The Shotgun Blog
« Helpful Advice for Terrorists | Main | Canada not enforcing its own laws against terror »
Friday, August 10, 2007
Put it on ice
Globe and Mail: Canada steps up fight for the Arctic
Another volley has been launched in the battle for the Arctic, with Canada announcing Friday that two new military facilities will be built in the Arctic in a bid to boost its sovereign claim to the fabled Northwest Passage.
See also Reuters: Experts say UN must decide on Arctic claim and AP: Denmark maps Arctic ridge in race for polar sovereignty
Posted by Kevin Steel on August 10, 2007 in International Affairs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e3933990628834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Put it on ice:
Comments
This is a complete waste of time. I hope Mr. Harper is not serious, and just appealing to some temporary popular sentiment over this issue.
If the Liebrals/Dippers were doing this, I would fly a Danish flag from my car to protest it.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-08-10 11:42:37 AM
Northern resource development has long been a source of concern for interests in Canada and has long been an issue dodged by successive governments. Use it or lose it.
Posted by: DML | 2007-08-10 12:11:52 PM
DML: but it's not under threat.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-08-10 12:23:06 PM
Sovereignty represents control and the ability to control usage. Would we like the Russians with their crappy environmental record,drilling for oil? how about storing their clapped out Nuke fleet? The main argument for asserting Sovereignty is to preserve and protect the Arctic
Posted by: nick | 2007-08-10 12:28:17 PM
From who?
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-08-10 12:35:33 PM
From whom, dear Sir! lol!
Posted by: obc | 2007-08-10 12:37:26 PM
Zeb you are right - the people advocating this nonsense have never been to Resolute Bay I'll wager, nor flown over the Arctic in Winter which is downright dangerous and requires special skills and
equipment, the same applies to Ships, plus the fact that Canada's Patrol Frigates are not designed to operate in frigid waters nor ice conditions. The estimate for land based resources is simply put, wrong. We just completed a Proposal for a145,000 sq foot state of the art aircraft maintenace hanger to be built in the State of NY, which will cost in excess of $17.5 million US but will use Canadian NB steel and cladding (fibreglass reinforced precast concrete) -getting building materials into Resolute has not been thought out I'll also wager. We do not need an Arctic presence, airborne patrols are the right way to go. The socialist nerds who advocate such nonsense would only last a few days in the frozen North (which might not be a bad thing) this is just another bad plan by a slovenly public service
-no surprise to us - way to do these projects is by the Private sector with a long term lease to purchase -thats how the DEW Line was built, mostly by the US/Canadian Firm Drake Merritt. Macleod
Posted by: Jack Macleod | 2007-08-10 12:40:17 PM
Jack: I haven't been further north than Edmonton, so I have no experience with the Arctic. I do, however, know a waste of time and money when I see it. This more than qualifies as both.
Canada's real, current military requirements are for operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, not the high Arctic. The frigates, tanks and C-17s must not be wasted against wholly imagined 'threats' from the same countries that are fighting alongside our troops in Afghanistan.
I have an idea - put a flag, a webcam, and a battery at the tip of Baffin Island. If the camera sees anything, send an angry letter to the Globe and Mail.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-08-10 12:51:59 PM
I think this is a good idea. Protect our own land and stay out of someone elses business in the Middle East or Africa.
Posted by: Edmontonian | 2007-08-10 1:18:30 PM
I agree that the presnt proposals don't make sense but protecting Canadian interests in the Arctic does make sense. One air patrol per week solves nothing- too little, too late. Yes, I have done arctic patrols, albeit long ago when the average temp was lower. The present government may be looking at global warming to open us the Arctic to travel through more of the year. As a non-scientist I don't know if that will happen. If it does, we will have to exercise our presence more. That will mean more than the occasional air patrol and extending the Canadian Rangers and their quota of 303 ammo.
Posted by: DML | 2007-08-10 1:24:17 PM
But what if someone from the Middle East or Africa involves themselves in our business, like they did on 9/11? The Arctic is a diversion from real issues. I hope Mr. Harper is doing it to help him win a majority in the next election. If he wins, then the Arctic can take a back seat like it always has.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-08-10 1:24:36 PM
ZP, they attacked USA on 9/11.
Posted by: Edmontonian | 2007-08-10 1:28:26 PM
Interesting monkey-in-the-middle twist.
For years, the organ grinders claimed, Canada should have stayed out of Afghanistan because Darfur was more important.
Now that the UN said it would commit to Darfur, distract from Afghanistan and claim the Arctic is more important.
For your info, Arctic sovereignty has been on PM Harper's agenda from Day 1.
If you had been paying attention, you'd know.
Afghanistan was a unilateral act by Chretien, who did not seek the courtesy of Parliamentary approval before committing Canada's troops to that sorry poppy-growing dustbowl.
Pay attention, edmontonian.
Posted by: set you free | 2007-08-10 1:28:46 PM
And the US isn't an important Canadian interest?
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-08-10 1:31:57 PM
And the two dozen Canadians murdered on 9/11 don't matter?
Posted by: obc | 2007-08-10 1:33:31 PM
Yes, US is important but that still does not mean we got attacked on 9/11.
Posted by: Edmontonian | 2007-08-10 1:38:52 PM
We weren't attacked in 1914 or 1939, yet we still went to war.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-08-10 1:39:24 PM
9/11 was not an attack by a Country. It was an attack by individuals.
Posted by: Edmontonian | 2007-08-10 1:41:21 PM
Edmontonian wrote: ZP, they attacked USA on 9/11.
When Pike refers to "our business" he means that because he has a green card he is a sort of, kind of American. Hey Pike, when you are driving into Georgia on I-20 to shop at Arbor Place in Douglasville and get stopped by the GSP and get asked "Got any ID?", don't answer "bout what?" Unless of course you only go to Walmart and Goody's then you can stay in Alabama.
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 1:46:04 PM
Ed:
Finally, a glimmer of understanding.
9/11 was an attack by individual neo-Mohammedans.
Not by a country, not by all members of the Muslim religion.
Of course, they all purport to be Muslim, which brings shame on all the rest.
More and more Muslims are rejecting this neo-Mohammedamism and converting to Christianty, a true religion of peace.
Posted by: set you free | 2007-08-10 1:48:47 PM
I guess your parents are proud they raised a biggot, eh perish?
We are all North Americans last time I checked.
Posted by: missing link | 2007-08-10 1:55:47 PM
Canada has conducted many, many military operations in the Arctic and High Arctic commencing in 1945 with Operation "Musk Ox" which was designed to train the Canadian Army, returning from France and Germany
to fight in sub zero weather conditions. It was this operation that led to the development of specially designed tracked vehicles that brought fame and fortune to the Bombardier Family. Some of the personnel who formed a small part of "Musk Ox" were German Army Officers who fought is Russia. Meanwhile send the big mouth media into the arctic for a year or so, to deal with the issue of who owns what. Canada as I have posted previously would be better to form joint ventures with the
Russians whose Arctic Expertise is on par with ours, and we are considered the experts. Development should be carefully thought out, focus on environmental protection because the Arctic is in fact, deadly but pristine, a great gift for the people of Canada, to serve and protect.Have been in Resolute, Cambridge Bay, Tuktuktek, which was
serviced by RCAF Units from the great party Base of Goose Bay Labrador (now NF -Labrador) shared by the RCAF and USAAF - that remains the real base to
serve an Arctic presence which we have recommended to General O'Connor and General Hillier. Whose Mother named him "Rickey" - Macleod
Posted by: Jack Macleod | 2007-08-10 2:11:37 PM
missing link wrote: We are all North Americans last time I checked.
I know it's probably a bit of a stretch to assume that you travel, but if you do, do you use a passport issued by the government of North America?
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 2:13:00 PM
Only in Canada would this issue even be an issue. Haven't you people got anything better to do?
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-08-10 2:23:22 PM
Pike. Did you get your "Stars Fell On Alabama" tag yet? In Georgia it's viewed as a pitch for federal disaster relief. hahahaha
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 2:33:45 PM
Actually I have a God Bless America tag. Good joke though!
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-08-10 2:37:34 PM
Well I still think that Parliament did us proud in the 1980s, by refusing to build a measely $500 million icebreaker to look after and patrol our North.
Thereby allowing any Tom, Dick or Harry nation to plant their national flag on the Arctic where the prize is hundreds of billions of dollars of natural resources, like oil and gas.
The King Christian Island gas well would still be burning if they hadn't put it out in the early 70s, it was so productive.
303 ammunition?
Hey, when Ottawa get rid of the flintlocks?
Posted by: rockyt | 2007-08-10 2:44:57 PM
...it's pretty sad when a small spit of a country like Denmark can out hustle Canada in her own back yard.
Granted, Greenland is closer, but the fact remains, Canada got pushed around by a small cheeze country.
Good for Harper at least making an effort to recognize there is a nation north of the 60.
Posted by: tomax7 | 2007-08-10 3:52:44 PM
In fact Government of Canada bought several Ice Breakers in the late "fifties and 'sixties and upgraded their existing fleet in the middle 1980's
-Ships are not the problem - proving competent crews is the real situation facing Canada Coast Guard. Pearson's Navy is not capable nor motivated to take a certified Ice Breaker to sea. In our House the Pearson Navy remains and always will be the Royal Canadian Navy. Jeez Pearson's Navy gave Peter Newman the Queen's Commission for God's sake. He had nothing to offer except his penchant for nasty gossip.Pearson's Navy almost destroyed HMCS Labrador - no surprise to my father and his friends who went to sea in the early 1920's when Canada had a real Merchant Marine (or as they called it; Merchant Service) - Canadian Ships with Canadian Crews which flew the mighty Red Ensign
which was called "The Jack Flag" by the professional seaman in the RCN, RCMP Marine Division and the Canadian Merchant Service. If Canada sends wimps to the Arctic everybody who has an interest in Arctic resources will get a great laugh -All hands except Saint Alabaster take stations for leaving harbour, without falling overboard - MacLeod
Posted by: Jack Macleod | 2007-08-10 4:15:42 PM
Don't worry. Harper already sold it to GW.
Posted by: munroe | 2007-08-10 4:32:07 PM
Anyone can out hustle Canada. Our leaders are dolts for the most part. Chicken shit dolts actually.
It will be the Americans who will protect the NW passage for us.
Re the UN will decide who gets to control it???
What a joke. If the UN is true to form they will award it to that monkey Mugabe in Zimbabwe. Why not? ... it is Zimbabwe that currently holds the economic development portfolio for the UN last I heard.
UN nowadays stands for the United Negros organization. Toss in a few Jihadists and you have the governing world body.
Neat eh?
Posted by: John | 2007-08-10 4:37:53 PM
The breathless pandering by the Bell Media CTV Globe and Mail reflects upon the blatant anti americanism which pervades the disgusting city of Toronto where even the loosers are overpaid (In Canadian dollars)
This current contrived situation started on CTV when Puffy Duffy and Cluelss Taber where "shocked and appalled when they discovered a US Navy SSN Nuclear Boat had "penetrated our virgin Arctic by going under the ice." I wrote O'Connor who was then an opposition MP and pointed out that the US vessel
had operated in war games with Canadian and other NATO ships for many decades, and going under the ice was a routine operation for the Boat which uses the HMCS Shearwater Jetty Halifax HRM as a port resource when US Navy SSN's visit Halifax HRM NS for R and R, which they have for many decades
-the US Navy is on our side. Despite CTV the Canadian, UK and Russian Navies all knew exactly where the US Navy SSN was at all times. Jeez Puffy Duffy would get seasick on the Dartmouth -Halifax Ferry. MacLeod
Posted by: Jack MacLeod | 2007-08-10 5:13:56 PM
JOhn,
You downplay the influence of the nutbars, by going through race.
The reason why Idi Amine had the power he had, was he was a ghuinea pig for the wahabists. While he was doing what he did, they were studying the reactions of the west. I imagine they figured that the UN would do nothing when they did the ethnic cleansing in Darfur, and they knew it--cause no one stopped Idi, when he killed the 250,00 he killed, and no one stopped his successor either, when he did the same.
So, we are surprised that it is what it is?
We will see a change with the change of hands, but it will take awhile.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-08-10 5:18:44 PM
Ok, how about moving all jewish feamles to the nearest village? Save the flag and all...
Posted by: munroe | 2007-08-10 5:21:30 PM
All hands except Saint Alabaster take stations for leaving harbour, without falling overboard - MacLeod
Thanks for the kind words Jack. Did you ever serve in the Navy during wartime? A relative of mine served on HMS Dorsetshire and lived to tell the tale. Now those men were tough as nails, not like the pussy's in the Merchant Marine. Have a nice weekend.
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 5:57:32 PM
Denigrating the Merchant Marine is a sure sign of a loser. Many were killed in war, delivering vital supplies to attain victory.
Posted by: obc | 2007-08-10 6:01:47 PM
Denigrating the Merchant Marine is a sure sign of a loser. Many were killed in war, delivering vital supplies to attain victory.
At least my relatives actually did fight.
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 6:11:11 PM
Sure - with each other, no doubt.
Posted by: obc | 2007-08-10 6:13:18 PM
Sure - with each other, no doubt.
Maybe sometimes, but they did serve their country and in a couple of cases paid with there lives to preserve our freedom, unlike tossers like you.
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 6:19:21 PM
If they were like you, those lives weren't worth much anyways.
Posted by: obc | 2007-08-10 6:20:36 PM
If they were like you, those lives weren't worth much anyways.
If you consider servicemen who did for the Allied cause in WW2 worthless, then you are nothing but a worthless ingrate piece of shit.
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 6:24:40 PM
But he Merchant Marines who died were denigrated - by you!
Posted by: obc | 2007-08-10 6:27:05 PM
If they were like you, those lives weren't worth much anyways.
If you consider servicemen who died for the Allied cause in WW2 worthless, then you are nothing but a worthless ingrate piece of shit.
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 6:30:42 PM
But the Merchant Marines who died were denigrated - by you!
Posted by: obc | 2007-08-10 6:31:44 PM
But he Merchant Marines who died were denigrated - by you!
Were did I denigrate Merchant Marines who died. Show me where I said that.
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 6:33:58 PM
"Now those men were tough as nails, not like the pussy's in the Merchant Marine."
Sound familiar?
Posted by: obc | 2007-08-10 6:36:08 PM
So you consider allied servicemen who died fighting fascism worthless. What a fucking warped piece of shit you are.
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 6:37:13 PM
Off the deep-end once again, sap. Buchananites are all alike.
Posted by: obc | 2007-08-10 6:38:25 PM
"Now those men were tough as nails, not like the pussy's in the Merchant Marine."
Sound familiar?
Where does the word died or death appear?
Posted by: St Albion Parish News | 2007-08-10 6:39:13 PM
Nitpicker.
Posted by: obc | 2007-08-10 6:40:37 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.