79 replies to this topic

[DogOnPorch]

I think the idea of government-by-referendum for the everyday things it does is silly but not for something like sending troops abroad to kill other people. I don't think politicians have the moral or ethical background it takes to make such decisions on their own.

But, you and Joe Public do? OK....

[capricorn]

I think the idea of government-by-referendum for the everyday things it does is silly but not for something like sending troops abroad to kill other people.

Sounds good on paper eyeball. We're only getting around a 60% turnout in elections. How many people would bother to vote in such a referendum and would those voting in favour represent the will of the majority of Canadians?

[eyeball]

But, you and Joe Public do? OK....

Yes I definitely think we're better positioned than politicians are for this particular task.

[eyeball]

Sounds good on paper eyeball. We're only getting around a 60% turnout in elections. How many people would bother to vote in such a referendum and would those voting in favour represent the will of the majority of Canadians?

We could make referendums for going to war mandatory and don't forget I said the will of a super-majority.

If this is about giving troops real support it should be as unambiguous and unequivocal as possible.

Edited by eyeball, 08 May 2012 - 01:12 PM.

[guyser]

This slogan means people need to support what our troops are doing. So how does one do that. Lean out the window and yell 'I support you troops?'

Of course, the only who doesnt really have to support them are the same people who put them there, the govt. They pay our guys very little , oh but they do get danger pay...woot!

Then when they get permanently injured, or suffer extreme distress, or heaven forbid, killed, the govt pretty much abandons them.

The govt pays a death benefit (while in fighting) of $260G's. Gosh, govt, thanks for that. Remind me again what your pension is? You know, the one thats not funded by anything?

Oh yeah, lets see.....
Gilles Duceppe $145,000
Stephen Harper (from 2015 eligible) $224,000......per year

So, Yes ...support the troops , but for heavens sake, please dont look into our pensions. Hell the Reformers all balked at collecting them and said no way.....and of course now they are collecting.

Funny, I cant fathom why people think politicians are slimy

Edited by guyser, 08 May 2012 - 03:08 PM.

[GostHacked]

I agree with your points Guyser. As in another thread, I talked about my pal who did a couple tours in Bosnia as well as a couple in Afghanistan. Something happened on his last tour in Afghanistan, it changed him forever. I've tried to stay in contact with him... i'll have to wait for him to come around.

[fellowtraveller]

I agree with your points Guyser. As in another thread, I talked about my pal who did a couple tours in Bosnia as well as a couple in Afghanistan. Something happened on his last tour in Afghanistan, it changed him forever. I've tried to stay in contact with him... i'll have to wait for him to come around.

our military is 100% volunteers. The terms and conditions of employment are not secret. But.... just like any workplace injury, ongoing physical or mental trauma suffered on te job should be covered, as it would for a workers comp[ensation case.

[fellowtraveller]

We could make referendums for going to war mandatory and don't forget I said the will of a super-majority.

If this is about giving troops real support it should be as unambiguous and unequivocal as possible.

well, for that process to occur we'd have to abrogate all existing alliances and treaties that require our action since it would take about 2 years to get any proposed involvement to a ballot, what with Parliament yakking it up, politicians of all stripes posing and preening, committees and subcommittees holding hearings, Elections Canada gearing up to spend a couple hundred million on the referendum. Then of cvourse it would take the miliatary another six months or so to gear up, since they culd not spend a penny in advance on a political issue.
In World War Two, we'd have gotten to the assistance of our allies about mid-1947 with a boatload of German-English dictionaries to aid the new Teutonic regime in London.

[eyeball]

well, for that process to occur we'd have to abrogate all existing alliances and treaties that require our action since it would take about 2 years to get any proposed involvement to a ballot, what with Parliament yakking it up, politicians of all stripes posing and preening, committees and subcommittees holding hearings, Elections Canada gearing up to spend a couple hundred million on the referendum. Then of cvourse it would take the miliatary another six months or so to gear up, since they culd not spend a penny in advance on a political issue.
In World War Two, we'd have gotten to the assistance of our allies about mid-1947 with a boatload of German-English dictionaries to aid the new Teutonic regime in London.

Well, we'd just have to pick up the pace a little wouldn't we.

Speaking of the golden age of going to war issuing war bonds might be a good idea to revisit so those of you who wish to have hundreds of billions of dollars worth of hardware and troops sitting around on standby could invest in these to your heart's content.

[g_bambino]

well, for that process to occur we'd have to abrogate all existing alliances and treaties that require our action since it would take about 2 years to get any proposed involvement to a ballot, what with Parliament yakking it up, politicians of all stripes posing and preening, committees and subcommittees holding hearings, Elections Canada gearing up to spend a couple hundred million on the referendum. Then of cvourse it would take the miliatary another six months or so to gear up, since they culd not spend a penny in advance on a political issue.
In World War Two, we'd have gotten to the assistance of our allies about mid-1947 with a boatload of German-English dictionaries to aid the new Teutonic regime in London.

These points have already been presented to eyeball's eyeballs more than a few times. Still, he holds to his unworkable proposal. One has to give him points for tenacity (or is it stubbornness?).

[fellowtraveller]

Well, we'd just have to pick up the pace a little wouldn't we.

Speaking of the golden age of going to war issuing war bonds might be a good idea to revisit so those of you who wish to have hundreds of billions of dollars worth of hardware and troops sitting around on standby could invest in these to your heart's content.

so by 'pick up the pace' you would have us bypass Parliament?
Is your middle name Stalin?

[eyeball]

These points have already been presented to eyeball's eyeballs more than a few times. Still, he holds to his unworkable proposal. One has to give him points for tenacity (or is it stubbornness?).

I think most people would associate stubbornness with your it-can't-be-done attitude and tenacity with the opposite.

I'm sure you must be thrilled to know you have the full support of politicians and that nothing will ever change, just the way you like it. As for the troops it seems they prefer the politicians call all the shots too so...I really don't know what they have to complain about, it seems this issue of not supporting the troops is as old as war itself.

Why the public should be blamed for our politician's military failings is beyond me given how little the public has to do with anything.

[eyeball]

so by 'pick up the pace' you would have us bypass Parliament?
Is your middle name Stalin?

No, it would be Harper if I bypassed Parliament.

[g_bambino]

I think most people would associate stubbornness with your it-can't-be-done attitude...

Then you think most people are stupid (which makes one wonder why you'd put the case of going to war directly in their hands). "It can't be done" isn't synonymous with "nothing can change".

[GostHacked]

so by 'pick up the pace' you would have us bypass Parliament?
Is your middle name Stalin?

Parliament can be bypassed when going to war with another country (Libya) ... so what would be the harm in bypassing Parliament on this issue??