If the government was serious about wanting to protect our country they would worry less about buying tanks, long range military air transports, troop transports and other weapons for the field and concentrate on our peace keeping capabilities, and defending our Artic territories and coastal waters.
In all the most recent polls conducted in Canada a clear majority of the country's population has shown themselves to be against our involvement in Afghanistan continuing. It might be prudent for the government to remember that the majority of Canadians also opposed sending troops into Iraq or hosting American missiles on Canadian soil and previous governments acquiesced.
Most Canadian are more than willing to show support for the men and women who protect our country, but that doesn't mean they have to support what the government wants to do with them. In fact as most Canadians want to keep our soldiers out of a war that's not of our making and that has resulted in the most fatalities for Canadian troops since the Korean war, it's safe to say they probably support our troops more than the government does.
Before the government signs the contracts committing us to spending more than 17 billion American dollars on changing the role our armed forces play on the world stage, they may want to consider the wishes of the people they supposedly represent. Or is that asking too much?
Article comments
1 - The Admiral
Excuse me. But a military is for waging war, not meals on wheels. That is the purpose of a military. To fight and win wars. That is it's only purpose.
Canada is unable to provide for it's security at this point in time. Thus, failing in it's principle obligation to provide for the security of her people.
The governments job is to govern. It has no business in the healthcare industry, the daycare industry, or any other knee jerk ridiculous social program.
2 - Silver Surfer
Actually, the most successful counter-insurgency operation of the modern era (perhaps the only one if a lack of residual trouble is the benchmark) by a western nation DID use a meals-on-wheels type operation in CONJUNCTION with aggressive armed patrolling operations against communist insurgents in Malaya.
It took 12 years to win it, from aqround 1948 to the early 60s, and led to the rise of a modern, democratic muslim state (Malaysia) that has one of the highest standards of living in the world, not just Asia.
The British preferred to think of themselves as armed social workers, and it worked. The Australians learned the lessons and applied the same concept in Vietnam, and ultimately their area of operations in Vietnam was far less fraught and more peaceful than those of the US military.
It's also one of the reasons why Bush now wants to send more troops to Iraq - the change of tack is needed, because the old shoot 'em up shit just doesn't work in this context.
Fine for a regular war against Germany, Japan or the Soviets - but where is that threat today? China? Don't think so, they need us as much as we need them. India? Nah, they're on our side. That's about it, really.
Times change, and military thinking stuck in the 1960s like it is in the Pentagon won't apply in this new context.
So yes, meals on wheels does work.
3 - Mo
The military is not up-to par to protect the Country, so I feel that the military spending is somewhat justified. Canada's mission in Afghanistan seems to be only in support of the United States. The conservatives clearly are trying to establish a stronger relationship with the U.S. , however the mission in Afghanistan, as far as I am concerned is an unjustified one. However in response to Canada protecting and defending the Arctic, the last thing i'm sure the government wants at the moment is to start a military campaign there. However even the navy is in dire need of more equipment, so more money obviously must be spent on this. As well, I'd just like to add that the government's responsibiliy is to govern, and that DOES in clude the social aspects of the country (i.e. healthcare, etc.)
4 - Marc Treblay
At the risk of sounding like a Hawk, it's about time that Canada spend a little money on the armed forces. Our self-image as peacekeepers aside, the best way to make peace is to enforce it. In order to do that, the armed forces need strong offensive capabilities. Do not misunderstand me. I do not want Canada to build a war machine. We do need a strong Army, Navy and Air Force for sovereignty protection (self defence) AND to meet our commitments with Nato and especially participating in missions sanctioned and administered by the UN