How much is this war costing us?

It's been in both the Globe & Mail and the Toronto Star over the last couple of days that Canada's tanks are outdated and not very good for Afghan summers. Today the Star is reporting that Canada is set to lease and/or buy new tanks.

Swell, so what is this going to bring the cost of the war up to now? Moreover, while I'm sure that Flaherty will continue to insist that the budget is balanced, you have to recall that he was part of the Eves government. Remember them, the ones who played a trick on Ontario's voters by pretending that the budget was balanced.

While I'm sure most Canadians don't want to send our troops out into combat with the Taliban unprepared, I think we need to have a frank discussion about what exactly we are prepared to spend on our military. You, know the navy has a wishlist of its own. What about our new transport aircraft? Aside from the purchase price for all this fancy stuff, what will it cost to maintain it all? Parts? Where will we store it all?
Picture: Leopard tank

Oh! What a Lovely War!

It's really very difficult to grasp tone online. I hope I am wrong here, but I fear that I detected a note of excitement in Jason Cherniak's reporting of this incident as being an act of war. When he adds in the comments section of the post that maybe the British will respond with a strike against nuclear targets, it sounds again like he's hoping that will - or ought to be - the solution.

As others point out, the waterway where this all happened is disputed territory. Additionally, if you read the original CTV posting, you'll find that a similar incident had happened in the past. I suppose I should add that the US-led coalition in Iraq has no problem with arresting members of the Iranian diplomatic corps. Nor does the IDF - since we're talking about the middle east - have a problem with murdering sort of inadvertently yet somehow deliberately firing missiles at Canadian soldiers. Iran's actions, unpleasant as they may be, are more or less par for the course in this region and hardly a reason to touch off widespread airstrikes. Why would anyone want them to be a reason to do that?

I had thought that we had learned our lesson about finding flimsy pretexts for military attacks. Either way I suspect there will be a week of intense negotiations, followed by the release of the British soldiers. So I like I said, I hope I misread Jason's tone, if not that of some of those in his comments section. Iran wouldn't be any more of a pleasant place to attack than Iraq.

Edit: I'm not sure why the comments don't work on this post.
Edit: Fixed it!