[kEiThZ]

This is lame ass whataboutism

Nah. Go look at the videos and tell me why we shouldn't care about that.

If we're going to assert (without evidence) that Canada's global reputation depends on how much we support Palestinian interests, then I'll say our reputation depends on how much we support the Druze. I will put up as much evidence as the other poster did. Prove me wrong.

 

[kEiThZ]

1) Bigger font size does not improve the strength of an argument. Please edit the post to offer a more reasonable size, this is actually difficult to read.

2) Could this thread possible go back to being constructive and issues-based. We have have a limited exchange that really amounts of 'my world view is, and yours is wrong' going back and forth for a couple of pages.
It genuinely detracts from a thoughtful exchange of views, and novel information and insight which is what this and ever thread should be about.

Like I said elsewhere, the Palestinian cause has become a shibboleth for some Western leftists. They literally don't (can't?) care about anything else. Including any other genocide in progress. Or even domestic issues. They get really frazzled when they figure out the rest of the world doesn't work like that.

I'm not even unsympathetic to the Palestinian cause. I do think it's ridiculous that literally every discussion heads in that direction.

 

[T3G]

Nah. Go look at the videos and tell me why we shouldn't care about that.

If we're going to assert (without evidence) that Canada's global reputation depends on how much we support Palestinian interests, then I'll say our reputation depends on how much we support the Druze. I will put up as much evidence as the other poster did. Prove me wrong.

Was this supposed to be some kind of gotcha? Yes, countries have a responsibility to speak up against all forms of violence and injustice, since they are the only entities in the world that stand any reasonable chance of stopping said violence. Not only do many of them not, but many of them support said violence if it is politically convenient for them to do so.

If western politicians were drinking buddies with the Russians, they wouldn't lift a finger to stop the slaughter of Ukrainians, either. The levels of hypocrisy the Gazan war has exposed in our politics is enough to make one puke.

Domestic concerns are a red herring. Human beings are able to care about more than one issue at the same time.

 

[Cobra]

Was this supposed to be some kind of gotcha? Yes, countries have a responsibility to speak up against all forms of violence and injustice, since they are the only entities in the world that stand any reasonable chance of stopping said violence. Not only do many of them not, but many of them support said violence if it is politically convenient for them to do so.

If western politicians were drinking buddies with the Russians, they wouldn't lift a finger to stop the slaughter of Ukrainians, either. The levels of hypocrisy the Gazan war has exposed in our politics is enough to make one puke.

Domestic concerns are a red herring. Human beings are able to care about more than one issue at the same time.

When you listen to western politicians and medias, they tend to frame collective west (G7+EU) as "the world" despite its combine population accounting for roughly 15%. If we're going to have an honest discussion about Canada and the World, the global South (global majority) views should be acknowledged.

On this matter, WE - western nations are the minority on this issue and we're isolating ourselves. The majority of the world view us - the west, as hypocrites since we pick and choose when UN charter and international law applies and to whom based on our interests - that's just fact and lots aren't ready/willing to discuss our place in the "world" from that perspective

 

[kEiThZ]

The levels of hypocrisy the Gazan war has exposed in our politics is enough to make one puke.

You must be young. I remember the genocide in Rwanda and the discussions in the aftermath of that. None of this is new.

The majority of the world view us - the west, as hypocrites since we pick and choose when UN charter and international law applies and to whom based on our interests

The same UN that has Saudi Arabia and Iran on the Human Rights Council?

How old are you? Serious question.

At a certain point you should realize that real diplomacy is one to one between countries and almost nobody actually cares about organizations like the UN beyond its PR value. The maxim has always been the smaller the number the more useful the group.

 

[T3G]

You must be young. I remember the genocide in Rwanda and the discussions in the aftermath of that. None of this is new.

You're right, that was several years before my time. I guess every generation has to have their own moment of sheer disillusionment with the incumbent political system.

 

[jje1000]

Like I said elsewhere, the Palestinian cause has become a shibboleth for some Western leftists. They literally don't (can't?) care about anything else. Including any other genocide in progress. Or even domestic issues. They get really frazzled when they figure out the rest of the world doesn't work like that.

I'm not even unsympathetic to the Palestinian cause. I do think it's ridiculous that literally every discussion heads in that direction.

(Psst there's literal massacres going on in Syria right now against the Druze, Christians and Alawites!)

 

[Cobra]

The same UN that has Saudi Arabia and Iran on the Human Rights Council?

How old are you? Serious question.

At a certain point you should realize that real diplomacy is one to one between countries and almost nobody actually cares about organizations like the UN beyond its PR value. The maxim has always been the smaller the number the more useful the group.

That was the point of my argument - western powers have selectively enforced or interpreted the UN Charter, especially when it aligns with their strategic interests while "demanding" that the rest of the world abide by them unconditionally. That's the criticism from the global majority towards us.

We’re far removed from the era of Jean Chrétien, who anchored Canada’s opposition to the Iraq War in respect for multilateral institutions and international law, a stance that earned us credibility across the Global South which was lost since Harper. I believe it’s time we return to those principles of principled diplomacy, rather than doubling down as a loyal enabler of Trump’s erratic foreign policy agenda.

(Psst there's literal massacres going on in Syria right now against the Druze, Christians and Alawites!)

Pssst - who supports that regime AND removing sanctions AND removing Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) from its list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations

let me help you

 

[kEiThZ]

The little-known Canadian military operation saving Ukrainian lives

Operation Unifier, now in its tenth year, is playing a key role in Ukraine’s fight for survival

www.canadianaffairs.news

 

[Northern Light]

Interesting piece from the Globe today, looking at the contenders for a Canadian sub contract (South Korea and Germany) and suggesting the contract may not be directly awarded to the manufactures, but instead be a government to government contract (ie. Canada - South Korea, or Canada-Germany) in order to facilitate a broader arrangement.

One suggestion is that Canada might trade future LNG production in exchange for faster delivery or greater Canadianization of tech on board.

Canada weighing direct contract with foreign governments for sub purchase, head of navy says

Vice-Admiral Angus Topshee said a government-to-government contract could be more beneficial for Canada

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[guavadelic]

Interesting piece from the Globe today, looking at the contenders for a Canadian sub contract (South Korea and Germany) and suggesting the contract may not be directly awarded to the manufactures, but instead be a government to government contract (ie. Canada - South Korea, or Canada-Germany) in order to facilitate a broader arrangement.

One suggestion is that Canada might trade future LNG production in exchange for faster delivery or greater Canadianization of tech on board.

Vice-Adm. Topshee seems pretty bullish on the influence that Canada can have in the procurement process, being able to ask for more Canadian content in future batches, etc...
I wonder what he's seeing in the proposals being presented.

 

[Northern Light]

Vice-Adm. Topshee getting himself more media space (nothing good or bad implied there) ......by saying Canada might split the sub order between different suppliers.

Navy commander says Canada could end up with subs from two different suppliers

Vice-Admiral Angus Topshee says the Royal Canadian Navy could end up with submarines supplied by both companies vying for Ottawa’s lucrative sub procurement contract — and there could be advantages to diversifying the fleet.

www.ctvnews.ca

That seems dubious to me; but I think @kEiThZ should weigh in.....

 

[kEiThZ]

Vice-Adm. Topshee getting himself more media space (nothing good or bad implied there) ......by saying Canada might split the sub order between different suppliers.

Navy commander says Canada could end up with subs from two different suppliers

Vice-Admiral Angus Topshee says the Royal Canadian Navy could end up with submarines supplied by both companies vying for Ottawa’s lucrative sub procurement contract — and there could be advantages to diversifying the fleet.

www.ctvnews.ca

That seems dubious to me; but I think @kEiThZ should weigh in.....

He gave a guest lecture on my RCAF senior captains course once. Let's just say he's got a reputation for not caring what others think and passing on decorum.

He's free to give his opinion. And honestly, the government is giving more leeway to our GOFOs to speak more candidly in public these days. But ultimately he isn't deciding the procurement strategy. That's Cabinet's job.

I think there's positives and negatives to the idea of a split. On one hand, it would cost us economy of scale and leverage for industrial benefits. On the other hand, interoperability with two allies is good. I worry whether we have the institutional bandwidth for two sub fleets.

 

[guavadelic]

Vice-Adm. Topshee getting himself more media space (nothing good or bad implied there) ......by saying Canada might split the sub order between different suppliers.

PM Carney just said Canada won't split the submarine contract during the post-UN press conference.

"There's nothing I see that would suggest we would have a mix fleet of submarines."

"You just get too many efficiencies in economies of having one fleet," Carney said, adding that the efficiency of being able to cycle the same type of submarine if one is being tuned up is "just overwhelming."

"When the decision is made by the right people, it will be made on the basis of one or the other after deliberation," Carney said.

https://www.timescolonist.com/the-m...ne-contract-between-suppliers-carney-11249390

 

[lenaitch]

If splitting the fast jet fleet wasn't feasible, I can't see how anyone thinks a split submarine fleet would be.