• AnotherDirtyAnglo@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    9 days ago

    Oh, and the overwhelming majority of weapons systems we do produce go to genocidal dictators and human rights violators.

    So, like double-what-the-fuck?

    • pipsqueak1984@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      Agreed, that is a big pile of bullshit, though unsurprising given that the government doesn’t want it’s own population armed, that is dictator 101 right there.

      Something something, admiring basic dictatorships…

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Look guys, we may be falling short on our fiscal contributions but we’re there when it matters. If you ever need more war crimes we’re happy to step up to the plate.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    If Canada does not meet its spending commitments, it could open itself up to pressure from Mr Trump if he wins November’s presidential election.

    European allies may also grow resentful, said Christopher Sands, head of the Washington DC-based Wilson Center’s Canada Institute.Canada is already feeling the consequences in other ways, he said.

    It has ambitions to be part of US-led Indo-Pacific economic talks, which includes countries like Australia, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and South Korea.

    It has also been excluded from the AUKUS defence pact between Australia, the UK and the US.“That’s where the real rubber hits the road for Canada.

    At the onset of the war in Afghanistan in 2001, deficits in Canada’s military capabilities became clear and launched a wave of spending, said Mr Sands.But Canada is still playing catch up after decades of neglect and struggles when it comes to critical issues like procurement.Aside from the pointed remarks by Speaker Johnson, experts anticipate much of the pressure on Canada at the Nato summit will be made behind closed doors, rather than direct criticism aimed at Mr Trudeau.“It’s a little delicate because Canada is doing quite a bit in terms of tangible contributions,” Prof Legassé said.That includes support for Ukraine and work leading the multinational Nato battlegroup in Latvia.He added that US President Joe Biden and a number of other Nato leaders are ideologically aligned with Mr Trudeau, the Liberal Party leader, and would prefer not to pressure him publicly.

    “They don’t necessarily want to give fuel to the idea amongst Canadian conservatives and the general public that the Trudeau government is failing miserably,” he said.


    The original article contains 911 words, the summary contains 271 words. Saved 70%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Um, sorry, the money we gave to Trudeau for tanks, planes and APCs got used on a sick new weed vape instead.

    E: Alright, I’m not being serious here… this joke landed poorly.

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      Where is this coming from? The Liberals passed 80 billion in extra defence spending, over the objections of the Conservatives who unanimously voted against it. Like, if you’re mad about the army not getting enough money, hi, I’m right there with you. I live in army housing, my wife’s health and wellbeing literally depend on her getting modernized equipment that’s in good repair. But why, of all people, are you specifically going after Trudeau on this?

      Also, why the hate on legal weed for that matter? Do you have any idea how much weed soldiers smoke? Hint: Its a LOT.

      • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        I’m not against weed at all, nor improving the deteriorating state of our Army and the infrastructure that military personnel need.

        I thought it would be funny to suggest that Trudeau spent the entire 0.6% shortfall of Canada’s GDP to meet the NATO target on a singular weed vape (and that somehow he would be handed this amount of money to buy military equipment from somewhere where he instead buys an unfathomably expensive vape), but apparently it was interpreted as a slight against him. I apologize for causing this confusion.