with unification on Pearson's watch
(after Diefenbaker's "Turn in your pencil stub to get a new one"
period) then crowned by Trudeau with his "Defence in the 70's" White
Paper. Of these, I think only Pearson, a veteran of the CEF and the
RFC, understood the institution with which he was meddling.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

[Andrew Chaplin]

Allen wrote:
>
> "Brian Allardice" > wrote in message
> news:kYDCb.693353$9l5.144730@pd7tw2no...
> >
> Snip
> >
> > >Martin is supposedly for reconstituting* the Canadian Armed Forces.
> > >Is this considered a step in that direction, and have any
> > >general-specifics been laid out as of yet?
> > >
> > >
> > >* My term.
> > >
> >
> > as far as I know, no. And in an instant globe and mail poll, the
> military came
> > near the bottom of our priorities. Bloody good for us!
> >
> Prime Minister Martin said yesterday that "it is obvious" that a
> complete review of foreign and defence policy is needed. Sounds like a
> good place to start.

If the silly buggers would only do it from first principles, we could
at least be assured of a semi-sane product. I am afraid useless
infrastructure will be preserved to save the votes that go with it.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

[Andrew Chaplin]

Brian Allardice wrote:
>
> as far as I know, no. And in an instant globe and mail poll, the military
> came near the bottom of our priorities. Bloody good for us!

The Canadian public, if asked whether to spend money on guns or
butter, will ask for K-Y Jelly because they don't understand the
question.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

[Brian Allardice]

In article >,
says...
>
>
>"Brian Allardice" > wrote in message
>news:kYDCb.693353$9l5.144730@pd7tw2no...
>>
>Snip
>>
>> >Martin is supposedly for reconstituting* the Canadian Armed Forces.
>> >Is this considered a step in that direction, and have any
>> >general-specifics been laid out as of yet?
>> >
>> >
>> >* My term.
>> >
>>
>> as far as I know, no. And in an instant globe and mail poll, the
>military came
>> near the bottom of our priorities. Bloody good for us!
>>
>Prime Minister Martin said yesterday that "it is obvious" that a
>complete review of foreign and defence policy is needed. Sounds like a
>good place to start.

That's what we've needed for some time. I hope we can do better than the
Brits, who seem, as per their white paper, to view themselves as Bush's
poodles.

Cheers,
dba

[Brian Allardice]

In article >,
says...
>
>Brian Allardice wrote:
>>
>> as far as I know, no. And in an instant globe and mail poll, the military
>> came near the bottom of our priorities. Bloody good for us!
>
>The Canadian public, if asked whether to spend money on guns or
>butter, will ask for K-Y Jelly because they don't understand the
>question.

The Yanks are going to spend zillions on (unproven) missile-defense. I think
we understand the question quite well. We are not a military power, and that's
ok. Cancel that 300 million for Iraq, bring our ships back from the gulf, and
leave Afghanistan now ... that will build rapid transit in Vancouver, pay for
teachers in the north, &c, &c, &c.... Let Bush call his lawyers...

Cheers,
dba

[Fred J. McCall]

Andrew Chaplin > wrote:

:Brian Allardice wrote:
:>
:> as far as I know, no. And in an instant globe and mail poll, the military
:> came near the bottom of our priorities. Bloody good for us!
:
:The Canadian public, if asked whether to spend money on guns or
:butter, will ask for K-Y Jelly because they don't understand the
:question.

Or perhaps they just want to make the screwing their government tends
to give them a bit more comfortable....

[Jack]

> > as far as I know, no. And in an instant globe and mail poll, the
> military came
> > near the bottom of our priorities. Bloody good for us!
> >
> Prime Minister Martin said yesterday that "it is obvious" that a
> complete review of foreign and defence policy is needed. Sounds like a
> good place to start.
>
> Allen
>
My initial opinion of the New PM is that he is a highy intelligent and
practical man. I nice change from the last 10 years

[Brian Allardice]

In article >,
says...
>
>Andrew Chaplin > wrote:
>
>:Brian Allardice wrote:
>:>
>:> as far as I know, no. And in an instant globe and mail poll, the military
>:> came near the bottom of our priorities. Bloody good for us!
>:
>:The Canadian public, if asked whether to spend money on guns or
>:butter, will ask for K-Y Jelly because they don't understand the
>:question.
>
>Or perhaps they just want to make the screwing their government tends
>to give them a bit more comfortable....

Sure, Fred..... Bend over for Boeing and Haliburton..... Gotta love that free
enterprise....


Cheers,
dba

[J_Harmeson]

"Carter Lee" > wrote in message
...
> J_Harmeson wrote:
> > "Carter Lee" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>Slow down, he was sworn in only today. :^)
> >>
> >>Carter
> >>
> >
> >
> > + Christmas break, they be back Jan/Feb, the an election could be
called
> > before April.
> >
> >
> Actually the first cabinet meeting is in progress right now. It
> started at 0900 hrs today, 13 Dec 03.
>
> Carter
>
Correct, but wouldn't that be like a big group hug before the break, not
much will happen (in my opinion) until the new year or election.

[Carter Lee]

J_Harmeson wrote:
> "Carter Lee" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>J_Harmeson wrote:
>>
>>>"Carter Lee" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Slow down, he was sworn in only today. :^)
>>>>
>>>>Carter
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>+ Christmas break, they be back Jan/Feb, the an election could be
>
> called
>
>>>before April.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Actually the first cabinet meeting is in progress right now. It
>>started at 0900 hrs today, 13 Dec 03.
>>
>>Carter
>>
>
> Correct, but wouldn't that be like a big group hug before the break,

On a Saturday morning?

not
> much will happen (in my opinion) until the new year or election.

I'll wait and see.

Carter
>
>

[Carter Lee]

Peter Skelton wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:54:28 GMT, Carter Lee
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Dewey wrote:
>>
>>
>>>agreed...
>>>
>>>we've seen and heard all this rhetoric before, and it will get worse before
>>>getting better.
>>>
>>>Chretien was no friend to the military. Personally, I'm glad he is history.
>>>
>>>I can't think of a single PM, who in a space of 10 years, almost
>>>single-handily brought the military to it's knees.
>>
>>I can, Trudeau and it took him less than ten years.
>>
>>Actually it was Trudeau who started it.
>>
>
> I think unification occurred on a previous watch.

Yes It did, I was there. That gave Trudeau something already
weakened to destroy. Reminded me of a bull fight.

Carter

[Coridon Henshaw]

Andrew Chaplin > wrote in
:

> The Canadian public, if asked whether to spend money on guns or
> butter, will ask for K-Y Jelly because they don't understand the
> question.

When formulating a Canadian defense policy, there is the slight practical
problem that the only threat to Canadian soverignty is posed by the
fascist minions to the south of our border, against whom no defense save
for nuclear weapons is economically practical. Further, the development
of a nucelar deterrant would prompt an American first strike--scuse me,
'liberation'. This is obviously a catch 22.

Similiarly, protecting Canadian interests abroad would require a far
greater funding committment than is economically practical. Force
projection is not cheap and reconstructing a capability to deliver much
more than a single flagbearer into areas where _our_ interests[1] are
challenged costs much more than we can afford without gutting Canadian
society to the point that we become an American or DPRK-style weapon state
that concentrates all economic output into the defense of values and
ideologies that do not exist at home.

On the one hand, there's nothing to be gained by spending so much on guns
that there's no butter left to protect. On the other hand, there's no
point in spending so little on guns that the capabilities provided are
essentially useless. Unfortunately for Canadian defense policy, the size
of the Canadian economy is such that there is no happy medium between
these points: providing a meaningful military capability would mean
slashing civil spending to the extent that there would be no meaningful
Canada left to defend.



[1] Our interests are not the same as supporting the American domestic
need to conduct expansionary wars on a regular basis.

--
Coridon Henshaw - http://www3.telus.net/csbh - "I have sadly come to the
conclusion that the Bush administration will go to any lengths to deny
reality." -- Charley Reese

[Peter Skelton]

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:12:20 GMT, Carter Lee
> wrote:

>Peter Skelton wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:54:28 GMT, Carter Lee
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Dewey wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>agreed...
>>>>
>>>>we've seen and heard all this rhetoric before, and it will get worse before
>>>>getting better.
>>>>
>>>>Chretien was no friend to the military. Personally, I'm glad he is history.
>>>>
>>>>I can't think of a single PM, who in a space of 10 years, almost
>>>>single-handily brought the military to it's knees.
>>>
>>>I can, Trudeau and it took him less than ten years.
>>>
>>>Actually it was Trudeau who started it.
>>>
>>
>> I think unification occurred on a previous watch.
>
>Yes It did, I was there. That gave Trudeau something already
>weakened to destroy. Reminded me of a bull fight.
>
Nice image, mind if I quote you in lectures?

Peter Skelton

[Carter Lee]

Peter Skelton wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:12:20 GMT, Carter Lee
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Peter Skelton wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:54:28 GMT, Carter Lee
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Dewey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>agreed...
>>>>>
>>>>>we've seen and heard all this rhetoric before, and it will get worse before
>>>>>getting better.
>>>>>
>>>>>Chretien was no friend to the military. Personally, I'm glad he is history.
>>>>>
>>>>>I can't think of a single PM, who in a space of 10 years, almost
>>>>>single-handily brought the military to it's knees.
>>>>
>>>>I can, Trudeau and it took him less than ten years.
>>>>
>>>>Actually it was Trudeau who started it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I think unification occurred on a previous watch.
>>
>>Yes It did, I was there. That gave Trudeau something already
>>weakened to destroy. Reminded me of a bull fight.
>>
>
> Nice image, mind if I quote you in lectures?

Be my guest.

Carter

[Allen]

"Coridon Henshaw @ (T<H+ESE) sympatico.ca)>" <(chenshaw<RE<MOVE> wrote
in message ...
> Andrew Chaplin > wrote in
> :
>
> > The Canadian public, if asked whether to spend money on guns or
> > butter, will ask for K-Y Jelly because they don't understand the
> > question.
> >
>
Big snip of poorly informed and thought out babble.
>
Dear Coridon please refer to the above comment. Oh and by the way most
frequent contributors to this NG have a personal experience with and
strong knowledge of Canada's military.

Allen


> Coridon Henshaw - http://www3.telus.net/csbh - "I have sadly come to
the
> conclusion that the Bush administration will go to any lengths to deny
> reality." -- Charley Reese

[J_Harmeson]

So I'll retract what I said at 12/12/2003.

They acually worked, canceled a program or two, they work again on
Sunday, hitting the books. good start, maybe.

[Brian Allardice]

In article >,
says...
>
>Peter Skelton wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:12:20 GMT, Carter Lee
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Peter Skelton wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:54:28 GMT, Carter Lee
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Dewey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>agreed...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>we've seen and heard all this rhetoric before, and it will get worse
before
>>>>>>getting better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Chretien was no friend to the military. Personally, I'm glad he is
history.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I can't think of a single PM, who in a space of 10 years, almost
>>>>>>single-handily brought the military to it's knees.
>>>>>
>>>>>I can, Trudeau and it took him less than ten years.
>>>>>
>>>>>Actually it was Trudeau who started it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I think unification occurred on a previous watch.
>>>
>>>Yes It did, I was there. That gave Trudeau something already
>>>weakened to destroy. Reminded me of a bull fight.
>>>
>>
>> Nice image, mind if I quote you in lectures?
>
>Be my guest.

Unification was and is a damned good idea...

Cheers,
dba

[Jay]

"Allen" > wrote in message >...
> "Coridon Henshaw @ (T<H+ESE) sympatico.ca)>" <(chenshaw<RE<MOVE> wrote
> >
> Big snip of poorly informed and thought out babble.
> >
> Dear Coridon please refer to the above comment. Oh and by the way most
> frequent contributors to this NG have a personal experience with and
> strong knowledge of Canada's military.

Which of the three newsgroups are you referring to when you type "this" Allen?

Jay

[tscottme]

Andrew Chaplin > wrote in message
...
> David Pratt, Member of Parliament for Nepean-Carleton, has just been
> appointed Minister of National Defence.
<snip>

Canada has a Minister for National Defense? Why?

--

Scott
--------
Monitor the latest efforts of "peaceful Muslims" at
http://www.jihadwatch.org/

[Jack]

>
> Unification was and is a damned good idea...
>
> Cheers,
> dba

For whom ????

[Carter Lee]

Brian Allardice wrote:


> Unification was and is a damned good idea...

Unless you want to be considered a usenet troll and ignored, you
had better give us some reason why you think that.

Carter

[Lars]

troll

"Brian Allardice" > wrote in message
news:kjUCb.698398$pl3.314454@pd7tw3no...
> In article >,
> says...
> >
> >Peter Skelton wrote:
> >> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:12:20 GMT, Carter Lee
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Peter Skelton wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:54:28 GMT, Carter Lee
> > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Dewey wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>agreed...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>we've seen and heard all this rhetoric before, and it will get worse
> before
> >>>>>>getting better.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Chretien was no friend to the military. Personally, I'm glad he is
> history.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I can't think of a single PM, who in a space of 10 years, almost
> >>>>>>single-handily brought the military to it's knees.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I can, Trudeau and it took him less than ten years.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Actually it was Trudeau who started it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>I think unification occurred on a previous watch.
> >>>
> >>>Yes It did, I was there. That gave Trudeau something already
> >>>weakened to destroy. Reminded me of a bull fight.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Nice image, mind if I quote you in lectures?
> >
> >Be my guest.
>
> Unification was and is a damned good idea...
>
> Cheers,
> dba
>

[James Linn]

"tscottme" > wrote in message
...
> Andrew Chaplin > wrote in message
> ...
> > David Pratt, Member of Parliament for Nepean-Carleton, has just been
> > appointed Minister of National Defence.
> <snip>
>
> Canada has a Minister for National Defense? Why?

a) new Prime Minister has lots of people to reward/thank for helping him get
in.

and b) the last guy was ineffective, had publicly demonstrated drinking
problem and had shown no talent for the job - in a previous life he was a
bank economist.

James

[J_Harmeson]

"Andrew Chaplin" > wrote in message
...

> I believe the credit properly goes to Louis St-Laurent, whose
> government commissioned John Glassco (who recommended integration)
> which was implemented, along with unification on Pearson's watch
> (after Diefenbaker's "Turn in your pencil stub to get a new one"
> period) then crowned by Trudeau with his "Defence in the 70's" White
> Paper. Of these, I think only Pearson, a veteran of the CEF and the
> RFC, understood the institution with which he was meddling.


Three words and a name tells it all.

DAMN THE TORPEDOES, PAUL HELLYER

I purchased the book around 1991. I mentioned it in a canteen one day
and got an earful, some were very unhappy about the author and what
happened, I put the book in a box and never read the whole book, just a
few pages. Probably a good read though.

[Darrel Newman]

Paul Hellyer - isn't he the guy who we all wanted to trade to the Israelis
as in

"Paul Hellyer + 10,000 bolts of green cloth for a One-eyed Jew"

[Brian Allardice]

In article >,
says...
>
>Brian Allardice wrote:
>
>
>> Unification was and is a damned good idea...
>
>Unless you want to be considered a usenet troll and ignored, you
>had better give us some reason why you think that.

Mostly back of the house stuff, but then the military is mostly back of the
house stuff in any case. I don't particularly care what the ranks are nor what
uniforms are worn, but it would be damned silly to have 3 different guys buying
paperclips.

Cheers,
dba

[Andrew Chaplin]

Brian Allardice wrote:
>
> Mostly back of the house stuff, but then the military is mostly back of the
> house stuff in any case. I don't particularly care what the ranks are nor what
> uniforms are worn, but it would be damned silly to have 3 different guys buying
> paperclips.

Then, dear Brian, you have failed to distinguish successfully between
"integration" and "unification".
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

[Allen]

"Andrew Chaplin" > wrote in message
...
>
SNIP
>
> Then, dear Brian, you have failed to distinguish successfully between
> "integration" and "unification".
> --
> Andrew Chaplin
> SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
> (If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

Just curious. If you keep the air force with only twin Heuy's, Hercs and
some P3's , build up the naval ability to transport army material,
retain some ships for defence against bad guys and ditch ASW
......strengthen our army so it can do a decent job in places like
Afghanistan......what do you have? unification, the Marine Corp ???

Allen

[Carter Lee]

Brian Allardice wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>
>>Brian Allardice wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Unification was and is a damned good idea...
>>
>>Unless you want to be considered a usenet troll and ignored, you
>>had better give us some reason why you think that.
>
>
> Mostly back of the house stuff, but then the military is mostly back of the
> house stuff in any case. I don't particularly care what the ranks are nor what
> uniforms are worn, but it would be damned silly to have 3 different guys buying
> paperclips.

I suspected at first that you were somebody who knew little, if
anything, about the military and were just trolling. You have
just confirmed that suspicion. I'm not sure what you mean by
'..back of the house stuff..' but I doubt that it means anything
complimentary to the CF. I suggest that you do some research
about military organization(s) in Canada, past and present. When
you know enough about the subject to speak intelligently about it
come back and do so.

Carter

[Brian Allardice]

In article >,
says...
>
>Brian Allardice wrote:
>>
>> Mostly back of the house stuff, but then the military is mostly back of the
>> house stuff in any case. I don't particularly care what the ranks are nor
what
>> uniforms are worn, but it would be damned silly to have 3 different guys
buying
>> paperclips.
>
>Then, dear Brian, you have failed to distinguish successfully between
>"integration" and "unification".

Fair cop, guv'. You've got me bang to rights.

Cheers,
dba

[Brian Allardice]

In article >,
says...

>I suspected at first that you were somebody who knew little, if
>anything, about the military and were just trolling. You have
>just confirmed that suspicion. I'm not sure what you mean by
>'..back of the house stuff..' but I doubt that it means anything
>complimentary to the CF.

Dear me! I suggest you do a bit of research and only then attempt to
characterise my views.

Cheers,
dba

[Andrew Chaplin]

IBM wrote:
>
> "Darrel Newman" > wrote in
> able.rogers.com:
>
> > Paul Hellyer - isn't he the guy who we all wanted to trade to the
> > Israelis as in
> >
> > "Paul Hellyer + 10,000 bolts of green cloth for a One-eyed Jew"
>
> Which is kind of ironic seeing as how one of the more important
> commanders of the Israeli war for independence was in fact a
> Canadian.

And arguably more competent a general than Moshe Dyan. Dyan, however,
was certainly the better politician, at least in the Israeli setting.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

[Jack]

"IBM" > wrote in message
...
> "Darrel Newman" > wrote in
> able.rogers.com:
>
> > Paul Hellyer - isn't he the guy who we all wanted to trade to the
> > Israelis as in
> >
> > "Paul Hellyer + 10,000 bolts of green cloth for a One-eyed Jew"
>
> Which is kind of ironic seeing as how one of the more important
> commanders of the Israeli war for independence was in fact a
> Canadian.
>
> IBM
>
Oh ?? Thats interesting...who was it ??

[Andrew Chaplin]

"Jack" > wrote in message
...
>
> "IBM" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Which is kind of ironic seeing as how one of the more important
> > commanders of the Israeli war for independence was in fact a
> > Canadian.
>
> Oh ?? Thats interesting...who was it ??

Ben Dunkelman, late of the Queen's Own Rifles, in which he was a company
commander from Juno Beach to the Low Countries, and who left Canada after
being de-mobbed to serve as a formation commander in the Israeli army.
Unlike many others who went to Israel to support the Zionists (and I use
the term as Dunkelman would have) he had operational experience in what
we would now call combat team and battle broup operations. He only died
about two years ago. While he was prepared to fight for Israel, he
preferred to live in Canada, and was a Colonel of the Regiment for the
QOR for a term. He was a haberdasher by trade, and the family firm, Tip
Top Tailors, was the equivalent in Canada of Brooks Brothers or Moss
Bros.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

[ian maclure]

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:59:28 -0500, Andrew Chaplin wrote:

[snip]

> Ben Dunkelman, late of the Queen's Own Rifles, in which he was a company
> commander from Juno Beach to the Low Countries, and who left Canada after
> being de-mobbed to serve as a formation commander in the Israeli army.

He was no Sir Arthur Curry but he did very well by the Israelis.
Didn't Ben Gurion want him to be Chief Of Staff at one point?

> Unlike many others who went to Israel to support the Zionists (and I use
> the term as Dunkelman would have) he had operational experience in what
> we would now call combat team and battle broup operations. He only died
> about two years ago. While he was prepared to fight for Israel, he
> preferred to live in Canada, and was a Colonel of the Regiment for the
> QOR for a term. He was a haberdasher by trade, and the family firm, Tip
> Top Tailors, was the equivalent in Canada of Brooks Brothers or Moss
> Bros.

Its my understanding that Brook's brothers were kind of
one step below carriage trade? I wouldn't put Tip Top in that
league but they certainly gave excellent value for the money
I have a closet full of their stuff because I hate shopping and
I knew they would usually have the sort of thing I wanted.

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>