Alliedassault           
FAQ Calendar
Go Back   Alliedassault > Lounge > Offtopic
Reload this Page w00t new "tanks" for canada
Offtopic Any topics not related to the games we cover. Doesn't mean this is a Spam-fest. Profanity is allowed, enter at your own risk.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old
  (#16)
intrestedviewer is Offline
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 4,657
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: California, USA
  Send a message via MSN to intrestedviewer  
Default 10-30-2003, 09:32 AM

lol, "Defence Minister John McCallum announced $600 million for 66 new fighting vehicles while the US ordered 2,131 of the vehicles in November 2000." Ok, now i really see how Canada is so weak in its military. biggrin:
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#17)
Pvt Flagg is Offline
Senior Member
 
Posts: 654
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: fredericksburg va
  Send a message via AIM to Pvt Flagg Send a message via Yahoo to Pvt Flagg  
Default 10-30-2003, 12:19 PM

thay nead one of these

[img]http://www.5thesbclan.com/flagg_images/bb-55.jpg[/img]


bb-55 uss north carolina


just how i like them ..

BIG GUNS!

Flagg
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#18)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
   
Default 10-30-2003, 12:49 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by intrestedviewer
lol, "Defence Minister John McCallum announced $600 million for 66 new fighting vehicles while the US ordered 2,131 of the vehicles in November 2000." Ok, now i really see how Canada is so weak in its military. biggrin:
Canada doesn't really need a big military, we (the US) are their friends.
We like Lord Calvert and Molson, anyone fucks with our Canadian pals we're coming with all 12 carriers battlegroups, 10 Air Force Expeditionary wings, and 20 Army and Marine divisions. (as long as we're not tied down in some shithole country that dumbasses like Clinton and Bush Jr. decide to invade)
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#19)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
   
Default 10-30-2003, 02:17 PM

Not like Canada is gonna get invaded. Besides, everyone (China, Iraq, N.Korea, ect.) hates the U.S not Canada!
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#20)
Zoner is Offline
Administrator
 
Zoner's Avatar
 
Posts: 17,739
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Camp Crystal Lake
   
Default 10-30-2003, 02:25 PM

God help anyone who invades us. We're highly trained in "dropping the gloves" and we'll have your sweater up over your head faster than you can say "Take off, eh!"

biggrin:


http://www.fpsgameforums.com/forums/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=5399&dateline=1213387  247
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#21)
ninty is Offline
Major General
 
ninty's Avatar
 
Posts: 12,683
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Calgary
   
Default 10-30-2003, 02:25 PM

And were trying not to run a deficit.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#22)
Zoner is Offline
Administrator
 
Zoner's Avatar
 
Posts: 17,739
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Camp Crystal Lake
   
Default 10-30-2003, 02:30 PM

Free health care, baby!

/me high-fives ninty


http://www.fpsgameforums.com/forums/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=5399&dateline=1213387  247
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#23)
Maplegyver is Offline
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,033
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: motherland
   
Default 10-30-2003, 04:23 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoner
Free health care, baby!

/me high-fives ninty
me high fived zoner
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#24)
SW-14 is Offline
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1,266
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Houston, TX
  Send a message via AIM to SW-14  
Default 10-30-2003, 05:10 PM

Lower taxes, baby!

calmdown:
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#25)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
   
Default 10-30-2003, 05:19 PM

[quote="SW-14":f2eb7]Lower taxes, baby!

calmdown:[/quote:f2eb7]

rising prices baby!

you do know that lowering taxes on the rich prompts investing, stocks mean that companies will have to pay more dividend, where does the stock dividend come from?
average Joes like you and me have to pay more for the same goods so some fucker can get richer. I'm all for free enterprise, but stockholders do more harm than good when the economy is not expanding exponentially.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#26)
SW-14 is Offline
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1,266
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Houston, TX
  Send a message via AIM to SW-14  
Default 10-30-2003, 05:25 PM

[quote="Sgt Stryker":dc6bf][quote="SW-14":dc6bf]Lower taxes, baby!

calmdown:[/quote:dc6bf]

rising prices baby!

you do know that lowering taxes on the rich prompts investing, stocks mean that companies will have to pay more dividend, where does the stock dividend come from?
average Joes like you and me have to pay more for the same goods so some fucker can get richer. I'm all for free enterprise, but stockholders do more harm than good when the economy is not expanding exponentially.[/quote:dc6bf]


Inflation is less than 2%, (last I checked) and GDP grew at a 7.2% rate in the third quarter.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#27)
A HUNGRY FATMAN is Offline
Senior Member
 
Posts: 427
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: PA
   
Default 10-30-2003, 06:36 PM

ya but the state of the economy is not on disscusion here offtopic:
the canidian excuse for a millitary is.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#28)
ninty is Offline
Major General
 
ninty's Avatar
 
Posts: 12,683
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Calgary
   
Default 10-30-2003, 06:48 PM

[quote="A HUNGRY FATMAN":46f03]ya but the state of the economy is not on disscusion here offtopic:
the canidian excuse for a millitary is.[/quote:46f03]

That is not on discussion either. The discussion is purchasing new mobile gun systems.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#29)
Maplegyver is Offline
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,033
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: motherland
   
Default 10-30-2003, 07:04 PM

[quote=ninty9]
Quote:
Originally Posted by "A HUNGRY FATMAN":9b0ce
ya but the state of the economy is not on disscusion here offtopic:
the canidian excuse for a millitary is.
That is not on discussion either. The discussion is purchasing new mobile gun systems.[/quote:9b0ce]
ninty
is there any ather talk about getting anything else?
why not buy the abrams.
i is very well fit for the role of an mbt. atlease better than the one we are buying.
the lav 3 is a great apc. if not one of the best. but not as the role of a mbt.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#30)
ninty is Offline
Major General
 
ninty's Avatar
 
Posts: 12,683
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Calgary
   
Default 10-30-2003, 07:24 PM

[quote=maple]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ninty9
Quote:
Originally Posted by "A HUNGRY FATMAN":21446
ya but the state of the economy is not on disscusion here offtopic:
the canidian excuse for a millitary is.
That is not on discussion either. The discussion is purchasing new mobile gun systems.
ninty
is there any ather talk about getting anything else?
why not buy the abrams.
i is very well fit for the role of an mbt. atlease better than the one we are buying.
the lav 3 is a great apc. if not one of the best. but not as the role of a mbt.[/quote:21446]

well if the Government wanted MBT's they would have ust kept the leopard and upgraded them all to A2's like the Germans have done. The loepards are still a good tank. They are still effective, but in order to remain effective they need upgrading. I guess the brainstorm in Ottawa is, scrap the MBT's and replace them with a smaller amount of Armoured Fighting Vehicles. As I said before, if we were to purchse 500 of these things, I could understand scrapping the leopard. These things aren't like a tank, but if we haev enough of them to go around, I don't see a problem with using them.

The thing with MBT's either Leopards or Abrams is that we can't transport them. Our navy can't ship them, and our air force can't fly them anywhere. We have nothing capeable of carrying tanks. These Strykers are supposed to be able to fit onto a CC-130 Hercules aircraft. I guess the government thinks if we can ship them, we can use them. Thats why our Leos are all up in Waineright. They don't move from there because we can't transport them anywhere, and we probably wouldn't beable to support them in operation. And the amount we have is so insignificant, they wouldn't really make a difference is a campaign like in Iraq.

So the general idea is totally scrapping MBT's. Once this deal goes through, i'm sure you'll see the leo's going away. That is unless the PM retires before the deal goes through. If paul martin wants to spend money on the military (which I doubt since he was finance minister when he cut the budget) then its up to him on wht he wants to do. Maybe he'll cancel the contract. Who knows. If Paul martin gives spending a boost, we might find that we have money for more vehicles. But that won't happen under chretien, and remember these strykers wouldn't even be delivered until 2006. So thats a long way off.
  
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.12 by ScriptzBin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
© 1998 - 2007 by Rudedog Productions | All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners. All rights reserved.