Canada considering international bases: MacKay http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/06/02/pol-military-bases.html Or rather how to be a good dog for washington!
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: Become a Podcaster | Find a Show
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2012 the authors
How to create world chaos and make us fall with the american!
Of all bad plan of harper this is the worst!
Canada considers a lot of things. In the Defense Ministry, 'considering ' ranks right up there with 'planning'.
No worries, Lefauvre, its all about churning policy and burning funding, not about actually doing anything constructive. In the Canadian Forces, actually doing anything may be bad for your career if it backfires or, the public hears about it but 'considering' and 'planning' are safe occupations that don't put promotion and pension at risk.
Oh goody!
Now Canada can better support the overseas American Empire, financially bankrupt itself all that faster and become even more hated in Africa, Asia, the MidEast and the Caribbean.
w00 h00 our own Canadian Imperialism! First the First Nations, then Quebec, now the world!
Terrible idea. These guys wish so badly they were the Republican Party of the United States...
In the neo-con playbook, maintaining international bases is a necessary step in protecting one's economic interests. It would surprise no one to learn that the Conservatives are planning to construct bases in areas of vital economic importance in proximity to the Southern Philippines or Ecuador. Incidentally, Canadian mining firms operate there. We can only hope that the victim countries have the courage to face our imperialists down and maintain whatever sovereignty they have left.
If the NDP doesn't absolutely oppose this, and also absolutely oppose increases in the war budget, it won't be a separate party from the Tories.
It will be impossible for an NDP government to do any of the things the party stands for at all if it accepts the Canadian war budget getting larger. That's half the reason Harper is pushing for that.
Any of the Canadian Legion types in small towns that agree with this will also agree with Harper on everything else. You can't be for a bigger war budget and have any left-of-center views.
Ken, I don't see the NDP supporting setting up war-making bases - full stop!
Still it a sign that the American Empire is falling.
Still i don't see ourself in the role of the visigoth.
i wonder if he will build a base to keep quebec by force in case of a sucessfull referendum.
It isn't without precedence ex. CFB Lahr, Camp Mirage
Did we have others which were not attached to peacekeeping missions?
Was this in the ReformaTory election platform? Well they can let Canadians decide if we really needed bases by next election. Or will they just put it on the taxpayer's tab in boosting federal debt between now and then? We already know they won't be raising corporate taxes to pay for this baloney, lying liars that they are.
But Harper has made it clear that they won't be doing anything that wasn't in their election platform. I don't recall hearing anything about bases.
Between Canada, Australia, Britain, France, Germany, and various and sundry European satellites, much of the US slack will be taken up.
But Harper has made it clear that they won't be doing anything that wasn't in their election platform. I don't recall hearing anything about bases.
It's all part of his sometimes tacit and unstated overall prowar agenda.
do politician alway told the truth?
Terrible idea. These guys wish so badly they were the Republican Party of the United States...
Republican tea baggers in the House of Congress along with left wing Democrats have tried to vote down the Libyan missions. They got more votes than the NDP had members so how can opposing this agenda be anything but a good electoral strategy in Canada? This is very much back to Ready Aye Ready we will spend tax dollars to promote the NATO empire.
If the NDP would stop talking about our white man's burden to help in places like Libya and instead started talking about the expenditure of scarce resources on foreign wars they can not only consolidate their base but undermine the Harper right wing base. Few Canadians are going to buy into a future of endless cuts to services to pay for foreign adventures and it doesn't matter what side of the political spectrum their other views are on.
"The focus of the planning, let's be clear, is our capability for expeditionary participation in international missions.... We are big players in NATO. We're a country that has become a go-to nation in response to situations like what we're seeing in Libya, what we saw in Haiti...
"We are constantly working within that paradigm of countries, to see where we can bring that niche capability to bear. It's part of planning and preparation, in conjunction with our equipment needs."
do politician alway told the truth?
The frightening thing is Herr Harper does tell the truth...
... and delivers (when he has a majority government.)
From experience what they don't say is worst that what they say! Like the price of the F35.
do politician alway told the truth?
The frightening thing is Herr Harper does tell the truth... ... and delivers (when he has a majority government.)
From experience what they don't say is worst that what they say! Like the price of the F35.
He said he was going to buy the F-35. Still looks like he is going to buy it.
Ken Burch "Any of the Canadian Legion types in small towns that agree with this will also agree with Harper on everything else. You can't be for a bigger war budget and have any left-of-center views."
JanfromtheBruce "Ken, I don't see the NDP supporting setting up war-making bases - full stop!"
The New Democrats should define what these military bases should be used for. Jan and Ken make the distinction between 'war budgets' and 'war-making bases' but again the NDP need to define a more complete vision of what they see Canada's military role being in the world. To simply oppose military bases period would not be the right direction.
If Canada's military role is that of a leading peacekeeper and trainers as well as an elite disaster relief delivery mechanism then there are still expenses involved in building that capability and accepting the leadership role in many of those missions. Having individual bases or shared bases with allies who have the same aspirations is a not a bad idea and worth the investment. So while I agree that the Conservative government clearly aims to use them for aggressive military missions we still have to be intelligent about how we oppose them.
There has to be a use for all of our new planes and new navy ships that are yet to be constructed.
We dont and wont have enough planes (65 overpriced and hard to maintain fighters gives you about 2 airbases... heck you could put them all at Cold Lake if you wanted) or ships to man our own bases much less foreign ones. Its a non issue. I would like to see us gain a better ability with large flat tops and some more helicopters to intervene in humanitarian disasters. When it comes to things like Sumatra and Haiti we are notably little able to help without using US or others logistics.
Temporary operational bases must be distinguished from semi- and permanent military bases. If mandated by popular global opinion, a case could be made to erect UN bases serviced by multiple nations. However, for a nation to set up a military base in another sovereign nation downplays the subject nation's sovereignty.
I agree mime guy about intelligent about how we oppose them. If we are setting up temporary operational bases for humanitarian aid or peacekeeping missions that is one thing but I agree with notaradical, setting up military bases in sovereign nations does diminish their sovereignty. Thus it is oppressive!
It certainly does diminish sovereignty even if no one notices.
Canadian Forces Maritime Experimental Test Range, CFMETR, on Nanoose Bay, on the east coast of Vancouver Island, less than 100 km from Vancouver, is the location, not only of maritime weapons tests by the USA, but also it is also the destination for many nuclear-powered and nuclear-weapons capable ships of the USA military.
Since the agreement between Canada & the USA was signed in 1965, the base has actually been used almost exclusively as a USA base. Canada tests nothing at CFMETR. Canadian taxpayers now pay $10 million for the maintenance of this facility; essentially we are glorified caretakers and housekeepers; roles that no society respects, least of all the USA. It makes Canada look like the military version of Latin American domestic workers within the USA. This base is Canadian in name only – like much of this country.
http://www.vipirg.ca/publications/pubs/speeches/0606_tw_wpf.pdf
But we don't know about the price, it is a suprise price.
Now i'm scare!
The Canadian Peace Alliance condemns the plans of the Harper government to establish new foreign military bases for Canada. This is a policy that has been in the works for some time but, like so much else about Canada's foreign policy, it was completely excluded from the discussion during the recent federal election.
The idea of expanding foreign military bases for Canada goes against the wishes of the vast majority of Canadians. With the Harper government set to make a series of cuts to public services and spending generally, one of the few areas where they seem intent on spending even more is on war and militarism.
Last week, Peter MacKay admitted that Canada had already made agreements for bases in Germany and Jamaica, and were in talks with Kuwait and a number of other countries. MacKay stated that the focus was on increasing the Canadian military's "capability for expeditionary participation in international missions." MacKay noted that Canada has already "become a go-to nation in response to situations" like Libya and Haiti.
The new overseas bases are designed to increase Canada's ability to play leading roles in future military interventions. Taken together with the Harper government's policy of acquiring costly new F-35 fighter jets, and an ongoing policy of expanding Canadian Special Forces, this policy of expanding overseas operation bases is lock-step with its exporting of militarism rather than human rights and aid.
It was Canadian Special Forces, the secretive Joint Task Force 2 (JTF2), who participated in the 2004 coup against the elected government of Haiti, securing the airport in Port-au-Prince from which President Aristide was taken out of the country by U.S. Forces. The war in Afghanistan is also increasingly being fought with Special Forces.
The announcement about new foreign bases came at the same time as a request to keep Canadian Forces on the ground in Richelieu, Quebec to help with flood relief was being ignored. The Harper government continues to encourage costly and unnecessary deployments of the Forces abroad, while showing little interest in using its resources at home for disaster relief.
Foreign bases have nothing to do with Canadian security, and everything to do with the Harper government's desire to be able to participate in future military aggressions like the ones ongoing in Afghanistan and Libya.
Source
I am sure there are lots of bases we can get rented or bought out from by the British or Americans. I hear Germany is nice, or maybe Japan, Cyprus. After the loss of Camp Mirage, it became clear that if Canada wants to help defend the American Empire that we need a base of our own, which is what we been doing since 1945. Before 1945 we were defending the British Empire. However, isn't the legacy of Canada since 1960s to be peacekeepers? I guess we have scrapped that, too under the Conservatives. The Liberals did nothing for the military and now the Conservatives are going out all buying new toys but not building them in Canada. I believe we need a miliatary for national defense, emergency response, peacekeeping but not imperialism.