Huawei CFO arrested.

[Violator]

I'm wondering if Biden's presidency will mean all charges will be dropped.They must have something more concrete to put her away.She has lots of money and resources that would mean a not guilty verdict.

[Tortorella's Rant]

On 11/17/2020 at 8:23 PM, Lancaster said:

It's about international agreements.  If it was Sweden asking for an extradition, should Canada assist?  Or should Canada just kowtow to any country more powerful?

Rules, regulations, agreement has to be blind... can't just go, "Oh, this involves the Chinese... so let it slide..."  

 

Canada is a nation of laws, not special treatment.  So far, Meng is being processed under Canadian law without any political interference.  If she doesn't get extradited, she will be on her merry way.  If she gets sent down, then GTFO.  The same rules applies regardless of what country is involved.  If Canada bends now, then Canada should just lube up and take it from every other country.  Canada is rightfully standing up now against a bully, to do anything less would be un-Canadian.  

Which they already did when they abided by the US request in the first place. She won't be extradited as this was purely a political power play and she will be on her merry way and this country will have been dummied by two bigger powers and its inability to look out for itself as is common nowadays whenever it involves China.

[24K PureCool]

26 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

Except Canada has an extradition treaty with our neighbours to the south.  Are you suggesting that we should just act like the ccp and throw away the agreement as if it was soiled toilet paper?  Then what would be the ponit of signing agreements in the first place?

 

As far as I can tell, Canada has acted in the manner as it should under the norms of international law, and in adherence to the commitments it has made under the agreements it has signed.  Whether or not the extradition will happen will likely boil down to whether or not the prima facie evidence supports the claim by the Americans sufficiently for the ruling to extradite to be made by our court of law (or if Lametti decides to exercise his political power, which would be a bad move at this stage).

Haven't you heard? Breaking international law is in style these days. Just go ask the U.K and U.S. 

Edited December 4, 2020 by 24K PureCool

[Boudrias]

1 minute ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

So if the Trump and BoJo administrations decide to do political seppuku, does that mean that our government needs to do likewise?  

Canada signs such agreements to maintain the protection offered by the USA. As a chronic underspender on the military Canada cannot take a more independent position. 

[JM_]

6 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Canada signs such agreements to maintain the protection offered by the USA. As a chronic underspender on the military Canada cannot take a more independent position. 

what? we have extradition agreements with many countries, that makes no sense. 

 

Also, we'll never be able to spend enough to be a significant military force. We need to do more to protect the north but that doesn't mean we'll ever be anything but a small middle power. 

[BPA]

3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

what? we have extradition agreements with many countries, that makes no sense. 

 

Also, we'll never be able to spend enough to be a significant military force. We need to do more to protect the north but that doesn't mean we'll ever be anything but a small middle power. 

Exactly. 

 

If we do not honour our extradition agreements, then why should others do the same?

 

 

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, BPA said:

Exactly. 

 

If we do not honour our extradition agreements, then why should others do the same?

 

 

yup, it has squat to do with some kind of bargain for protection. Someone forgot about NORAD. 

[Violator]

According to global a deal is in place were she pleads guilty but she gets to go back to China.

[24K PureCool]

1 hour ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

So if the Trump and BoJo administrations decide to do political seppuku, does that mean that our government needs to do likewise?  

Clearly a joke. Chill bro.

[RUPERTKBD]

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

what? we have extradition agreements with many countries, that makes no sense. 

 

Also, we'll never be able to spend enough to be a significant military force. We need to do more to protect the north but that doesn't mean we'll ever be anything but a small middle power. 

It's just a guess, but I believe he was referring to the tired old trope that if not for our neighbours to the south and their "massive" military, Putin would have already invaded Canada and we'd all be speaking Russian....

 

However, some of us remember the Russkies trying that with the Afghans and getting their asses kicked....

[Boudrias]

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

what? we have extradition agreements with many countries, that makes no sense. 

 

Also, we'll never be able to spend enough to be a significant military force. We need to do more to protect the north but that doesn't mean we'll ever be anything but a small middle power. 

What price freedom? Canada has the 10th largest economy in the world. Population edging toward 40 million. Many Canadians fret about American dominance and yet the country does little to chart an independent course. Israel had the same dominating influence by America and yet they have become world leaders in their military and industry. I can appreciate that Israel feels far more threatened militarily but they saw strength beyond the military. A strong economy allows countries to chart their own course. 

 

I think you are quite right to point the finger to our north. Russia, the USA and China all have ambitions over Canada's territory. Did the Chinese push us around because that is who they are or did they take their cue from the Americans? Trump was not the first American president who thought he could push Canada around. 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

What price freedom? Canada has the 10th largest economy in the world. Population edging toward 40 million. Many Canadians fret about American dominance and yet the country does little to chart an independent course. Israel had the same dominating influence by America and yet they have become world leaders in their military and industry. I can appreciate that Israel feels far more threatened militarily but they saw strength beyond the military. A strong economy allows countries to chart their own course. 

 

I think you are quite right to point the finger to our north. Russia, the USA and China all have ambitions over Canada's territory. Did the Chinese push us around because that is who they are or did they take their cue from the Americans? Trump was not the first American president who thought he could push Canada around. 

if we want to go the Isreal route, we need to develop our own nuclear capability. We could do that pretty easily and we have our own capacity right from mining right through to mounting it on a warhead. But what do we gain from that? we won't be nuking the US and anyone sending nukes toward Canada will hurt the US too so its in their interest to deter others from that. 

 

On the north tho we are quite vulnerable. We need to step up our presence there because I have no doubt we'll see China and Russia trying to claim our territory, or simply send ships through the passage with impunity once its ice free year round. 

 

The Chinese pushed us around because they are 1.4 billion, we're. 37 million, and we have too much dependence on them for our manufacturing. We can shift the equation on our dependence on them, but realistically there isn't much we can do from a military pov beyond nukes which really arena't an option. 

[UKNuck96]

7 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

if we want to go the Isreal route, we need to develop our own nuclear capability. We could do that pretty easily and we have our own capacity right from mining right through to mounting it on a warhead. But what do we gain from that? we won't be nuking the US and anyone sending nukes toward Canada will hurt the US too so its in their interest to deter others from that. 

 

On the north tho we are quite vulnerable. We need to step up our presence there because I have no doubt we'll see China and Russia trying to claim our territory, or simply send ships through the passage with impunity once its ice free year round. 

 

The Chinese pushed us around because they are 1.4 billion, we're. 37 million, and we have too much dependence on them for our manufacturing. We can shift the equation on our dependence on them, but realistically there isn't much we can do from a military pov beyond nukes which really arena't an option. 

I agree, my view would

be that it would make sense for Canada to have a strategic pact with Denmark to patrol and seal off the north from others who are doing routes inside Canadian maritime territory (cannot stop the Russian nuclear ice breakers though outside of it) also to take a note from the Russians and patrol the waters more and also look to open it up to commercial shipping. It’s a fine balance as you don’t want the route taken to be around the top of Russian and lose the strategic and financial benefit of it 

[JM_]

8 hours ago, UKNuck96 said:

I agree, my view would

be that it would make sense for Canada to have a strategic pact with Denmark to patrol and seal off the north from others who are doing routes inside Canadian maritime territory (cannot stop the Russian nuclear ice breakers though outside of it) also to take a note from the Russians and patrol the waters more and also look to open it up to commercial shipping. It’s a fine balance as you don’t want the route taken to be around the top of Russian and lose the strategic and financial benefit of it 

we can do that, station and rotate troops in key areas, invest more in anit-submarine tech and surface to air missiles, that kind of thing. I'm sure there's a report somewhere that lays it all out better than I can. 

 

We can also really benefit if we make it ourselves as well and put more money into our own military industry, which is something I think @Boudrias and I can agree on. 

[UKNuck96]

3 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

we can do that, station and rotate troops in key areas, invest more in anit-submarine tech and surface to air missiles, that kind of thing. I'm sure there's a report somewhere that lays it all out better than I can. 

 

We can also really benefit if we make it ourselves as well and put more money into our own military industry, which is something I think @Boudrias and I can agree on. 

The infrastructure is there with bombardier. I don’t think you need the shore to ship missiles though as they are not really a deterrent as Russia will push against it and will win in a game of chicken. That’s why I said a pact with Denmark would work as it would allow for more maritime patrols. That and better coverage of the artic.

 

better would be frigates and corvettes with helicopter hangers for multiple anti submarine and anti shipping and radar helicopters 

[Violator]

We don't have enough people buying into the military to expand it.Way to many economic opportunities at this point for people to avoid the military.

[Boudrias]

19 hours ago, UKNuck96 said:

The infrastructure is there with bombardier. I don’t think you need the shore to ship missiles though as they are not really a deterrent as Russia will push against it and will win in a game of chicken. That’s why I said a pact with Denmark would work as it would allow for more maritime patrols. That and better coverage of the artic.

 

better would be frigates and corvettes with helicopter hangers for multiple anti submarine and anti shipping and radar helicopters 

Canada cannot engage in all out battle against the military might of China, USA or Russia. That isn’t the end game IMHO. The military is the extension of sovereign claim. A willingness to defend territory is a sovereign claim. In the court of world accountability that stands for everything. The ability to form alliances that defend national claims are based on the ultimate call to arms if needed. Failure to defend will ultimately result in a failed state. Over dependence on allies will lead to a failed state. Many people would not agree but I would pull all Canadian ground forces from Europe and redeploy them in Canada. Joint training exempted. Canada should focus their military in the Artic and in maritime defence. That should be their NATO role.

[UKNuck96]

42 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Canada cannot engage in all out battle against the military might of China, USA or Russia. That isn’t the end game IMHO. The military is the extension of sovereign claim. A willingness to defend territory is a sovereign claim. In the court of world accountability that stands for everything. The ability to form alliances that defend national claims are based on the ultimate call to arms if needed. Failure to defend will ultimately result in a failed state. Over dependence on allies will lead to a failed state. Many people would not agree but I would pull all Canadian ground forces from Europe and redeploy them in Canada. Joint training exempted. Canada should focus their military in the Artic and in maritime defence. That should be their NATO role.

I don’t disagree with that. The whole reason I mention Denmark is because thy eyes already have a presence up there and have a vested interested with the Faroe Islands and Greenland. 
 

for me my point is that I know Canada cannot compete with the Russia’s USA and China’s of the world but if it focuses its attention on the artic with strategic partners (to work with and along side rather than getting them to do it) there can be a significant presence. That’s why only ice breakers and corvettes and the odd Frigate would be needed you don’t need anything the size of a destroyer up there. 
 

surface missiles are pointless because with a ship you can shadow them or block them off, with missiles are you really going to fire them at a Russian ship that has entered sovereign water but not made any other hostile moves? 

[Boudrias]

1 hour ago, UKNuck96 said:

I don’t disagree with that. The whole reason I mention Denmark is because thy eyes already have a presence up there and have a vested interested with the Faroe Islands and Greenland. 
 

for me my point is that I know Canada cannot compete with the Russia’s USA and China’s of the world but if it focuses its attention on the artic with strategic partners (to work with and along side rather than getting them to do it) there can be a significant presence. That’s why only ice breakers and corvettes and the odd Frigate would be needed you don’t need anything the size of a destroyer up there. 
 

surface missiles are pointless because with a ship you can shadow them or block them off, with missiles are you really going to fire them at a Russian ship that has entered sovereign water but not made any other hostile moves? 

I found it interesting that the Russians got so upset that the USA sold Ukraine both ground to ground and ground to air missile defence systems. IMO Canada has to demonstrate a willingness to defend sovereignty. Russian aircraft regularly violate Canadian airspace and are challenged by Norad. The longer 'turning the other cheek' goes on the bolder the aggressor becomes.    

[UKNuck96]

2 hours ago, Boudrias said:

I found it interesting that the Russians got so upset that the USA sold Ukraine both ground to ground and ground to air missile defence systems. IMO Canada has to demonstrate a willingness to defend sovereignty. Russian aircraft regularly violate Canadian airspace and are challenged by Norad. The longer 'turning the other cheek' goes on the bolder the aggressor becomes.    

True but if they call the bluff and you back off it’s even worse. With ships you can shadow and also position yourself on the inside to block them off, same with planes you can shadow them. 
 

They also grant a physical presence issues don’t.

 

put it this way the UK could line the east Scottish coastline and the Shetlands with SAMs but the Russians would still fly over them even with a lock on, they know that unless they show direct hostile intent they won’t be fired on. However they are shadowed from Norwegian airspace and handed over to RAF which keeps them genrally to the edges of territorial areas. Same when ships are in the area they get shadowed. It’s more effective because a ship and plane can physically deny space a missile cannot.

 

Canada cannot stop Russian interdiction, the best option is to basically always be there when they are to say if your here, we are here it sends a stronger message then a passive defensive missile system that they know will never launch the first strike