Army Guy

Yes the Americans are going to use it until platforms such as the Bradlys, M901, and the LAV equivalent are replaced. That being said TOW tech is obsolete, for many reasons , it is wire guided, wires have a tendency to break or malfunction. once fired a large flash normally gives away your position, last thing you want is for the enemy to find you while your missle takes off into space.... It should be noted that we had taken off the TUA turrets off the M-113 and placed them on LAV III chassis, but as Derek said some of these vehs were frankistiened into the a ADDATS/ rocket platform, the rest were converted into something else after that failure..... The Europeans are now replacing all their Tow platforms into new tech fire and forget missles that have no wires but are computer controlled using various systems , along with much longer ranges....the TOW systems have a max range of 3750 meters and were once a long range sys....today such as the Spike system which comes in short (inf manpad) ,MED, AND LONG RANGE with long range sys it has ranges exceeding 5 kms or 5000 meters..... And while other allies have developed firing missles from tanks, such as Israel, and Germany leo firing the LAHAT missles similar to the Russian tanks. Defeating reactive armor is not all that hard, the latest TOW has a tandum war head, the problem with reactive armor is once it is used it leaves a gap in your defenses....hence why the tandum war head is so effective....it is also deadly to dismounted infantry, not to mention is dazes the crew inside the tank....for a few seconds....The TOW II B was a top attack mis, meaning it had no reactive armor to defeat....as you don't put reactive on the top of the tank.... hence why some nations now use a combo reactive armor and new composite armor.....Plus most NATO nations have added active defense systems that use smoke, thermal defeating smoke, or attack the missles themselves with a counter projectile. which are much better than reactive armor, but the sys themselves tend to be exposed to enemy fire. and can only be used once every 8 to 10 seconds....

No we have a few Tow missles most were sold off...An Infantry BN normally held 18 tow under armor vehs, plus 18 ground mount systems, not including eryx systems and 84 mm carl gustoff at guns....now they have only the 84mm, and a few examples of the ground mount Tow sys....the Eryx system was scrapped in 2011, and was suppose to be replaced by a similar system such as US javelin , but that project was cancelled along with the tow sys replacement....

It seems to be your favorite go to statement, "looking through your prism" as I see it I'm not the only one who is looking through a prism.....I am as passionate about the cause I back, as you are about yours, but in defending mine, you have attacked my character, and have mistaken that passion for this nation as being unpatriotic....It was not me, who put you on this merry go round, it was you, with your posts..... "And I am the one being aggressive and derogatory"....go figure....I did not make you print those posts sir, that was all you, you had the chose of responding or not....but what can one say about hypocrites..... No need to respond to this post, as I'm no longer interested in anything you may have to say.

Your not speaking out again'st our governments actions or policies are you Big guy.... And hear I thought you were a patriot, who could not stand the fact that some one may or may not like our governments actions.....But I guess you sir, have special status..... these are your quotes are they not....I guess your not such the patriot you thought you were, in fact kind of makes you a hypocrite does it not...

I guess it boils down to the question, how far is NATO willing to go to destroy one target, or in your case these 47 individuals. One could ask how many lives were allies willing to take to kill top brass in WWII such as Hitler, if it could change the course of the war, did they ask the same question when they dropped the bombs on Japan.... Taking out top tier targets has also proven to shorten or change the course of the conflict. Does it have a price Yes it does.... But during the same period of time that NATO was looking for these 47 terrorist, how many civilians did the terrorist kill, also proven over many studies that they are responsible for 90 % or more of all civilan cas in Afghanistan. This has to also be taken into account when deciding to take out these 47 targets, if they are to be left unmolested then how many more civilian's will be killed by terrorist actions.... The difference between the two, is terrorist deliberately target civilains, as it garnishes the largest media / world attention... while NATO does kill civilians it is a side effect of their attacks, the main target is the terrorist themselves....the fact they take great effort to reduce civilian causalities....something the media fails to report on....

No what is misleading is the fact your justifying our military strength via the total dollars spent on it. And disregarding the major issues that DND is having. it is comparing apples with oranges....each military spends and accounts for it's expenditures differently. for example rate of pay per member, annual infra structure expenditures, equipment expenditures, there are to many variables to account for. On top of all that most of those countries have already made those expensive equipment decisions, and do not have a equipment deficit such as DND, along with major infra structure deficits, training deficits....it all had to be taken into consideration. Not to mention our purchasing operating procedures which need to be rebuilt from the ground up. along with how, when and why we spend our funding....Our the entire budget is based on one fiscal year, with all surplus being returned if depts. can not spend them in time, current spending regulations prevent funding being spent in such a short period time....which then in turn creates a mad rush by all governmental depts , to spend their funding on anything , normally garbage or things it does not need in order that they're budget is not reduced the next year.....multi Bils are waste on this practice... So a lot of things have to change before you can start saying were number 6, because if number 6 looks like we do, then I hate to see number 10 or 20.....

And that would mean what exactly.....that all those sources are false....or that NATO has asked most to spend 2 % of our GDP....

Absolutely...

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/bruce-moncur/canadian-forces_b_6407088.html http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/jonathan-wade/canadian-army-reserve_b_9839984.html http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/02/02/canada-military-ill-prepared-to-resume-mantle-as-world-s-peacekeeper-report_n_9137354.html http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/bruce-moncur/veterans-affairs-canada_b_7142772.html

I'm sure the CDS is looking at the big picture, and what is best for the institution, and balancing that with whats best for the nation. a tough choice, but i'm sure he is not good with a few dead soldiers...But given the circumstances perhaps the risks are worth the rewards....Ironic that we as a nation have placed him in that situation... As for my dim view, nothing I have not presented facts to back it up with....facts that you yourself have either ignored or written of as rants on my part....it does not change the situation the forces are faced with, nor everything that has been published in the media already....and while you see roses, I smell shit..... http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-defence-spending-brian-stewart-1.3242611 And I am positive if you sat down with the CDS and asked the question 'If he could do anything for the military what would that be, I am sure it would have a long list of things that need to be corrected, or looked at TODAY... http://www.defenseone.com/politics/2015/06/nato-members-defense-spending-two-charts/116008/ In 2015 Canada rates 22 and out of 29 NATO countries. http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/15/news/nato-spending-countries/index.html http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nato-commander-trump-comments-1.3559234 .

Your right Smallc I do owe it to Canadians, I owe them all the good and all the bad, which is my point, but all you want to here is the good, no one wants to here about the bad, I guess I should just shut up and be grateful for what I have is that your message here.

It was your intention to question mine though, because you think that I am showing disrespect towards this government,past governments along with it's citizens through questioning how we as a nation treat our soldiers....I here I thought we lived in a democracy, with freedom of speech and others.....But instead of you debating the topic you attack me, and question my patriotism....like wanting a defense department that does not put undo risk to it's soldiers is a taboo topic....

Perhaps Gen Vance see that with out any missions or operations on going one of the sure fire methods to secure extra funding is to be involved....scraps from the big table are better than nothing....But this funding comes at a cost dead soldiers.....something many Canadians are good with....

The media has changed the meaning of Collateral damage to something entirely different. It is now assumed that NATO is deliberately targeting civilians women and children and using these attacks as terrorists do, to make a political statement. Not true, NATO uses all of it's resources to eliminate it's enemies, those are the targets...Great lengths go into each mission to reduce Collateral damage, even canceled if the value of the target does not warrant the damage to incents.... And on the rare occasion the value of the target does out weigh any collateral damage, such as a high ranking enemy combatant or several in one location, where many more lives could be saved by taking them out.... Terrorist on the other hand deliberately attack women and children as it has the highest media value....to allow them to gain more coverage for they're struggle....in their minds killing soldiers does not bring about the same result as killing civilians.... NATO can easily increase the collateral damage by bombing them back into the stone age, wiping out everyone and everything much like mid evil times or in a total war such as WWII, Hence why we have as a civilized world agreed to the genva convention, which limits these activities....And labels those that do practice them as terrorist....or criminals I get the fact that to the families dead is dead it does not bring relief to the pain they are suffering....But then again nothing that happens in war will bring joy and happiness....only death and destruction.

Don't lecture me on patriotism, I spent 34 years in the service of my country, 9 tours of duty in some of the worlds shit holes, and 5 years in Germany...and not once did I waiver in my duty or sacrifice for this nation...I have held my best friend in my arms on the battle field watching his last moments of his life fade away, I have buried to many good friends, seen even more maimed for life, both physically and mentally. I have attended 6 more funerals since the Afghanistan mission has ended, for friends that have taken their own lives....I think I earned that check mark in the patriotism block of life....along with a few others. And in return all I have asked is for this nation to stand up and have our soldiers backs, to look after our soldiers when they are broken incapable of serving this great nation any more. I have also advocated for better equipment as it is proven to save lifes.....To bring our soldiers home alive and well so they can be with their families....A mission that we as citizens have failed at. I owe everything I have in life, all my experiences, all my training, to our nations military, it has feed and clothed my family, allowed me to purchase my home, raise my kids in a good, safe environment. I also owe my life to some of it's members the men and women who I have the honor of calling comrads in arms. And if bringing into question how the rest of Canada treats these brave men and women is unpatriotic then I am guilty as charged. I have been retired for DND since 2014, and now a regular citizen of this great nation, with all the freedoms and rights as you have.....I while am no longer bound by that oath, my service is done...if this nation was to call upon me once again I would do it in a heart beat....Sounds very unpatriotic to me.... And yet your entire posts sounds more like "shut the F*** up" and do as your told to do, and to drive your point home you question MY loyalty to our nation. turning it into a dick measuring contest of some sort....by telling me your proud of our nation, and some how I am not because I have questioned some of our governments actions and the actions of it's citizens..... The fact that your willing to let our military slip into despair, putting the lifes of our soldiers at extra risk because it is not properly equipped and trained....that sir has got patriotism written all over it....add that to your list of things i'm proud off, that fact that we can not question our governments actions has got patriotism written all over it....the fact that you label those that do has got patriotism written all over it....add all those things to your things i'm proud of list.... And now that we have our dicks swinging in the wind, and comparing sizes please tell the other posters here what have you've done to be a patriotic Canadian.

Once again, the CDS advises the PM on what the military is capable of doing and what is beyond it's reach. It is the PM's job to take in that advice and make a decision....He meaning the PM is the man that makes the call, regardless of what the CDS has advised or not....Politicians have a habit of blaming others for those decisions, but in the end the PM needs to own it...he is after all who is in charge.. That being said after that decision is made by the PM do you really think the CDS would go to the media and voice his concerns or dismay with that decision, not likely... Gen Vance knows what shape the military is in, and I am positive he has also made it very clear to our government in charge on a daily basis...None of us were in the room when this discussion took place, nor do we know exactly what Gen Vances thoughts are on the topic, for us the public we can only speculate....Perhaps Gen Vance see that with out any missions or operations on going one of the sure fire methods to secure extra funding is to be involved....scraps from the big table are better than nothing....But this funding comes at a cost dead soldiers.....something many Canadians are good with.... This is not about pointing the finger at the liberals , It's about how this is going to effect our nations military....

Yes Soldiers join by choice, normally driven by a need to give back to this nation, to serve a higher cause than just a pay check, to have a sense of belonging to an institution for the greater good, similar to becoming a police officer or firemen. At least that is how it is sold to young men and women who are inspired by our governmental propaganda. Because the government needs them to have seats at certain tables, to do their bidding for political points abroad....Funny how that does not get mentioned in the recruiting posters, to coin a US phase be all you can be, just don't expect us to support you..... Governments make a lot of promises, to get your vote, they promise you a rose garden and deliver what ever they feel like. And while that sounds like good leadership to you, you really should get out more....Running a country is more than just following the peoples wishes for cotton candy, and hard toffee. And yes you are one of those "people" you've said as much in more than one post... And Yes, the military has always done as it has been told, when it has been told, it has always had our citizens backs. regardless if it's had the support of Canada and its population.....I guess it is a one way street.

Your problem is your understanding of war it self....Even your favorite Gen Powel understood that, where he has been quoted as saying Nothing in war is fair, we concentrate our forces to maximize our fire power to it's fullest, we will use every weapon and tactic available to us, to bring about the end of this violence and the Sadam's regime. Who seem to be shedding a tear for those poor terrorist because they are not being fought on a level playing field....for a group who uses terror not again'st those that are doing the bombing, but to thousands of innocent civilians.....why because they are cowards, nothing more....they are not will to take on military forces when it is to their advantage, they want to cause terror amongst the soft under belly of their own nation.....their own people..... This is what your condoning....a Muslim boys club that want to play soldier, and kill as much as they want, they want to feel the power of controlling others, perverting an entire religion , forcing their will upon millions....I wonder if they show the same compassion when they kill unarmed civilians.....and then have the balls to say we are being hunted down and killed like animals with planes, tanks, drones etc....They are animals....they follow ideals that need to be wiped out completely..... No your silent on what these scumbags did to deserve all this special treatment from the west....which could mean you approve some how....and if it is all right for them to use such tactics of ethic cleansing, mass murder, the targeted killing of women and children.....why does your balls get twisted when NATO accidentally kills civilians....seems there is a double standard....

This new mission is just another example of our political masters willingness to gain global political points on the backs of our soldiers, while over looking the current state of our military.....This will never stop happening, and yet it is sanctioned by the Canadian people, who I might add are scared shitless of what our elected governments would do with a larger Military force......Who pays the price for these childish acts....our soldiers...when are we going to wake up....And at least demand they are equipped properly....

Having any mission under direct UN control is much more dangerous, it adds dozens of layers to the chain of command, plus they control the RO&E, Ask Yugoslavia how the UN mission went there, before they were dumped in favor of a NATO mission. This is not going to be good.

Your starting to get it, todays world is a global one in all aspects, from civil wars, to screwing with the prices of oil and other commodities. The UN is nothing more than a place to vent and rant your problems to, without any solutions bring brought forward and when they are they are Veto. Leaving the job to the other super powers.... What I don't get is most Canadians would rather watch the world burn, rather than lift a finger to help, sure we are there to hand out some Kleenex, and blankets but that is where we stop. That is until some little boys body washes up on the beach, then we all of sudden develope some form of emotions and want to help.....we open our wallets and homes to invite refugees, the same people we told to "it's a local problem sort it out by your self" we will not help your cause....now shut up and take your blanket.....mean while the main problem still exists, and still goes on.... ISIL is not trying to set up some Sunni nation, it kills anyone not of the same ideology, THAT INCLUDES Sunni Muslims...ISIL does not talk for all Sunnis, in fact the majority are speaking out again'st ISIL and their practices....one could hardly say "OH they just want their own homeland" lets give it to them and be done with this....ISIL is now in 1/2 dozen nations, not there to set up anything but to kill their enemies....which include everyone that does not think and act as they do.....How hard is that to see....

Have you been watching the news lately, ISIS has made claims for several bombings in Turkey. And yet what are we as a nation suppose to do with groups like ISIS, do we turn our heads and claim it is just a regional problem, and yet this regional problem effects us in several ways, in the wallet as it influences markets, global prices of oil, and trade within that region....do we just shrug our shoulders and ride out the storm....and what do we do with all those refugees, the other effects of war, do we continue to pay out for other effects of war and continue our lives if nothing has happened.

I could give you a long list of countries that would disagree with your UN statement entirely but you could start with the state once called Yugoslavia, ask them how their rights were protected, during that conflict, as UN soldiers watch them cleanse entire villages, cities, helpless to stop them..... NATO is a defensive agreement signed by dozens of countries, meant to counter soviet aggression, so the answer to your question is yes, NATO would come to the aid of any country that signed on to that agreement, even if it meant going to wqar with mother Russia. If the state of our military bothers you so much, then why are you so good with it, is it the tax dollars spent, is it your afraid of our military, what is the reason you oppose it so much ? Regardless of the state of our military, our government will send it to defend this nation regardless, and those young men and women will pay for that decision with their lives....Something most Canadians are willing to live with....until it is their sons and daughters that will answer the call, wonder if they would change their tone then....when it is to late....when they are attending the funeral service for a love one....

Knowing this how can you justify your position, with any cuts....knowing that the forces have been cut to the bone, all that is left is to cut capabilities....keeping on topic, how can we justify NOT being able to move your forces which was barely able to with over 10,000 wheeled vehs now forcing it to do that job with only 1500 vehs.... All this is going to do is force DND to rent the Civilian contractors, or vehs to get the job done, how does that save any funds, How would they ever handle say another Winnipeg flood, or ICE storm....

The Milcot fleet your talking about is the MSVS fleet, a veh platform originally purchased to service our reserve forces, it is a civilian truck 7.5 ton, with limited off road performance. The length of the veh prevents it from operating in a lot of field conditions as it is easily high centered. As the regular force began retiring it's veh fleet , they started to strip most of the reserve units of these vehs, leaving behind mostly civilian pick up trucks.....It should also be noted even with the MSVS in service it's total numbers do not even come close to the number of vehs it is suppose to replace. While the truck program was severely downgraded in size, the production of 20 foot containers or office, workshops, cp's, etc went on, meaning now there is these SEV's or 20 foot containers to replace MLVW SEVs or pods, but very limited prime movers. meaning a unit will not have the ability to make tactical moves with out support from other resources.... Not to mention that it stills leaves the forces which was in desperate need of lift before the forced retirement of most of its fleet of almost 10,000 wheeled vehs, now it has to make do with 1500 vehs....or to put that in context , it will have the G wagons (jeeps) and then a split truck fleet of new and old MSVS trucks, with no other capabilities in between or the heavy trucks it was looking for. Then once you break those numbers down again for specialty vehs such as refuelers, recovery, arty prime movers, PLS trucks which form the bulk of the fleet, the Army, and Air force will have next to nothing in the form of cargo vehs......Once again if you can not move cargo the army is not mobile.... It is one thing to create a smaller force, if done in scale that is balanced ,thisis taking away the ability to move your forces....period..... The TAPV is not what DND wanted, it was what was forced upon them by fiscal restraints, and political handling, I've talked to some of the armored guys that were involved in the testing and they said it was not the best choice of what was available, The armored corp was looking for a RECCE platform, to replace the Coyote Recce veh, one armed with a decent gun, an improved surveillance package. what they got was a smaller veh, with a light RWS system.