Can-Challenge: Beat Mackenzie King's record

Oh, Mulroney...there were the Airbuses that were bought for the air force as midair refuelers, which he took one and fitted out for a government airliner.
Then there was the whole "giving contracts for Bison upgrades and light armoured vehicle building deals to my shady friends in Montreal" thing.

Fucking Mulroney. He should be lucky they didn't find out about that LAV deal until a little while ago.

The Airbus weren't originally bought as tankers. They were bought as glorified airliners, to replace the old Boeing 707s that previously did that job. The air force should have bought some as tankers too. Rather than having two of them converted as such only a few years ago...

As for the flying white elephant, that was an attempt at imitating the Americans. And the Airbus bribery scandal was related to Air Canada, which also bought a bunch of them and was at the time government owned...

Out here there are folks still pissed about the CF-18 maintenance contract going to some company in Quebec instead of one in Edmonton...

At least we have LAVs. Look at the helicopter fiasco that followed Mulroney's ouster. Especially at the part where the specifications got repeatedly changed to prevent the cancelled EH-101 from winning all over again. And we still don't have the new ones yet...

Montreal must be our analog for Chicago. Politically you can't ignore the place, you usually need it to win, and it is as corrupt as all hell...
 

MacCaulay

Banned
The Airbus weren't originally bought as tankers. They were bought as glorified airliners, to replace the old Boeing 707s that previously did that job. The air force should have bought some as tankers too. Rather than having two of them converted as such only a few years ago...

That's what I like about you, RCAF, I learn something knew everytime we talk!

Look at the helicopter fiasco that followed Mulroney's ouster. Especially at the part where the specifications got repeatedly changed to prevent the cancelled EH-101 from winning all over again. And we still don't have the new ones yet...

Fucking Chretien. Let's just dump everything down the fucking toilet, why don't we? Why the fuck not? Half the soldiers are out of the country in a Balkan hellhole driving around in tank trainers that we never designed to be deployed out of the country, why should they care?

Fucking Chretien.

One of the big problems with the specifications on Canadian equipment is that they'll just change stuff on a whim to make it impossible for non-Canadian companies to win. Then they end up with POS equipment like the medium trucks, which were built by a company that hadn't ever built trucks before. But it was Canadian, and apparently that was supposed to make some sort of difference when you're towing something.
Christ, we couldn't drive those things over 50. They were deathtraps. Now they're starting to make a change. They've ordered International trucks out of Illinois that are actually well made.

Montreal must be our analog for Chicago. Politically you can't ignore the place, you usually need it to win, and it is as corrupt as all hell...

I never thought about it like that...but that's actually pretty astute. Props to RCAF!
 
Good points all around guys , Chretien got kind of a 'free ride' playing off the rump (federal) PC against the Reform/Alliance of the '90's (so weird to speak of that in the past tense :eek::D ) Oh, btw the IIRC choppers that Chretien cancelled would have been flying years ago. Honestly, it really sucks how much of the shaft the armed forces got. Anyways yeah, Fucking Chretien.
 
That's what I like about you, RCAF, I learn something knew everytime we talk!

That little tidbit was something that I first read in the local newspaper (The Cold Lake Sun, a weekly) in an article about this year's Maple Flag... Which mentioned that it was the first time that we'd used the tanker conversion of the Airbus...

Fucking Chretien. Let's just dump everything down the fucking toilet, why don't we? Why the fuck not? Half the soldiers are out of the country in a Balkan hellhole driving around in tank trainers that we never designed to be deployed out of the country, why should they care?

We're in agreement. My dad fixed Sea Kings in 1979. The government was trying to replace the things even then. There is still a chance that he could be posted to one of the helicopter squadrons in either Comox or Shearwater. Those squadrons (still) fly... Sea Kings... That are more than 40 years old.

Those moves won that son of a bitch a lot of votes in Toronto and parts of Quebec.

Fucking Chretien.
There will be a special place in hell reserved for him.

Why could we have had Paul Martin in 1993? I doubt that the younger, yet-to-be-frustrated-in-his-ambitions Paul Martin would have goofed nearly as bad as the power-hungry former Finance Minister did...

One of the big problems with the specifications on Canadian equipment is that they'll just change stuff on a whim to make it impossible for non-Canadian companies to win. Then they end up with POS equipment like the medium trucks, which were built by a company that hadn't ever built trucks before. But it was Canadian, and apparently that was supposed to make some sort of difference when you're towing something.
Christ, we couldn't drive those things over 50. They were deathtraps. Now they're starting to make a change. They've ordered International trucks out of Illinois that are actually well made.
You mean the trucks that had wheels fall off because the rim or the axle rusted through? We're still using those? Now there is yet another deal that should be looked at closely. And maybe some of those involved should be shot...

I never thought about it like that...but that's actually pretty astute. Props to RCAF!
Well, some folks (who actually like Toronto, no less...) compare Toronto to New York, and if that is the case, well, then what city is our little pit of scum and villainy?

For Alberta politics, Edmonton and Calgary fill the role of Chicago. The provincial government here is popular, competent and corrupt as all hell.
 
To bump this thread, someone does believe that the PM is Mackenzie King reincarnated. This person is Lord Black of Crossharbour.


http://network.nationalpost.com/np/...bers-return-quebec-to-a-pivotal-position.aspx

"For a couple of years I have been intermittently promoting the idea that Stephen Harper is something of a Mackenzie King, not an overly alluring public personality, but a master political tactician."

Now that I've regained my breath after 20 minutes of hysterical cackling, all I can say that someone's nipped over the border and bought a case of "George Bush is the greatest thing since Saint Ronald of Reagan" hooch. Good tactics are great and all, but it's the strategic depth that lacks. If the "percée conservatrice" in Québec in 06 had been based on top-quality candidates who could win outright and build on their success, then those 10 Tory MPs who lost in October, added to the gains made in Ontario, could have led to a slim Tory majority gov't. Instead, the Tories picked a bunch of scheisters who could manage to squeek through in a tightly triangulated vote but who had no hope of surviving 2 years of scrutiny as gov't MPs. Likewise, the same will probably happen to a smaller degree in Ont. next year or 2011 at the latest. Given that track record, the Tories have probably reached their high-water mark for the forseeable future.

Now, I do like the possibilities of either Clark or Turner in the modern era... Can either of them navigate the country through the Constitutional clusterfuck in a way that allows them to survive into the new millennium? Besides Wilfred Laurier, I think they'd be the only two possible options.
 
Now that I've regained my breath after 20 minutes of hysterical cackling, all I can say that someone's nipped over the border and bought a case of "George Bush is the greatest thing since Saint Ronald of Reagan" hooch. Good tactics are great and all, but it's the strategic depth that lacks. If the "percée conservatrice" in Québec in 06 had been based on top-quality candidates who could win outright and build on their success, then those 10 Tory MPs who lost in October, added to the gains made in Ontario, could have led to a slim Tory majority gov't. Instead, the Tories picked a bunch of scheisters who could manage to squeek through in a tightly triangulated vote but who had no hope of surviving 2 years of scrutiny as gov't MPs. Likewise, the same will probably happen to a smaller degree in Ont. next year or 2011 at the latest. Given that track record, the Tories have probably reached their high-water mark for the forseeable future.

Now, I do like the possibilities of either Clark or Turner in the modern era... Can either of them navigate the country through the Constitutional clusterfuck in a way that allows them to survive into the new millennium? Besides Wilfred Laurier, I think they'd be the only two possible options.

If it were Clark in power for 20 years starting in 1979, then we wouldn't really have the constitutional clusterf*ck. Because Turdeau wouldn't have been in power to repatriate it in 1982. Just think, Lesvesque loses the referendum in 1980, (he can't win even if it were the Tories in power at the time) No NEP so Alberta stays quiet and the political and financial power shift towards Calgary quietly occurs 20 years early... There is no cock-up at Meech Lake or at Charlottetown to re-awaken the separatists in Quebec in the early 1990s. Sure we'd have had a bunch of different scandals and cockups, but none on the scale of that can of worms that Trudeau opened in 1982.

Turner could have survived by jettisoning everything that had Trudeau's name on it. Sure many Liberals would never have forgiven him, but he'd have won way more votes than he'd have lost. Screwing Pierre Trudeau over would have been extremely popular in 1984. (That is how Mulroney won 214 seats...) To the point where Turner might even have been able to win back some seats in Alberta...
 
Top