> Canada does not have a great need for armored forces

We have treaty commitments and national defense. We cannot rely on the USA. Particularly if they get another Trump idiot in office.

Why, to steal islands from Denmark?

[removed]

Would you describe Russian victory as peace? Foolish

The soldier looks tiny next to the tank in that picture, funny perspective.

No aha moment. I read that up too. You’re still missing a lot of nuance and context to the situation that I provided in another comment though. I highly advise you check it out.

> One hopes the Liberals find a way to get over their disdain for military funding and procurement and equip our forces properly.

Associating this with the Liberals is inappropriate given that both the Harper and Mulroney Conservative governments also slashed military budgets. Harper, in particular, provided much less support to the military than the current government does.

Canadian governments in general have been averse to funding the military since the end of the cold war.

https://fakenews.pl/en/politics/there-is-no-evidence-that-white-crosses-on-ukrainian-military-vehicles-are-associated-with-nazi-symbolism/

This link provides a lot of context i think you might appreciate. There are plenty of reasons why they have that symbol on their tanks. Jumping straight to labeling them as Nazis just stinks of propaganda. It’s up to us to wade through the misinformation and arm ourselves with context and facts.

Not tanks no. We could sure beef up the navy though

>Canada does not have a great need for armored forces.

Yes, yes we do. The idea that we don't is the sort of conclusion that people with no defence or security policy background come to when they think about the situation. It does not represent an informed perspective.

In reality, not having strong armoured forces already got us caught with our pants down in Afghanistan--resulting in dead Canadian soldiers--and in any event in which we immediately have to deploy overseas, we will immediately be caught with our pants down again.

And while the effects of not having tanks in Afghanistan were bad, but the effects of not having tanks against an actual military force would be horrible. Canada's ground forces as a whole would be crippled.

And of course, depending on the size and scope of the conflict, Canada's ability to import tanks at any given time could be extremely limited---meaning that the country's would be unable to rapidly replenish its defensive capabilities in a time where they are desperately needed.

And this of course doesn't even factor in the need to defend against attacks on domestic soil, which we do in-fact need, even with the U.S. right next to us. "Unlikely but possible" scenarios still need to be defended against.

[removed]

[removed]

You’re wrong about The Balkenkreuz being a Nazi symbol.

[removed]

They think that The Balkenkreuz is a Nazi symbol. They’re just ignorant, and don’t understand nuance or history.

The Balkenkreuz predates Nazi germany… it’s been adopted as a symbol of hate by neo Nazis, but they often put a swastika over it to get the point of hate across. By itself, it’s not a symbol of hate, nor was it created for the purpose of representing the Nazi party’s ideology.

My conscience trumps your rights.

It's the attitude of all conservatives, in all places and at all times:

>Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

- Frank Wilhoit

She likes being the in-group, wants to control it even.

China built islands in the south china sea, militarized them and claimed the land in opposition to UN law and it's neighbors, Vietnam and Philippines. That's wrong

You are the one that claimed they were all nazis. I'm still waiting on any proof whatsoever. And then you claimed I support nazis. Still waiting on proof of that. Then resorted to calling me a cunt lmfao. So still no proof of anything you have said. And still just name calling and trying to divert from the actual facts of the matter.

Or...

[removed]

I'm going to guess that he was a little too truthful in his reporting and the role that the Erdogan government had in the lax enforcement of building codes.

I work with a person from Turkey, and they mentioned that apparently their family in the country (who thankfully were safe) were completely unaware of the bribery that had led to the poor construction... Because the local news wasn't covering it.

[removed]

Hahaha when they have to resort to name calling instead of providing any real facts for any argument whatsoever.

True. I never understood why Europe fought nazi Germany since surrendering would bring peace immediatelly.