weaponeer

Israel bears NO responsibility. Those scumbags came in Israel and killed then kidnapped their soldiers. Olmert should have invaded and destroyedf them and the Syrians. Hezbolah are nothing but scumbags, lifes loosers, and have no business bringing their BS to Canada.

Funny you should post right now, I am just having a conversation with a naval officer about this right now. He tells me that what "may" happen is that the navy will sell of the mine sweepers as they cannot mine sweep, not equiped for it, and give the naval reserve the arctic patrol boats. They would be something along the lines of the Swedish Visby class, but with a helo, and capable of operating in "first year ice" he says. As for bases, Leitrim, NDHQ & Connaught Range are all considered part of CFB Ottawa, lodger units. Kapyong is sadly closed, but it was part of 17Wg which is still open. The move to Shilo was good for the army in that they now have a training range in their back yard. Crappy for a 19 year old on Saturday night:) Hope alls well in Winnipeg, i will be home mid Oct, can't wait........

Alberta has only two major bases, Cold Lake and an army brigade base in Edmonton. Wainright & Suffield are army maneuver training areas, not too many people. Although, I have heard from some army folks I know that the new Leopard tanks will be consolidated into a full regiment to be based in Wainright. Ontario only has 6 bases I can think of, North Bay, Petawawa, Ottawa, Kingston, Trenton & Borden. There is a militia training area at Meaford. BC has only Comox and Victoria that are major bases. Perhaps your using differnt criteria to define what a base is. I cannot think of a major base that has closed in Manitoba. Portage is stil a military flight training school, they just contracted the training out to Kelowna Flightcraft and move the military people out. A training unit is not operational, and you can staff it with civilian contractors. the mission in Portage is still there. As for Winnipeg, the army garrison is part of 17Wg, the garrison closed, by 17 Wg is still there. The army move to Shilo boosted that base. Having a base there has benefits. You will have a major base where you had none before. You will be able to project power deep into the arctic. A naval base means piers, dry dock repair facilities, fuel storage, ammo storage, housing, medical facilities, operations buildings as well as a major upgrade to the nearby airport. We will have a major base where we can preposition supplies, and support not only naval, but army and airforce operations throughout the area. We will have to upgrade the airport to support CAF planes, C130, C17, CF18 etc... we will have barrack and supply facilities to support army ops, as well as naval units from Halifax or Victoria that will have a base to stage from. There is major potential here I feel. As for Churchill, I will most likely be the supply base for the Nunavut naval base. Supplies will be shipped there and then forwarded to Nunavut. It means big bucks for Churchill. As a NORAD guy, I welcome an airbase that far north to conduct air ops, it will give us great capability. The decision has been made, we need to look at what we can do with the hand we are dealt....

29 years, & 28 lives, a failure. Peackeeping was not intended by Pearson to be conducted the way it is. On to Afghanistan, being here right now I can say there is progress, all be it slow. NATO has problems, and I do not think you'll get most NATO countries here to fight, they most likely would not fight too hard it they were attacked themselves, you cannot expect them to come here and give 100%. Canada does have a tradition going back to the Boer War of giving 100% in combat. We do not like it, we do not seek it, but we do the heavy lifting when asked, and that is something all Canadians can be, & should be proud of. We lost 60,000 men in WW1, another 45,000 in WW2, and sadly 516 in Korea. We have lost Canadians in Peacekeeping, Peace making, humanitarian missions, and we have NEVER just up and quite on the world. We really need to think about what we do, there are consequences. As for NATO, I do not believe it has every really worked, I think we need to seriously review our participation in it in the future. Perhaps it is time for a new defence alliance. Canada, UK, USA, Australia & New Zealand.....

Hi Jdobb, I agree 100% with all you points, but what about a need to be active in the very high arctic. A refuelling base is a great idea, no doubt there will be some, but we are now looking a naval "fleet" base in the arctic. That means supply depots, staging areas for land & airforces, most likely enlarging the local small airport you showed us. I agree about Churchill, but how would you deal with the political issue of another major military base in Manitoba?? Shilo & Winnipeg, and now Churchill, I could imagine the northern territory gov'ts screaming to high heaven.

public money parasite and this from a guy who cannot find a job and is living off the troff of taxpayers who work.......... :angry:

I see Jdobbs point, he does make very good points, but I agree with you. We need to be in the HIGH ARCTIC..... A major CF base in the high arctic. Jdobb is right in his assumption about the cost, it will be more than $60 million, I have no doubt...

Yes, it will be known as the CC-177. Canadian Cargo model 177. The Canadian Airforce re designates the type numbers of all it aircraft, for example the CF18, which is the American FA18 Hornet is actually known in CAF as CF188 Hornet, Canadian Fighter model 188. All CF aircraft have a 3 digit 100 series number as well. The C130 Herc is the CC130 in Canada, the P3 Orion sub hunter is the CP140 in Canada, etc.....

more good info....... http://www.sfu.ca/casr/

http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/site/index_e.asp But on another note....

I agree, Churchill would have bee the best choice for all the reasons you mentioned. But, there is always a but, no northern territory has asignifigant military base, there is a small rescue unit (4 planes) in Yellowknife, that's all. We need to seriously start thinking about operating and basing larger military forces in the arctic. The north will now have a full scale military base. Churchill could be, should be, used as the main supply base to support Nanisivik. Just my 2 cents

Yes, of course. This IS along the same lines as Islamic terrorist and Canadian immigration policies. Allowing terrorism to achieve political victories cannot be condoned. Failure to take a stand, is promoting their objectives. What do Jews have to do with anything, in the way of terrorist activity? Have Jews not been loyal to Canada and have contributed greatly to Western society? Jews are fine, I just used them as an example. I seriously doubt the disloyalty of French Canadians. They have voted down two referendums, they have been in Canada since the beginning, all be it a thorn at times, but I cannot see them attacking Canada with DND equip. Besides, most of our CF18 fighters are in Alberta, and our biggest army units are in Alberta & Ontario. Alberta is the most heavily armed province in Canada.......

It will be the CC177 Globemaster II in Canadian service........

http://www.airforceimagery.forces.gc.ca/ne.../server.np?find Pics of the new Canadian C17.......

They would be smaller ships than the Frigates if they are only Patrol Boats. Most likely we would get 6-8 Sea Hawk helos, but I am only guessing....

http://ruxted.ca/index.php?/archives/75-GO...!!.html Once again, I forgot the link, sorry. Here.......

Link to original article Good News! Caution: this is a long article crammed full of facts; facts which will contradict the ‘stories’ being put about by politicians, journalists and anti-military academics and ‘peace activists.’ It might be dangerous, even subversive because it may cause some readers to actually understand what is happening in Afghanistan. It may shatter some belief sytems because the cold, hard facts are at odds with the prevailing 'wisdom' in Canada.

Here's some good info.... Backgrounder Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships BG–07.023 - July 10, 2007 In the current and future security environment, the Government of Canada must have effective tools for exercising control of Canada’s Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs, or 200 nautical mile limit) in all three oceans, particularly the Arctic. This Government recognizes that an increased Canadian Forces (CF) presence in the Arctic is essential to achieving our goals in this region, which is critical to our national interest and sense of identity. Currently, the Canadian Navy can patrol the coastal waters of Canada’s East and West Coasts, but it does not have the capability to effectively patrol all three oceans. The Navy can only operate in northern waters for a short period of time, and only when there is no ice. While the Navy can effectively patrol our close coastal waters in the Atlantic and Pacific with its Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs), these ships cannot be used effectively out to the limits of Canada’s EEZs. They have limited ability to operate in the open ocean, limited speed, limited capacity to support boarding operations and lack the ability to support a helicopter. The Navy must use its large combatant vessels – destroyers and frigates, which are expensive to operate and already over-tasked - to patrol the open ocean. To fill this capability gap, the Navy will acquire up to eight Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships (A/OPS). The estimated cost of acquiring these ships is $3.1 billion, with approximately $4.3 billion provided for operations and maintenance over the 25-year lifespan of the ship. The multi-purpose, ice-capable offshore patrol ship will enhance Canada’s ability to enforce its right, under international law, to be notified when foreign ships enter Canadian waters. The primary tasks of the A/OPS would be to conduct sea-borne surveillance operations in Canada’s EEZs, including the Arctic; provide cross-governmental situation awareness of activities and events in the regions; and cooperate with other elements of the CF and other federal government departments to assert and enforce Canadian sovereignty, when and where necessary. These ships will also provide the flexibility for the Navy to operate in both the Arctic and offshore environments, allowing them to be used year-round in a variety of roles, including domestic surveillance, search and rescue and support to other government departments. The Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship offers the best blend of capabilities in one platform; however, a ship with these capabilities does not currently exist and would have to be designed to meet a series of high-level requirements: Seakeeping: The A/OPSs must be able to operate independently and effectively in Canada’s EEZs, including such diverse environments as the Canadian Arctic, the Grand Banks of Newfoundland and the Northwest Coast of the Queen Charlotte Islands. The ship must also be capable of navigating the St. Lawrence River year-round and berthing at Quebec City. Ice Capability: The hull of the A/OPS must be ice strengthened to operate in medium first-year ice, which may include old ice inclusions - old ice that is denser and may strike the hull of the ship. This ice capability is exclusively for the ships’ own mobility, not to provide icebreaking services to other ships. Endurance/Range: The ship must have the ability to sustain operations for up to four months and must have a range of at least 6,000 nautical miles. Command and Control: The ship’s electronic equipment must have the ability to ensure safety of navigation and flight, as well as sufficient command, control and communications capability to provide and receive real-time information to and from the CF Common Operating Picture. Speed: The ship must be able to maintain an economical speed of 14 knots and attain a maximum speed of at least 20 knots. Armament: The ship must have gun armament to assert Canadian sovereignty. Boat Operations: The ship’s crew must be able to conduct boat operations in up to sea state four, support operations ashore via landing craft and support naval boarding parties. Class Life: The ships should remain operational for 25 years. The ship may also be designed to embark and operate an on-board helicopter, as well as house one flying crew and one maintenance crew. Procurement Strategy The two-phased process of procuring the A/OPS will be an innovative, fair and transparent means of guaranteeing the requirements of the CF are met in a timely manner, while ensuring value for Canadians’ tax dollars and maximizing opportunities for Canadian industry. Industrial and regional benefits totalling 100 per cent of the contract value would be sought for the implementation contract. A project definition phase of 24 months will be needed to develop the functional design, refine the high-level statement of operational requirements (SORs), complete and issue the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the implementation phase of the project and evaluate responses. A competitive process will be used to select a Definition, Engineering, Logistics and Management Support (DELMS) contractor, who will develop the design used to refine the requirements and provide input into the RFP. During this time, consulting engineering contractors will also deliver a functional design for the infrastructure needed to support the A/OPS. Throughout the project definition phase, industry will be kept engaged and informed of progress and design work. Interest from industry will be sought through a Letter of Interest to allow potential bidders to self-identify, and qualified teams will be invited to comment on the draft project implementation (PI) RFP. The definition phase of the procurement process would end with the release and evaluation of this RFP. The implementation phase of the process would involve the successful contractor completing a detailed design of the ships, followed by construction and the provision of integrated logistics support, and initial in-service support. Delivery of the first Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship is expected in 2013. The procurement strategy would conform to the Canadian Shipbuilding Policy Framework, which provides that the federal government will continue to procure, repair and refit vessels in Canada, subject to operational requirements and the continued existence of a competitive domestic marketplace. This acquisition will create long-term industrial development for Canadians. The Government's policy requires that prime contractors on defence procurements undertake business activities in Canada, usually in an amount equal to the value of the contract they have won. This helps Canadian companies maintain globally competitive operations in the country and effectively support future national security requirements. The acquisition of these ships will deliver maximum high-quality industrial benefits to Canadians and the Canadian shipbuilding industry is well positioned to play a significant role as this project proceeds.

Here's new website with all kinds of good info on YOUR Airforce. All the current C17 info etc... http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/site/index_e.asp

The folk in Bagotville could very well be French nationalist that care little for federalist. I see no merit in a PM pandering to a culture that approx. 50% of Quebec's population sided with the separatist in the last referendum. Loyalty to Canada is the name of the game and when it comes to Canada's military or federal public servants, loyalty to Canada must be assured. I think Mr. Harper is blindly wading into a dangerous area without verifying Canada's federal public servants are indeed loyal to Canada first and foremost which is impossible to determine pertaining to Quebec at this time. This of course, could, in the event of severe problems between Quebec and the rest of Canada, place the country at risk. I don't know how anyone could possibly be so naive not to acknowledge this fact. As it stands now we have an entire army brigade in Valcartier QB, and a fighter wing in Bagotville. That's lots of military power. The 3R22R from Valcartier is currently replacing 2RCR in Afghanistan, so Quebec military units are at the pointy end these days.... I have benn in the military for 19 years and have not met many separtists in unifom, only 1 I recaqll, and he was a 20 years old private, not much of a threat..... I spent 18 months stationed at St Jean QB. We military folks were treated as an occupying army by the civilain locals for the most part. Quebec separtist have NO loyalty to Canada, your right, so they do not join our military...... You have failed to understand what the risk is. The risk is, in the event of a Quebec/ROC conflict who would Quebec (and or francophones in general) federal public servants/military be loyal to, Quebec nationalistic ideologies or federal ideologies? And how can you confirm or prove loyalties and ideologies? You can't and this compounds the risk. So you are saying we should deny entry into the military for any French Canadian because there is a "risk" they may not be loyal. What about muslims, jews etc....

I suppose we'll be seeing more targeted ads to this demographic. Sounds like its a very small pool for potential recruits. Firstly, it is mostly men who join the military, there's nothing new there. Little girls do not grow up playing soldier, or dreaming of being fighter pilots... even though they can be... Second, "those under 25" are the ones to join. Try getting up at 0400 and going for a 10km run when your 35, it hurts and we older folks are much too wise for that. Military life is physical, and you need to be in shape, youth helps... Third, responsible unemployed people are activly looking for work, so they will most likely run into recruiting ads, and may consider joing..... someone with a job, a good job, is not looking for anything else, and most likely will not join. Although, there is a girl on my crew back in North Bay that quit her job at a law firm (she's a lawyer) to join the CF, she loves it, and No, she's not a JAG..... The aboriginal one is news to me, good news. There are some in the forces, they are dammed good soldiers, the ones I have known.... The military is a volunteer org, and you will only ever get those interested in the military to join. Unless there's conscription, that's how it is. We have very professional drill instructors who take these folks and mould them into effect soldiers...

The folk in Bagotville could very well be French nationalist that care little for federalist. I see no merit in a PM pandering to a culture that approx. 50% of Quebec's population sided with the separatist in the last referendum. Loyalty to Canada is the name of the game and when it comes to Canada's military or federal public servants, loyalty to Canada must be assured. I think Mr. Harper is blindly wading into a dangerous area without verifying Canada's federal public servants are indeed loyal to Canada first and foremost which is impossible to determine pertaining to Quebec at this time. This of course, could, in the event of severe problems between Quebec and the rest of Canada, place the country at risk. I don't know how anyone could possibly be so naive not to acknowledge this fact. As it stands now we have an entire army brigade in Valcartier QB, and a fighter wing in Bagotville. That's lots of military power. The 3R22R from Valcartier is currently replacing 2RCR in Afghanistan, so Quebec military units are at the pointy end these days.... I have benn in the military for 19 years and have not met many separtists in unifom, only 1 I recaqll, and he was a 20 years old private, not much of a threat..... I spent 18 months stationed at St Jean QB. We military folks were treated as an occupying army by the civilain locals for the most part. Quebec separtist have NO loyalty to Canada, your right, so they do not join our military......

Actually, we do not have that much territory to protect. What you say??? We protect the population, the people. There is not need to have thousands of troops and planes to protect every inch of Canada. Like Russia, we have space, we have winter for that. You need forces that can be moved where they are needed quickly, anywhere in Canada. If they are required up north they should be able to get there, and operaste there. If they are required in the BC mountains, same , they should be able to get there and stay. Thay means we need military land, sea and air transport, we need airpower, the most cost effective defence. You need to train your troops to move and operate in various places. The biggest threat to Canada in the for of a conventional attack would be from air/sea launched cruise missiles, you need the capability to kill their mother ships before launch.... He who defends everything, defends nothing....

Rapid deployment is currently a major issue with Canada's military. Canada lacks equipment badly, to be able to deploy anywhere. "Labour Minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn, the local MP, said the move would pump between $80-million and $85-million yearly into the Saguenay regional economy. Bloc Québécois defence critic Claude Bachand said the Conservative government will be disappointed if they think Quebeckers will change their minds regarding Canada's role in Afghanistan. "I don't think running around throwing a little bit of money on one side or another will change the opinion of the Quebeckers concerning the mission," he said." This is nothing more than another blatant attempt to buy votes. Three hundred million is a drop in the bucket when it comes to building a functioning military. The $3.1 billion dollar expenditure pertaining to the Arctic patrol ships can be seen in the same light as it also is nothing more than a drop in the bucket and represents no significant increase in fire power to enforce and protect Canada's sovereignty. Canada will forever lack the proper fire power and military strength and equipment to emulate a country like the U.S. Spending money in the way of the military is senseless, as major national federal political parties do not share the same ideologies, concerning Canada's military. Until a consensus is reached with all federal parties, pertaining to Canada's military, it really makes no sense for one government to build a military and another federal government to dismantle or not support the work of the other. Your right, since all the idiots that live in the house cannot decide what to fix we should just let it fall down around us. We should ceed our nation to others because we are to stupid, self absorbed or dimwitted to care. Harper is doing the right thing, he's leading, something the other parties have never heard of. He is making decision, decision that will not be undone as the cost would be too high. He's giving Canadians thier pride back, something the others have no concept of... The Air Force is going to an Expeditionary force concept, we deploy. That means around the world, or around the country, we are not longer a static organization. All that is happening here is that the folks in Bagotville will be deployable. Canada has to put up or shut uip, and Harper is stepping up..... Canadians have not seen a gov't that supports the military since St. Laurent, guess it is a shock........

They are just establishing an Air Expeditionary Wing in Bagtown. There's already one in Cold Lake AB, Trenton ON, & Greenwood NS. There will now be a fourth, good. Makes the deployment rotations easier, and now there's a French Canadian one....