Merchants of death...

...assisted by an implicitly nefarious distraction effort by the government. Or so these editorialists, posing as reporters, (and no doubt seeing themselves as the fearless counterparts of Woodward and Bernstein) would have readers think. Babbling has already very well fisked Mr Blanchfield of the Ottawa Citizen. I'll have a go at him and his co-editorialist Andrew Mayeda.

As a start why would anyone think the fact that, during a combat mission, an army expends an awful lot of rounds, warrants a full page story in the paper? The headline:

Locked, loaded and lucrative
Overlooked in the cost of rebuilding Afghanistan is the cost of the bullets

The money shot:

An analysis of Defence Department data shows that while Colt has sold $2.4 million worth of guns, spare parts and maintenance to the military so far this year, those numbers are dwarfed by the $46 million worth of bullets and mortars that General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems Canada sold to the Canadian Forces during just five months in 2007.

I'm shocked, just shocked to learn that the Canadian Forces are spending money on bullets and mortar rounds when in combat.

Distraction and cover-up:

Canadian soldiers in southern Afghanistan are making record use of guns and bullets as they face some of their heaviest fighting since the Korean War. The Conservative government has tried to soften the rhetoric surrounding the war in Afghanistan this year, pressing messages of reconstruction and development, while downplaying the combat role of the military.

But a CanWest News Service analysis tells another story: the Defence Department has also embarked this year on a record purchase of guns and ammunition.

In late February, Prime Minister Stephen Harper tried to shift the focus away from the violence that has so far claimed the lives of 73 Canadian soldiers and one diplomat by announcing an additional $200 million in development aid.

But then, between February and late June, Canada spent almost $54 million on guns, ammunition, explosives, grenades and other weapons -- more than in all of 2005 and 2006 combined.

What "another story"? While the government has clearly been trying to emphasize non-military aspects of our engagement in Afstan (seemingly necessary in terms of Canadian public attitudes), what does that have to do with ammunition purchases? Do these editorialists expect government press releases announcing them? Has any government anywhere ever made a point of publicizing bullet buying when at war?

The headline says "lucrative", with photos of C-7 rifles and C-8 carbines (print version), implying there's big money now in selling these weapons to the Army. But from the story:

Colt Canada, the Kitchener, Ont.-based company that manufactures the C7 assault rifle and the shorter-barrelled C8 carbine exclusively for the Defence Department, says the escalation in fighting has not created a windfall for them.

Well, few new "guns" (the authors clearly do not know what a gun is in an army, typical of our editorialists) and lots of bullets. To repeat, what a story when in combat. I mean more bullets. Who'd a thunk it?

Now the "cover-up":

While the Conservative government has been largely silent about guns and bullets, it, too, has been anxious to publicize its purchases of $20 billion worth of new hardware.

In the summer of 2006, then-defence minister Gordon O'Connor spent a week touring Canada to announce contracts to purchase armoured trucks, supply ships and large aircraft, including the $10 billion worth of transport planes and helicopters it planned to buy from the two major U.S. military contractors, Boeing and Lockheed Martin [horrors! "U.S. military contractors"--let's buy from the Euros].

Then there's this:

Since Canadian troops were stationed in Kandahar in August 2005, Colt has sold almost $7.7 million worth of weapons and services to the Canadian Forces.

But Mr. Bleeker says a spike in fighting on the ground does not necessarily lead to a sudden rise in the purchase of guns.

A smidgen of truth. The Canadian Provincial Reconstruction Team did arrive at Kandahar in August 2005. But our battle group (those firing almost all the rounds) did not start arriving until mid-January 2006. Economy with the truth, I'd say.

Recall this quote from earlier in the story: "...the [National] Defence Department has also embarked this year on a record purchase of guns [emphasis added] and ammunition. One now reads this:

While Colt won't provide exact figures, Mr. Bleeker says the Forces stockpiled large quantities of rifles in the mid-'80s, toward the end of the Cold War.

"Don't forget, when they were building up their stocks, they were preparing for the great Soviet onslaught," says Mr. Bleeker.

"The rifles that they're using in Afghanistan are as good as new," he adds. "They have been completely taken apart. Everything has been tested and, where necessary, bits and pieces have been replaced."

The obvious inference (together with other quotes above) is that Colt isn't selling a lot of new rifles or carbines to the CF, contrary to what the bolded bit above implies. But don't let that stand in the way of our intrepid editorialists. The news here, such as it is (we're fighting a war and have to buy lots of bullets), is garnished to the death of good reportorial taste with irrelevant words of spin.

Update: The Calgary Herald's headline for the same (edited) story:

Harper talking reconstruction during spending spree on arms

Scary, eh? Those bullets sure are spreeing and j-school sure sucks.