I thought it was pretty clear that I do, for the reasons already stated.

we shouldn’t be doubling or tripling our military budget to satisfy Trump’s demands

I simply don’t think many people would agree that that’s the reason we’re doing it.

It’s disappointing, but at the same time I don’t have a big problem with the government stepping up subsidies for the industry.

I just wish it was a “why don’t we have both” situation.

Trump demanded increased NATO spending and the countries did it. This isn’t rocket science.

No, it’s not rocket science. Trump continually threatens to abandon NATO and its allies, so everyone else has to pick up the slack. Not because he wants it, but because it’s an absolute necessity. I really don’t see a credible argument that Canada shouldn’t be investing in defence.

MAGA is a white supremacist phrase through and through. There is no excuse for repeating it.

A defensible position to take, but I think Carney’s intent in using it is fairly clear, whether you agree with it or not.

And Carney did cancel the DST

That’s why I used it as an example. The article should have, but didn’t. There are a number of things that could legitmately be held up as examples of “appeasement,” but I don’t think the article did so.

I think the article’s “appeasement” angle is pretty bullshit.

No one in NATO is boosting military spending to appease Donald Trump - it’s the inevitable response to the realization that the largest NATO contributor is unreliable.

The recent “MAGA” line was an appeal to American investors to spend money here. It appropriated Trump’s language, but that’s the opposite of what he wants.

Carney campaigned in decreased reliance on the US, not on severing all ties.

Actual examples of appeasement would be things like ending the digital services tax, and I’m sure we’ll see more like it when the CUSMA talks get started.

I think that was just the Digital Services Tax, which applied to a lot more than just online streamers. This is related to the Online Streaming Act.

I do wonder if its increase is being set up as a bargaining chip for the CUSMA talks, though.

The deal is contingent on Hanwha winning the lucrative bid to build Canada’s next generation submarine fleet.

The Korean and German bids both look pretty strong to this dummy. I have no idea how this is going to shake out.

I read somewhere about how South Korea could really benefit from an expanded overseas manufacturing arrangement, which makes sense considering their geopolitical, uh, situation.

Oh maybe - I just gave it a passing glance and focused on

You’re not automatically a Canadian citizen if you

marry a Canadian citizen

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if there’s an expedited path to residency.

'Fraid not.

Since 1970, Canada’s One China policy has recognized the PRC as the sole legitimate government of China, noting—neither challenging nor endorsing—the PRC government’s position that Taiwan is an inalienable part of its territory.

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/trnsprnc/brfng-mtrls/prlmntry-bndrs/20230623/19-en.aspx

I also can’t say whether the site was studied sufficiently, but the timelines talked about in the article combined with bill C-15 allowing ministers to except entities from environmental laws if they are pursuing something to be deemed as encouraging economic growth pushes me well beyond the point where I’m willing to give the government the benefit of the doubt.

Fair enough - the article you linked described the study of Yucca Mountain as a storage for nuclear waste as having taken about 20 years, whereas as near as I can tell, they started exploratory drilling in Cold Lake in 2022. That’s…less than 20 years, no doubt about it.

nearly all CCS projects in the U.S. are actually enhanced-recovery projects that keep the oil and gas flowing

This is undoubtedly the case for his project, as well. Even the most optimistic viewpoint seems to be that it would make the effects of continued drilling and export of oil “less bad,” and do nothing to actually stop climate change.

Airborne Early Warning and Control is a specific type of thing, so an AEW aircraft is a particular type of aircraft.

I’m extremely skeptical of the whole thing, but I’m trying to learn more. The article you shared says:

Many geologists (myself included) believe there are places on Earth where long-term CO2 storage could be safely achieved, but it would require what scientists call “site characterization.” That means studying the location in enough detail to be confident that things put there will stay there. For example, the U.S. currently stores military radioactive waste in low-permeability salt formations in New Mexico, and there are numerous pending proposals to store CO2 in sandstones overlain by low-permeability shales in North Dakota.

Okay, so the CBC article seems to suggest that the site in question has been studied.

At the storage hub, the gas would be injected deep underground in the Basal Cambrian Sandstone formation, which sits one to two kilometres below the surface. The sponge-like sandstone has spaces that can be filled with CO2.

Above that formation is thick, non-porous rock salt that can act as a barrier to keep the carbon dioxide in the ground.

I have no idea whether it’s been studied sufficiently, but the author of the article you shared seems to think it can be effective if that step is taken.

And I think even the most optimistic proponents of carbon storage argue that it’s a means of mitigating the effects of heavy industry, not of making a meaningful difference in other ways. But they seem to think those mitigating effects can be important, and maybe even necessary?

Saab had bundled its surveillance aircraft proposal in with its pitch to sell Gripen-E fighter jets to Canada and promised to transfer technology so both aircraft could be fully manufactured locally. Carney did not say anything about whether Canada will proceed with the Gripen and limit its purchase of American-made F-35 jets.

Sounds like he’s vacating his seat entirely.

I’d definitely love to see some grants or other assistance to get people building their own capacity.

Sure, but this article is about the lack of utility-scale solar capacity (read: large solar plants), not small-scale, individual efforts.

That seems to be the same conclusion that MB Hydro has reached, as well.

I’m a little surprised that there hasn’t (as far as I know) been any talk about arming the coast guard - the way things are headed, it seems a little inevitable.

Claiming Canada was founded on the principle of strong provinces, Ms. Smith said, “Canada is very different from the United States and many other Western democracies. For example, the U.S. centralizes the majority of power and decision-making in its federal government. In Canada, we chose a decentralized federation composed of very unique and diverse provinces left to govern themselves in almost all matters with the main exceptions of national defence and international affairs.”

Absolutely unhinged.