Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 11-05-2010, 02:59 PM   #1
HPLovecraft
Took an arrow to the knee
 
HPLovecraft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Toronto
Exp:
lanny What is Canada's foreign policy? What should it be?

So, I've been thinking lately about Canada's standing in the world, especially after losing that seat on the UN Security Council, and hearing Ignatieff and Martin speak about Harper's foreign policy. I am a little confused as to what our foreign policy actually is. I am not an anti-American nutter by any stretch of the imagination, but is the foreign policy of Canada really to just support the policies of the US so as to enhance our standing with them at this point? Continental issues are important too, of course, but it seems to me Canada's just kind of disappearing on the world stage. We aren't seen as peacekeepers and rule of law supporters in the UN anymore (and I realize some didn't like the "peacekeeper" role to begin with). I suppose we've adopted a more "hard power" line when it comes to foreign affairs such as in Afghanistan, but let's not kid ourselves, we're not making anyone shiver with our brute might, either. Do we still consider ourselves a "Middle Power," as Louis St. Laurent once put it, or are we trying to be something else?

The way I'm seeing it, it seems Canada doesn't have any real plan of what it wants to be on the world stage. I'm no expert on this, but the loss of the UN seat kind of worries me. Not that I find the UN particularly important in the long run, but as a reflection of how the world is beginning to perceive us.

To bring Flames jargon into this, what is our identity?
__________________
"An adherent of homeopathy has no brain. They have skull water with the memory of a brain."
HPLovecraft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 03:03 PM   #2
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

We thankfully got rid of the concept of a soft power foreign policy a few years ago, and have taken a harder line when dealing with countries with questionable human rights and international foreign policy.

We got out of the useless UN Peacekeeping game, mostly because we committed actual combat troops to the UN mission in Afghanistan.

Canada and other like nations can't win in the UN because the UN has shifted into a 3rd world power enabler, so Canada seems to be ignoring it more and more.

From a aid standpoint, we're still sending significant money abroad, but it has been cut back.

Canadian foreign policy is a lot harder then it used to be. We've gone from asking nicely and suggestioning, to actually telling.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 03:07 PM   #3
HPLovecraft
Took an arrow to the knee
 
HPLovecraft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Toronto
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
We thankfully got rid of the concept of a soft power foreign policy a few years ago, and have taken a harder line when dealing with countries with questionable human rights and international foreign policy.

We got out of the useless UN Peacekeeping game, mostly because we committed actual combat troops to the UN mission in Afghanistan.

Canada and other like nations can't win in the UN because the UN has shifted into a 3rd world power enabler, so Canada seems to be ignoring it more and more.

From a aid standpoint, we're still sending significant money abroad, but it has been cut back.

Canadian foreign policy is a lot harder then it used to be. We've gone from asking nicely and suggestioning, to actually telling.
Telling what, though? I haven't seen that much telling of anyone or anything. Is it making a difference at all, besides possibly costing Canada its image on the world stage? Is Canada, as a nation, really in a position to do the telling rather than the brokering?
__________________
"An adherent of homeopathy has no brain. They have skull water with the memory of a brain."
HPLovecraft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 03:14 PM   #4
mykalberta
Franchise Player
 
mykalberta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

From what I can tell Canada has shifted all foreign investment to countries which would benefit Canadian companies hence the movement of funds from Africa and South East asioa to South America. I am fine with our current status as a country of 35mil. I dont see a reason to bat much above our weight especially where there is very little to gain by it. We are leaving Afghanistan next year and that is also a good thing imo.
__________________
MYK - Supports Arizona to democtratically pass laws for the state of Arizona
Rudy was the only hope in 08
2011 Election: Cons 40% - Nanos 38% Ekos 34%
mykalberta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 03:18 PM   #5
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPLovecraft View Post
Telling what, though? I haven't seen that much telling of anyone or anything. Is it making a difference at all, besides possibly costing Canada its image on the world stage? Is Canada, as a nation, really in a position to do the telling rather than the brokering?
Brokering is worthless without the spine to back it up.

Our old soft power policy was worthless, we could broker all day long and basically get laughed at.

Canada is a strong economic power, with a military that at least can carry out some peace enforcement instead of acting as a bullet trap between two warring sides.

Honestly I don't see Canada's image on the world stage as suffering as much as changing.

I really care about the loss of the UN security seat, because the UN itself as a global entity for peace is fading and being subverted by penny ante radical countries who are using it to push their own regional mandates.

Personally Canada should stop writing cheques to the UN until it reforms.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 03:18 PM   #6
HPLovecraft
Took an arrow to the knee
 
HPLovecraft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Toronto
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mykalberta View Post
From what I can tell Canada has shifted all foreign investment to countries which would benefit Canadian companies hence the movement of funds from Africa and South East asioa to South America. I am fine with our current status as a country of 35mil. I dont see a reason to bat much above our weight especially where there is very little to gain by it. We are leaving Afghanistan next year and that is also a good thing imo.
This is true, but I don't mean just how Canada's viewed militarily . . . My definition of "Middle Power" has always been the brokers of the world, so to speak. They can speak to both major powers and small powers, and they can be trusted by both because they look to retain stability on the international stage. Is Canada still that, especially now with the loss of the UN Security Council seat? Canada may not be militarily strong, but for a long time it's been "politically" strong when it came to how other countries view us. My worry is that Canada is losing the credit it once had and, while we all know they aren't going to convince many nations to do things by force, won't be able to influence nations like they used to with political and legitimate clout.
__________________
"An adherent of homeopathy has no brain. They have skull water with the memory of a brain."
HPLovecraft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 03:32 PM   #7
mykalberta
Franchise Player
 
mykalberta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

I think the only places we have lost influence is Africa and the Middle East.

Africa because we have dramatically decreased funding, and the Middle East because with the Oil Sands we are a definite competitor to the stranglehold the ME has on world oil supply and we are neighbors to the worlds biggest oil addict.

While normally those 2 areas are relatively insignificant to Canada, Africa will always be a heart strings continent and the ME is seen by Continental Europe as a relative safe source of Energy compared to the corrupt regime in Russia (how crazy is that).

IMO what lost us our seat wasnt Canada Foreign policy in general, but its foreign policy towards the ME. Canada is one of the very few countries that doesnt need to bend over to the ME for anything since they have nothing we need. Here is my "off the top of my head" list of why the ME would try to sabatoge Canada bid for the UN.

1 - oil supply
2 - afghanistan
3 - neighbors and friend to the big bad usa
4 - uae flight rights to Canada
5 - Research in Motion

If you look at the 2 European countries that got it (the simple fact that 2 countries were from Europe should raise red flags considering there are already 3 permanent members from the EU on the councl.

1 - Europe has no oil, needs oil from the ME
2 - while some are in Afghanistan, most arent doing the heavy lifting
3 - most of europe sees the US as an advisary, not a friend hence the formation of the EU
4 - Europe has already sold its soul (airline flights rights wise) to the ME
5 - dont really have anything here but I am sure if I followed ME/EU relations close it wouldnt be hard to find.
__________________
MYK - Supports Arizona to democtratically pass laws for the state of Arizona
Rudy was the only hope in 08
2011 Election: Cons 40% - Nanos 38% Ekos 34%

Last edited by mykalberta; 11-05-2010 at 03:34 PM.
mykalberta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 03:35 PM   #8
Flash Walken
Lifetime Suspension
 
Flash Walken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
Exp:
Default

I think the appropriate foreign policy stance of a socialist nation like Canada is that of a strong, technologically advanced military presence with a stance of non-involvement.

I believe that the coastline and largely uninhabited regions of Canada require a technologically advanced Naval and Air Force presence. Force multiplication should be the order of the day.

Canada should implement at the Federal level, a regional research and production program for armaments and related technologies to supply NATO allies. Applied science should become a large part of military expenditures and should be the start of any opening of the public purse.

Canada should completely disengage from any current international entanglements to provide the current enlisted personnel a moment of reprieve to allow a period of information exchange and military re-alignment. With recent guerrilla experience, a reformation of military policy to train more, smaller, tactically advanced units should come now, while commanders are fresh from the battlefield.

Finally, the Coast Guard should be significantly augmented by the newly funded military apparatus.
Flash Walken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 08:44 AM   #9
FlamesFanInOilCountry
Backup Goalie
 
FlamesFanInOilCountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SE Calgary!!!
Exp:
Default

I think Canada's foreign policy is often affiliated with this notion of a "helpful fixer." We like to think that we are closely affiliated with an organization like the UN, which has been proven time and time again through our peace keeping missions. We put more solace in our identity as a strong economic country that thinks we are less partisan than we actually are, we think that we can be that "impartial" country that can help in peace keep missions and foreign aid (The perfect example of this was our role in the Suez, which effectively pissed of the British). The problem to me, is that we don't take a strong role in what is the best from Canada, we're more concerned with how we are perceived by the rest of the world.

I think the only reason that we went to Afghanistan was that our largest trading partner and the country we share a mutual defense treaty with was attacked. If it was anyone else, we would not have gone. The helpful fixer role is not benefitting Canada, which was clearly exposed in our security seat debacle of last month, which was further worsened by how Canada acted.

By no means am I anti-American, but I don't like how arrogant the American government is. They realize that they are in the drivers seat, and as a result they try to take us the the cleaners every chance they get, examples being their treatment of certain aspects of the NAFTA, or their handling of the mad cow outbreaks. You could even go back as far as Diefenbaker and Kennedy. The United States has a population that is 10x the size of ours and a substantially larger military, but our economies are equally dependent of each other. I feel that Canada should take a more assertive stand in securing it's economy and military, especially in the north, and stop trying to be the 'helpful fixer.' This ideology would work if the rest of the world did indeed actually perceive us as it, but they don't. In contemporary times we are perceived as a poster child first world nation, that is the 'little brother of the United States.'

It's time to stop trying to separate ourselves from the United States, while we let them step on us, as this just makes us look impotent. It's time to stop committing ourselves to extensive peacekeeping and foreign aid operations. I think that we are not being recognized as a world leader, so we should probably stop trying to be one in this certain areas. Our own country is suffering. Our own homeless rates have been increasing for years now, economic rates between rich in poor are continuing to be marganalized between rich and poor.

Hopefully that wasn't too much of a rant... I just felt this could be a good discussion!

Thoughts?
FlamesFanInOilCountry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 09:38 AM   #10
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesFanInOilCountry View Post
I think Canada's foreign policy is often affiliated with this notion of a "helpful fixer." We like to think that we are closely affiliated with an organization like the UN, which has been proven time and time again through our peace keeping missions. We put more solace in our identity as a strong economic country that thinks we are less partisan than we actually are, we think that we can be that "impartial" country that can help in peace keep missions and foreign aid (The perfect example of this was our role in the Suez, which effectively pissed of the British). The problem to me, is that we don't take a strong role in what is the best from Canada, we're more concerned with how we are perceived by the rest of the world.
I think that the affiliation to the UN actually does nothing for us internationally anymore. Ignatieff was quoted as saying its time for the military to wear the Blue Berets again. I couldn't disagree more strongly. The day and age of peace keeping is dead, peacekeeping only works if both sides want peace. For the most part we're now seeing insurgancies instead of fights over national borders, and instead of the romantically envisioned idea of lightly armed troops standing in between two warring sides who at some level want to stop, we need to realize that insurgancies need to be basically rooted out. In order to do that you need to be able to provide peace enforcement with enough mobility and firepower, and the will to use it if your asked to provide it. The UN is too conflicted and weak of an organization with little to no understanding of the military application of peace. If Canada is going to provide it, its either going to be through defense treaty partners or at the direct request of a foreign government.

The UN model doesn't work because it doesn't cater to global needs, its become subverted and corrupted by voting blocks and doesn't care about the greater good, its falling into the same kind of pit that destroyed the league of nations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesFanInOilCountry View Post
I think the only reason that we went to Afghanistan was that our largest trading partner and the country we share a mutual defense treaty with was attacked. If it was anyone else, we would not have gone. The helpful fixer role is not benefitting Canada, which was clearly exposed in our security seat debacle of last month, which was further worsened by how Canada acted.
Inititally nobody wanted us in Afghanistan, we had to go hat in hand to the American's because the U.S. was convinced and rightfully so, that our military had been driven too far into the turf by federal government mismanagement to do much more then be a nuicance there. But we also got into Afghanistan because Chretien panicked and had to do something to appease the American's after he refused to help in Iraq. We got into a war because of optics.

The fact is, as much as we talk about helpful fixer, and soft diplomacy, I think that those roles are dead, we've seen especially recently that other countries believe that national interests supercede international duty. Canada needs to become more selfish, and not sell itself short. We need to start using our own economic levers, if other nations want our help. We need to take the opinion that in the case of these other nations like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan and China, that they need our resourcess more then we need their goods, and we should be negotiating from a position of some strength.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesFanInOilCountry View Post
By no means am I anti-American, but I don't like how arrogant the American government is. They realize that they are in the drivers seat, and as a result they try to take us the the cleaners every chance they get, examples being their treatment of certain aspects of the NAFTA, or their handling of the mad cow outbreaks. You could even go back as far as Diefenbaker and Kennedy. The United States has a population that is 10x the size of ours and a substantially larger military, but our economies are equally dependent of each other. I feel that Canada should take a more assertive stand in securing it's economy and military, especially in the north, and stop trying to be the 'helpful fixer.' This ideology would work if the rest of the world did indeed actually perceive us as it, but they don't. In contemporary times we are perceived as a poster child first world nation, that is the 'little brother of the United States.'
We first and foremost will always be fast friends with the Americans. We also need to realize that we are economically intertwinded now. But Canada has always been treated like the annoying little brother because we allow ourselves to be perceived that way, not as a partner, but as a tag along. Rebuilding our military and showing the American's that we can take care of ourselves is a really positive first step. Aquiting ourselves well in a Afghanistan was a really positive step. Hopefully it will also allow us to eventually be seen world wide as our own country instead of a satellite state to the American's. We need to seperate our foreigh policy goals from the Americans as well. We need to show that we're not in lockstep with their goals and results.

We also need to start generating more favorable business terms internationally so that we're not locked in a death spiral with the U.S. economy.

We need to be more like the Swiss, in that way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesFanInOilCountry View Post
It's time to stop trying to separate ourselves from the United States, while we let them step on us, as this just makes us look impotent. It's time to stop committing ourselves to extensive peacekeeping and foreign aid operations. I think that we are not being recognized as a world leader, so we should probably stop trying to be one in this certain areas. Our own country is suffering. Our own homeless rates have been increasing for years now, economic rates between rich in poor are continuing to be marganalized between rich and poor.

Hopefully that wasn't too much of a rant... I just felt this could be a good discussion!

Thoughts?
I agree with that to a point, but we do need to show the world that we're our own country. I believe that we need to use foreign aid as a lever to effect change. And your right, no more worthless peacekeeping. Thank Pearson, then put all the blue berets in a museum.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 09:43 AM   #11
FlamesFanInOilCountry
Backup Goalie
 
FlamesFanInOilCountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SE Calgary!!!
Exp:
Default

So, to summarize. You and I agree, but you took more time to build and articulate on areas that I brought up?
FlamesFanInOilCountry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 10:02 AM   #12
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

sure, we have some minor disagreements in terms of our relationship with the U.S.

And I think I'm a little harder on the Canadian UN relationship.

Plus I want us to start being able to build and market weapons systems.

Re open the naval ship yards in halifax and license out the Halifax frigate design to our allies.

The next generation of armoured vehicles should be designed and built in Canada as well.

Oh and I want us to build about a half dozen nuclear tipped missiles.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 10:32 AM   #13
MarchHare
Franchise Player
 
MarchHare's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Re open the naval ship yards in halifax and license out the Halifax frigate design to our allies.
Do you mean the shipyard in Saint John, NB?

Also, there were attempts to sell the Halifax-class design on the international market, but there were no buyers. I know for a fact that Saudi Arabia was one country looking into it; a family member who was close to the potential deal said they were kicking the proverbial tires for an upgraded version even better than what we were building for Canada's navy. The joke at the time (early 90s) was that the Saudis wanted a ship "with all the bells and missiles".
MarchHare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 10:41 AM   #14
FlamesFanInOilCountry
Backup Goalie
 
FlamesFanInOilCountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SE Calgary!!!
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
sure, we have some minor disagreements in terms of our relationship with the U.S.

And I think I'm a little harder on the Canadian UN relationship.

Plus I want us to start being able to build and market weapons systems
I actually do like this idea. I feel it's a positive way to bolster our economy by having Canadian owned and operated companies manufacture and distribute weapons for our armed forces, plus it keeps our technology in the hands of our own nationals. The caution in this area is that we do not let these corporations turn into a form of patronage for the government, and that these companies do not turn to arms dealing to third world countries to sustain their bottom line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
Re open the naval ship yards in halifax and license out the Halifax frigate design to our allies.
We need to be prepared to pay more taxes in order to sustain these ventures, especially because acts like this would need a larger military and security presence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
The next generation of armoured vehicles should be designed and built in Canada as well.

Oh and I want us to build about a half dozen nuclear tipped missiles.
What is your argument behind this? I know there are obvious pro's and con's to this. Is this just for a level of military independence? I think there's a certain sophistication in being a primary country involved in the manhattan project and being a nation with the capability to build a nuclear weapon for 65 years, and being the only country in the world that has not built a weapon after possessing the technology.
FlamesFanInOilCountry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 10:41 AM   #15
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Yeah, misplaced the ship yard.

I still contend that the Halifax frigates are one of the best frigates on the planet and equivalent to the U.S. Burke class.

I know some American Naval officers that I talked to years ago that were in love with the things when they joined U.S. task forces in excercises.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 10:44 AM   #16
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesFanInOilCountry View Post
I actually do like this idea. I feel it's a positive way to bolster our economy by having Canadian owned and operated companies manufacture and distribute weapons for our armed forces, plus it keeps our technology in the hands of our own nationals. The caution in this area is that we do not let these corporations turn into a form of patronage for the government, and that these companies do not turn to arms dealing to third world countries to sustain their bottom line.



We need to be prepared to pay more taxes in order to sustain these ventures, especially because acts like this would need a larger military and security presence.



What is your argument behind this? I know there are obvious pro's and con's to this. Is this just for a level of military independence? I think there's a certain sophistication in being a primary country involved in the manhattan project and being a nation with the capability to build a nuclear weapon for 65 years, and being the only country in the world that has not built a weapon after possessing the technology.
I was kind of joking about the nuclear option. Its an old joke that we had back in the military because at one point Canada was a nuclear nation with air to air nuclear tipped missiles for the Star Fighter, ground to air and ground to ground nuclear missiles. Nuclear depth charges, and non guided battlefield nuclear bombs for our german forces.

The joke is that we never got rid of these weapons and they're stockpiled up at Alert, just in case we need them.

I really wouldn't want Canada to be nuclear armed. The goal of most people in civilized militaries is to ensure that they're never used.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 10:57 AM   #17
MarchHare
Franchise Player
 
MarchHare's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
Yeah, misplaced the ship yard.

I still contend that the Halifax frigates are one of the best frigates on the planet and equivalent to the U.S. Burke class.

I know some American Naval officers that I talked to years ago that were in love with the things when they joined U.S. task forces in excercises.
Yeah, they're absolutely fantastic ships for their size/role. During a joint wargame in the 90s, a lone Halifax-class frigate was able to successfully sneak up on an entire US carrier group, "sink" the carrier, and then escape safely. I've often wondered if the US government secretly pressured other nations not to buy them to help prop up their own naval shipbuilding industry.
MarchHare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 11:16 AM   #18
peter12
Franchise Player
 
peter12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
Yeah, misplaced the ship yard.

I still contend that the Halifax frigates are one of the best frigates on the planet and equivalent to the U.S. Burke class.

I know some American Naval officers that I talked to years ago that were in love with the things when they joined U.S. task forces in excercises.
Isn't the Burke the heaviest armed ship in the world for its class? I've heard they are comparable to missile cruisers, what with the Tomahawk missile launchers etc...

How does the Halifax compare to that?
peter12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 11:16 AM   #19
FlamesFanInOilCountry
Backup Goalie
 
FlamesFanInOilCountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SE Calgary!!!
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
I was kind of joking about the nuclear option. Its an old joke that we had back in the military because at one point Canada was a nuclear nation with air to air nuclear tipped missiles for the Star Fighter, ground to air and ground to ground nuclear missiles. Nuclear depth charges, and non guided battlefield nuclear bombs for our german forces.

The joke is that we never got rid of these weapons and they're stockpiled up at Alert, just in case we need them.

I really wouldn't want Canada to be nuclear armed. The goal of most people in civilized militaries is to ensure that they're never used.
I thought that was a joke at first, but, I have definitely heard some pretty hilarious notions regarding nuclear weapons... Perhaps we will need the green text
FlamesFanInOilCountry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2010, 11:17 AM   #20
FlamesFanInOilCountry
Backup Goalie
 
FlamesFanInOilCountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SE Calgary!!!
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchHare View Post
Yeah, they're absolutely fantastic ships for their size/role. During a joint wargame in the 90s, a lone Halifax-class frigate was able to successfully sneak up on an entire US carrier group, "sink" the carrier, and then escape safely. I've often wondered if the US government secretly pressured other nations not to buy them to help prop up their own naval shipbuilding industry.
The United States would NEVER do anything like that. Especially not in the 1960s.
FlamesFanInOilCountry is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
canada , foreign policy

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:26 PM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021