|
|
|
'Peter McKay is an empty suit'
- Thread starter afransen
- Start date
cacruden
Senior Member
I may tend to the conservative side of the Canadian spectrum - but - does not surprise me - I despise the guy....
kEiThZ
Superstar
Yeah, we had a good laugh at work over the CBC coverage of this. The Russians have been probing fairly regularly over the last year and a bit. It's part of their arctic strategy. It never get's reported. But all of a sudden CBC is all over it! Interesting, how they never reported the number of times we've had to get American assistance to do the job. The coverage was all clearly to make the government look good.
afransen
Senior Member
CBC angling for bail-out money?
kEiThZ
Superstar
All that being said, it doesn't hurt to publicly tell the Russians to back off a little. Interceptions like this are a high risk, nerve racking affair. I actually know a few of the pilots who have intercepted Bears. It's especially nerve racking that this is taking place over the Arctic where SAR coverage is at our weakest. Lives can be lost if one of these routine interceptions blows up. I don't really think it was too big a deal for him to make a few comments. I think its more the CBC that blew it out of proportion. That's the impression I got watching the coverage and the minister's comments.
H
Hydrogen
Guest
The Globe also went a little ballistic* with the story.
*Sorry, the opportunity was too good to pass up.
*Sorry, the opportunity was too good to pass up.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I also don't know why a Minister taking the advice of his DMs and speaking out would be considered a bad thing. Isn't that what they are supposed to do? Around Ottawa, Mackay is at least one of the more hard working and more knowledgeable (and better briefed) Ministers. I don't think he should face too much slack for following the (speculated) advice of his subordinates.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Here is the interpretation by James Travers from the Star:
PM plays the old distraction game
Mar 03, 2009 04:30 AM
James Travers
OTTAWA
What in the sweet name of re-election is happening? If it isn't a robust response to Russian "Bears" routinely probing air defences then it's the Prime Minister, now Paris Hilton ubiquitous on U.S. television, musing about trade, energy and an unwinnable war.
Look for answers in the deepening recession. Yesterday's numbers from Hell – a sphincter-clenching 3.4 per cent GDP contraction and plunging markets – rewrite Bill Clinton's axiom: It's not the economy, stupid; it's the stupid economy.
Two of the many political laws are immutable. One is that principles are more flexible than interests. The other holds that a distraction is the next best thing to a solution.
Britain's resolute Margaret Thatcher proved the utility of diversions in 1982 when she sent the fleet south to lay a licking on the "Argies." Rescuing the Falkland Islands from Argentina was such a flag-waving success that voters forgave the wrenching changes she was imposing at home and handed Conservatives another victory.
Stephen Harper doesn't have islands with more sheep than shepherds to conquer. He does have the sort of economic problem that pummels ruling parties.
Worse, financial free-fall threatens the strong and competent leadership premise that, with an assist from hapless Stéphane Dion, won the Prime Minister the last election.
Given that choice, voters suspended their disbelief about Conservative fiscal management. If it registered at all, it didn't matter that mixing tax cuts and wild spending shrank an inherited $13 billion surplus to a budget rounding error.
Jim Flaherty's fanciful November fiscal update changed that. Predicting prosperity during the fall campaign was wishful thinking; projecting surpluses with the global economy in chaos suggested a dangerous disconnect with reality.
Along with forcing archconservatives to become practising socialists, that holy-smokes miscalculation stripped the emperor's clothes from Harper's economic reputation. Foolish as it is to predict any politician's future, it's hard to see how his fiscal performance will earn a third consecutive mandate.
Instead, Harper is testing version 2.0 of an old formula. Leadership extends beyond the economy to all tough decisions imposed by the power's demanding discipline.
Shrewd politicians use events the way judo experts use an attacker's momentum. Harper is trying to toss off the economic monkey by making much of the Ruskie nothing and by seizing America's fleeting, post-presidential visit interest in Canada. Reinforcing the point, the Prime Minister is spending time away from the capital and beyond the reach of Liberals who yesterday asked him to apologize for hurting Canadians by misreading the economy, and reporters who wonder if the best way to get answers from the Prime Minister is to be American.
Even if distancing himself is a long shot, it's Harper's best shot. To calm Canadians and quiet Conservatives worrying that his best days are past, the Prime Minister needs to keep economic horrors at arm's length while showcasing leadership on other, pressing anxieties.
Common sense argues it would take a Houdini to escape this recession. Still, Harper is marvellously elastic. He seamlessly crossed the political spectrum from right to left, relaxed obsessive control just in time to link ministers to the most vexing national problems and morphed from colourless wonk into a modest Canuck facsimile of a Yankee TV personality.
In politics as in military campaigns and bank robberies, there's nothing quite like a distraction.
James Travers' column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday.
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/595518
AoD
PM plays the old distraction game
Mar 03, 2009 04:30 AM
James Travers
OTTAWA
What in the sweet name of re-election is happening? If it isn't a robust response to Russian "Bears" routinely probing air defences then it's the Prime Minister, now Paris Hilton ubiquitous on U.S. television, musing about trade, energy and an unwinnable war.
Look for answers in the deepening recession. Yesterday's numbers from Hell – a sphincter-clenching 3.4 per cent GDP contraction and plunging markets – rewrite Bill Clinton's axiom: It's not the economy, stupid; it's the stupid economy.
Two of the many political laws are immutable. One is that principles are more flexible than interests. The other holds that a distraction is the next best thing to a solution.
Britain's resolute Margaret Thatcher proved the utility of diversions in 1982 when she sent the fleet south to lay a licking on the "Argies." Rescuing the Falkland Islands from Argentina was such a flag-waving success that voters forgave the wrenching changes she was imposing at home and handed Conservatives another victory.
Stephen Harper doesn't have islands with more sheep than shepherds to conquer. He does have the sort of economic problem that pummels ruling parties.
Worse, financial free-fall threatens the strong and competent leadership premise that, with an assist from hapless Stéphane Dion, won the Prime Minister the last election.
Given that choice, voters suspended their disbelief about Conservative fiscal management. If it registered at all, it didn't matter that mixing tax cuts and wild spending shrank an inherited $13 billion surplus to a budget rounding error.
Jim Flaherty's fanciful November fiscal update changed that. Predicting prosperity during the fall campaign was wishful thinking; projecting surpluses with the global economy in chaos suggested a dangerous disconnect with reality.
Along with forcing archconservatives to become practising socialists, that holy-smokes miscalculation stripped the emperor's clothes from Harper's economic reputation. Foolish as it is to predict any politician's future, it's hard to see how his fiscal performance will earn a third consecutive mandate.
Instead, Harper is testing version 2.0 of an old formula. Leadership extends beyond the economy to all tough decisions imposed by the power's demanding discipline.
Shrewd politicians use events the way judo experts use an attacker's momentum. Harper is trying to toss off the economic monkey by making much of the Ruskie nothing and by seizing America's fleeting, post-presidential visit interest in Canada. Reinforcing the point, the Prime Minister is spending time away from the capital and beyond the reach of Liberals who yesterday asked him to apologize for hurting Canadians by misreading the economy, and reporters who wonder if the best way to get answers from the Prime Minister is to be American.
Even if distancing himself is a long shot, it's Harper's best shot. To calm Canadians and quiet Conservatives worrying that his best days are past, the Prime Minister needs to keep economic horrors at arm's length while showcasing leadership on other, pressing anxieties.
Common sense argues it would take a Houdini to escape this recession. Still, Harper is marvellously elastic. He seamlessly crossed the political spectrum from right to left, relaxed obsessive control just in time to link ministers to the most vexing national problems and morphed from colourless wonk into a modest Canuck facsimile of a Yankee TV personality.
In politics as in military campaigns and bank robberies, there's nothing quite like a distraction.
James Travers' column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday.
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/595518
AoD
jade_lee
Active Member
Mackay is quite the fear monger but in the end he comes across as quite ridiculous. As a potential candidate for heading NATO, it appears that he would be the final nail in NATO's demise, I mean the guy's experience includes handing out Tim Horton's coffee to Canadian soldiers in a safe zone. Thats all they need is a pampered politican who sacrificed a party for a few plum positions of little merit thus far. I really think Mackay believes that the Canadian troops are the glue keeping Afghanistan together. I wonder what his American friends think of that attitude? What a joke.
The comment posted about the CBS accommodating the "dangerous Russians in Canadian air space" story in order to gain funds is kinda funny since they were just echoing what the Harper Government was putting out there and every Canadian media outlet milked the story for what it was worth.....what was it worth you ask? The story disappeared once Russia cozied up to the Obama administration the very next day. The coverage was a good laugh for the average Canadian who never did buy into the cold war bull!
The comment posted about the CBS accommodating the "dangerous Russians in Canadian air space" story in order to gain funds is kinda funny since they were just echoing what the Harper Government was putting out there and every Canadian media outlet milked the story for what it was worth.....what was it worth you ask? The story disappeared once Russia cozied up to the Obama administration the very next day. The coverage was a good laugh for the average Canadian who never did buy into the cold war bull!
Last edited:
MisterF
Senior Member
It's a non-story. Russian bombers test Canadian, American, British, and Scandinavian air defences on a weekly basis. Not only that, but we do it to the Americans, they do it to us, and the Europeans fly into each others' airspace all the time. It's routine.
H
Hydrogen
Guest
^And what's happening these days is nowhere near the frequency of that during the Cold War.
kEiThZ
Superstar
MisterF, Hydrogen
It may not be frequent but I can assure you it's not as routine as you would portray here.
Canadian, American and European aircraft can enter each other's airspace because as NATO members they share 'squawk' (Transponder/IFF) codes, flight procedures, etc. And we would never conceive of flying armed jets into American airspace without squawking friendly just for the fun of it.
Russian bombers attempting to probe Canadian and American airspace is a big deal. And that frequency is starting to approach that of the cold war. It's getting alarming. They are starting to probe European airspace over the North Sea as well.
Yes, it should not be blown out of proportion by the media. But it should not be a considered a non-event either. It's a big deal to send a pilot out with live missiles hanging off his wing to intercept a russian nuclear delivery system over the Arctic where should there be a mishap search-and-rescue coverage is limited. I assure you our pilots who strap on a G-suit as they are running for the birds in the alert hangar consider it to be quite an event.
It may not be frequent but I can assure you it's not as routine as you would portray here.
Canadian, American and European aircraft can enter each other's airspace because as NATO members they share 'squawk' (Transponder/IFF) codes, flight procedures, etc. And we would never conceive of flying armed jets into American airspace without squawking friendly just for the fun of it.
Russian bombers attempting to probe Canadian and American airspace is a big deal. And that frequency is starting to approach that of the cold war. It's getting alarming. They are starting to probe European airspace over the North Sea as well.
Yes, it should not be blown out of proportion by the media. But it should not be a considered a non-event either. It's a big deal to send a pilot out with live missiles hanging off his wing to intercept a russian nuclear delivery system over the Arctic where should there be a mishap search-and-rescue coverage is limited. I assure you our pilots who strap on a G-suit as they are running for the birds in the alert hangar consider it to be quite an event.
jade_lee
Active Member
I bet the shacks are still on top of the American embassy in Ottawa that housed equipment to intercept our Prime Minister's communications during the cold war.
There is a great story floating out there about how Canada was able to win the Chinese Wheat Deal instead of our American cousins: it was a mistake, our Canadian spies had no idea that they were intercepting talks of the American's bid to the Chinese but they soon clued in and we had the opportunity to undercut their bid and we did! The Americans were pissed.
There is a great story floating out there about how Canada was able to win the Chinese Wheat Deal instead of our American cousins: it was a mistake, our Canadian spies had no idea that they were intercepting talks of the American's bid to the Chinese but they soon clued in and we had the opportunity to undercut their bid and we did! The Americans were pissed.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I don't think it's fair though to call Peter Mackay an empty suit. The guy is actually a fairly decent minister. For one he's probably one of the few ministers (both Liberal and Conservative) that actually reads the briefs that are produced for him. And he remains genuinely interested and engaged with DND. That's pretty rare in Canada, where the Defence portfolio is often seen as a junior portfolio. Some of our last few ministers were disasters, either they were hostile to the senior staff (Gordon O'Connor) or utterly lacking in qualification or experience (John McCallum). DND has run through ministers at a crazy pace. Having one ministers who has proven himself competent and committed is a god-send to a ministry starving for sound, steady leadership.
I sincerely hope he gets the NATO gig. He would represent Canada well and it would raise Canada's profile internationally. Sadly, that might well mean the end of his political career.
I sincerely hope he gets the NATO gig. He would represent Canada well and it would raise Canada's profile internationally. Sadly, that might well mean the end of his political career.
afransen
Senior Member
I haven't forgiven him for selling out the PC party.
Also, the frequent ministerial turnover is a feature not a bug of this administration. Kind of like how we have two foreign affairs ministers so they can each talk out of a different side of their mouths.
Also, the frequent ministerial turnover is a feature not a bug of this administration. Kind of like how we have two foreign affairs ministers so they can each talk out of a different side of their mouths.