Strike TWO!

[BrianHawkins1]

No one else has mentioned the obvious yet, so I will: O'Connor's appointment is terrifyingly similar to what is now business-as-usual in the US - especially in the Cheney administration - wrt the now non-existent line between the corporate world and cabinet positions.

O'Connor's past with the Ministry of Propaganda (aka Hill & Knowlton) is also about as scary as it gets:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_%26_Knowlton

www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html

This is perhaps the best example of the military-industrial complex in action ever seen in this country.
NOT GOOD, friends. Welcome to Harper's Kanada.

 

[Darkstar416]

Actually the Sun article was mentioned largely out of bewilderment that even the Sun picked up on what a hypocritical move Harper made in some of his appointments.

Thank you!

 

[unimaginative2]

How the hell can these people serve as a "voice" when they couldn't ever hope to get elected by the people for whom they're supposed to be speaking. Just because they come from the city doesn't mean that they represent the city's views. In fact, they evidently don't since their party did so dismally.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

This is a bad analogy, he was formerly a high ranking military official -- knowledgeable in that area (no conflict representing the portfolio he was given), your analogy is well.... stupid politically anyways.

Knowledgable? I don't think so. He was a Brigadier, and never held a major command at that. He has as much of a background to be MND as any middle level manager would at being made CEO.

Couple that with the asinine comments he's made over the last two years, and he's a disaster in the making. Maybe even as bad as Hellyer.

Kevin

 

[BrianHawkins1]

"the asinine comments he's made over the last two years"

For example?

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

i) Referring to our SF troops as "anti-social", and requiring "iron-tight discipline".

ii) A number of extremely distasteful things he said about the Chicoutimi incident.

iii) During the recent Arctic incidents, he repeatedly and publically asked for classified information, and then used it's denial for political points.

Kevin

 

[BrianHawkins1]

"A number of extremely distasteful things he said about the Chicoutimi incident."

I know he suggested that the Canadian technical evaluation of the subs may have been lacking, questioned the rescue plans and procedures, and called for an inquiry - was there more?

Also, what kind of "disaster" do you think he could cause?

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

I know he suggested that the Canadian technical evaluation of the subs may have been lacking, questioned the rescue plans and procedures, and called for an inquiry - was there more?

He also said that the boats were unsafe due to political interference. That might not seem like much, but it's definitely not what the submariner's families needed to hear. There were a LOT of family issues over that, as wives told husbands to "slap in". The USN has an apt saying: "If Momma ain't happy, ain't NOBODY happy".

Effectively, he crippled the submarine service with one stupid remark, when he couldn't even know if it was true or not.

Also, what kind of "disaster" do you think he could cause?

I can think of a number of scenarios which could cripple the CF for a generation, and I'm not exaggerating. The CF is in an extremely bad place right now, recovering from 15 years of burnout, and probably still too heavily tasked for it's size. It's also facing a huge demographic issue as a large number of senior officers/NCM's retire.

The most likely issue is that he'll heavily commit to foreign postings, and burn out the remaining people in the forces. You're looking at a generation to recover from that.

The next most likely is that he'll fritter away the miliatry in penny-packet postings, like his "defence battalions". If he does, the CF will lose the ability to operate in even the small units we now have ie brigades.

Kevin