Shrinking workforce + shrinking aggregate supply?

Those sneaky Danish bastards and the peaceful transfer of territory. But no really just cause we border 3 oceans so our navy shouldn't suck.

Someone has to be the first to behave with decency, your statement doesn’t indicate that you’re in support of that “someone” being your preferred group.

...am I supposed to be quiet? Why? Was there a memo passed around?

/s?

That the culture war candidate for the last leadership election was appointed equalities minister is such a damning indictment of the Tory party.

[removed]

You're right, there is likely some overlap with some Iron Age superstition too.

> Use of the flag is also a "sign of the stubborn endurance of the Ukrainian national idea even under the grimmest conditions."

Isn't it good to know that if an evil army invades, kills and rapes everything you know and love, there's a bunch of dudes in a room somewhere voting to condemn the war in the strongest terms?

Not an accident as it’s not a nazi symbol. Now if they had swastikas all over the place then I would agree with you. These aren’t Nazi symbols. They never were intended to be. You’re peddling propaganda to make Ukraine look bad. Let’s not forget which country decided to start this war (Russia) and how their actions bare striking similarities with Nazi germany’s play book.

Btw the cross already being on some of those tanks just encourages them to paint the rest so they can easily be identified in the battle field. Kinda like how russia is putting the Z on all theirs. It’s not because they’re pushing Nazi ideology. It’s because the symbol is already there, easy to get paint for and replicate, and distinguishes their forces from the enemy. If they really wanted to look like Nazis then why didn’t they just paint swastikas?

Yea it’s a bad headline.

It should say “first western tanks” as Poland just deliver a whopping four leopard 2’s which I’m assuming is mainly symbolic to get other countries to start donating.

It's not "rooted in Bronze Age superstition".

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Unfortunately, corruption isn't a debunked or not issue; it's a forever struggle.

For this article, it's whether or not there's anything actionable at least for the politician as they make their case for aid packages. If they did find corruption, then there needs to be an immediate plan to address it, tweaking the package if needed.

[removed]

That bigotry rooted in Bronze Age superstition still influences decisions. Which I find, to put it nicely, regrettable.

Or, now bare with me, you’re bending over backwards to push a narrative forward despite there not being enough evidence. We can go back and forth on this all day. Perhaps we should just call it a day?

What did you mean, then?

> not having strong armoured forces already got us caught with our pants down in Afghanistan

Tanks played a small role in Afghanistan. It was a fight for light infantry supported by air power. The only way tanks saved soldier's lives is by being armored against roadside bombs, a job done better (and more cheaply) by MRAP-style vehicles. There was no need for the treads or main cannon in Afghanistan

> in any event in which we immediately have to deploy overseas

That's something a tank can't do. They are too heavy and logistics-heavy to be quickly deployed. The armored forces Canada had in Afghanistan were reliant on US logistics as well as loaned equipment from countries like Germany and the Netherlands. An agile force is better off without too much weight

> Canada's ability to import tanks at any given time could be extremely limited

Are you calling for Canada to build its own tanks? And being able to build your own tanks means not just building your own tanks, but continuing to build new tanks for generations or else you lose the capability. This is why Canada buys jets, but it builds non-tank armored vehicles itself

> the effects of not having tanks against an actual military force would be horrible

I'm not calling for Canada to throw out its armored units. I'm saying they can send their current inventory to Ukraine without sacrificing security in any real way. The Canadian land, sea, and air units are more than capable of defending Canada. Any kind of overseas contingency that Canada would go to would be with other allies (when has Canada fought alone?) and couldn't have tanks in-theater quickly anyway

Did you intentionally misinterpret what I wrote or was it accidental?

To be fair the birthrate in the US is/was slowing, and this might be their way to pick it up again. I don't think it's on the level of fining media for something you disagree with.

word on the street is Santa loves the ladies

there is a God, and Santa is me. I'm making some lists, which one will you be on?

[removed]