Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/20/2020 in all areas

  1. This happens after a military member dies while on duty, opposition parties and selected media outlets do a story, just how old our military equipment is , people read it gasp say holy shit I did not know...then turn the page like nothing happened.... well here is another one of those stories, a similar story broke , the last snowbird crash, investigation found that the aircraft was to old and should be replaced, they were looking at running a purchasing program....but like everything else it was stuff aside for something else....today the Tudor aircraft is 57 years old bought when Diefenbake
    1 point
  2. I think you're missing the point entirely. The universities-as-enclaves are not a product of the "culture-war". They're one of the primary causes. This is a deeply entrenched, reinforcing feedback loop of academia informing policy makers, who in turn (consulting with peer-reviews) are responsible for funding grants. The funding grants are often what determine the longevity of a researcher, and there's a strong survivorship bias on those promoting the prevailing thinking. The research being done, and thus the research being consulted by policy makers, therefore ends up being tilted in one
    1 point
  3. The person that survives is not necessarily the strongest person it is the person that can adapt to change. What you call globalism is here and is not going away, you can work with different aspects of globalism to be better as an individual in a society. Not everything is about Trump, how can a man be 100 % correct ? Is he God ? Second of all Trump is probably one of the most liberal conservatives in power, this is just propaganda that he uses to brainwash people like you, you think Trump gives a damn for the middle American ? He just told them what they wanted to hear and used people'
    1 point
  4. DND writes a spec sheet, specs that explain in great detail what this piece of equipment needs to do, it is then given to PWSG, who are all civilians, no military at all, they then go out and pick several pieces of equipment that THEY think might fit the bill, DND tests them, discloses all the faults what they like or disliked, then the whole file gets taken up stairs to the politicians and they have the final decision, and as argus has explained the key factors are off setting "what can the company do for Canada, in most cases the company is asked to spend the equivalent of money in Canada...
    1 point
  5. There'll always be catastrophes. And when global incidents like this happens, it's always the poorest of the poor that bear the brunt of the suffering. The economic hardship for people in the West is somewhat ironic because we've seen 10 plus years of growth and wealth creation. The market correction was bound to happen.
    1 point
  6. The mainstay of the RCAF is the CF18 which first entered service 37 years ago. There is no replacement on the horizon for at least a decade. At which point they will be 47 years old. For comparison purposes, the Spitfire, the famed fighter from WW2, was retired from the RAF in 1952, 31 years prior to the introduction of the CF-18. Imagine the CF-18 flying against the Spitfire? That is what our fighters are expected to do now - fly against fighters over 30 years newer and more modern than them. And by the time they are replaced? Well, imagine if Canada was till been flying the Spitfire in
    1 point
  7. There's nothing wrong with military procurement. The problem is that the politicians use the military's budget as a kind of regional economic improvement exercise. The military's actual needs are superseded by what the politicians want in the way of jobs for government ridings. Thus we often pay double or triple what is needed for a piece of military equipment so the government can brag about all the jobs they're bringing to individual ridings. And, of course, the negotiations are protracted, and the bidding has an enormous unspoken, underlying aspect involving jobs and money to government rid
    1 point
  8. I think I can help. He's saying allowing the call to prayer is Politicians favoring one group of people over "the rest." So the one group of people would be the Muslims. And "the rest" would be what you might call "Kafir" or unbeliever or infidel. No need to thank me. I'm happy to help.
    1 point
  9. So your citations are Dr. Oz and a book written in 2005? As opposed to the Lancet, the CDC, the FDA etc. This whole Trump era really is a War against expertise. Trump is a the Dunning Kruger mascot. The irony of all this is that Trump is now discrediting studies that show the drug's ineffectiveness as partisan. It was a questionable study that got him to jump aboard the bandwagon in the first place. It's almost like he's a complete hypocrite.
    1 point
  10. Trump doesn't have evidence, he's not a prosecutor. The DOJ has evidence. It is an established fact that the FBI presented an unverified, uncorroborated dossier as partly verified and independently corroborated when neither was true. They made 17 "significant" errors and omissions in their submissions to get FISA Warrants and renewals. They said that the unverified dossier was just a part of the evidence they had of collusion, but it was all they had, and they knew that it amounted to nothing in late 2017. Still they kept acting like the investigation was producing actual, damning evidenc
    1 point
  11. There ya go. Click the link, it will take you right to where you were intentionally misrepresenting the facts about the Chinese travel ban. Any idiot knows that the POTUS can't force the Chinese gov't to allow Americans to stay there during a pandemic any more than he can stop Americans from coming home. The US DID NOT allow "40,000 travellers" in, they allowed 40,000 Americans to return. So again, you're intentionally dishonest and yet you expect the full truth from others. It's pathetic.
    1 point
  12. Why do you Trump fans keep citing Travel bans as if they did anything. Unless unilateral, Travel bans are essentially useless.
    1 point
  13. You forgot to mention the primary reason for harvesting wildlife . . . . food! Did the first European settlers carry a supply of Kraft dinner, were they vegans? They killed wildlife just like the Indians did. Both white/natives still hunt.
    1 point
  14. When you can't imagine others being motivated by something other than money, in Psychology, it's referred to as 'projection'. If you can't imagine how others think, it's actually your problem. I will reserve my response somewhat for the case that you have proof that this journalist is lying.
    1 point
  15. That Dude is a drama queen. Pelosi has passed plenty of legislation. Much of it is sitting on Mitch McConnel's desk.
    1 point
  16. The notion being that by saying so, we remove 'absolute power' from our own governments. You decide toward what or whom you would like to give absolute power. I know my response.
    1 point

Announcements



×
×
  • Create New...