Harper announces 20-year

[Argus]

Canada has 3 Iroquois class destroyers (280's) that were built in 1972/73, these are similar to the American Spruance class destroyer still in use today;

Not that Wiki is perfect in all things, but according to Wiki there are no Spruance class destroyers serving with the US navy. Most were decommisioned in the mid nineties, and the last one in 2005.

we have 12 Halifax class frigates that were built between 1992 and 1996;

The design team for which has gone to the four winds long ago.

4 Victoria class submarines the Liberals purchased from the RN built between 1990 and 1993;

Otherwise known as the Lemon class.

12 Kingston class coastal defense ships built between 1996 and 1999;

Of very little use due to their slow speed and the lack of personnel to man them.

2 repleshment ships built in 1969/70 (replacements are on the drawing boards); auxilary vessels: HMCS Quest built in 1969, HMCS Orca built in 2006; and 21 tugs and diving tenders that are relatively new. Equally important, both coasts have modern dockyards with top notch facilities. Where are all the 40-year-old rusted out destroyers? What the Canadian military needs is modern aircraft.

I'm not questioning the need for aircraft, esp patrol aircraft, but I do question whether we have the people who can design and build a modern destroyer from scratch without adding enormously to the cost and time involved. And I still think we need more inshore patrol aircraft more than we do anything else, whether they go to the Coast Guard or the navy.

[eyeball]

(August1991 @ May 13 2008, 12:38 AM)

Can someone here explain to me why we need "big platform" destroyers?

There's more than one reason but....

Better to ask, Aren't we happy with tagging along instead of leading?

Destroyers can act as flag ships for flotillas, which would give leadership to Canada ina particular mission. Unles of course simply following another nations leadership is good enough.

To paraphrase August1991, can someone here explain to me why we need to be such big leaders? OTOH why does Harper feel need to tag along after all the other bigshots trying to lead the world? What the hell has all this leadership got them anyway? A world of pain is all.

What particular mission are you talking about Morris? Its obvious Harper simply pulled this $30 Billion defence strategy out of his ass. Can you imagine the howls of outrage if any opposition party proposed we spend $30 billion without a detailed plan or strategy or reason beyond...some imagined mission?

I'd be a lot happier if we just made our own way in the world and if other countries want to tag along or run on up ahead that's fine too. We don't need a $30 Billion armed force because there's nobody attacking us. There's really only one country in the world who could ever pull off an invasion and if they did invade us 3/4 of the rest of the world would be on our side...mind you 30% of Canadians would probably greet the invaders with hugs and kisses so...

All I can say is I hope we have a wide-ranging series of public hearings about what our military strategy should be before so much as a dime is spent on this. I say complete neutrality, a Prime Directive that outlaws ANY interference in the affairs of others, and a small but effective nuclear deterance capability. Throw in another DART or two, a few more coast guard ships, helicopters and what have you for domestic use and that's about it. $5 billion or so tops and go ahead and buy these from your 'leaders' if you makes you feel any better.

[Topaz]

One question the Cons are going to have to answer is why are they taking the subs that need work and sailing them down through the Pamana Canal to Vancouver to be fixed? It is going to cost a million dollars just to get them there, said someone reporter on Duffy. Why can't they be fixed in Halifax?? Another item was what Harper had to say about building up the military and he was saying recruiting will be increased along with the equipment. I can't agree with him unless they are going to starting paying 25,000 bonuses to sign up especially the 18-25 just don't want anyhting to do with the military. So were is he going to get these people, maybe by creating unemployment so people will have to turn to the military for a job.

[bush_cheney2004]

To paraphrase August1991, can someone here explain to me why we need to be such big leaders? OTOH why does Harper feel need to tag along after all the other bigshots trying to lead the world? What the hell has all this leadership got them anyway? A world of pain is all.

What has it gotten them? Let's see...

1. Compliance with NATO membership commitments

2. Execution of UN missions

3. Feel good moments for the "Responsibility to Protect"

4. Maintenance of basic capabilities for sovereignty, natural disasters, and domestic security

5. A "seat at the table" (instead of a dog dish outside)

I'd be a lot happier if we just made our own way in the world and if other countries want to tag along or run on up ahead that's fine too. We don't need a $30 Billion armed force because there's nobody attacking us. There's really only one country in the world who could ever pull off an invasion and if they did invade us 3/4 of the rest of the world would be on our side...mind you 30% of Canadians would probably greet the invaders with hugs and kisses so...

Would you also promise to ignore and not whine about things such as East Timor, Rwanda, Kosovo, Darfur, and Haiti ? That "one country" doesn't need to invade...it already owns or can buy what it wants.

All I can say is I hope we have a wide-ranging series of public hearings about what our military strategy should be before so much as a dime is spent on this. I say complete neutrality, a Prime Directive that outlaws ANY interference in the affairs of others, and a small but effective nuclear deterance capability. Throw in another DART or two, a few more coast guard ships, helicopters and what have you for domestic use and that's about it. $5 billion or so tops and go ahead and buy these from your 'leaders' if you makes you feel any better.

It's already been done...studied to death. Leaving NATO or NORAD was not one of the directives.

[HisSelf]

The BIG question is 'what is this all for?'

I couldn't help but notice that Harper made a comment about being somebody with an opinion everybody smiles at as opposed to being somebody who can make a difference. With respect to what? Why is this guy arming? I've watched his policy thrusts - even before he got elected - and quite frankly I think he's just gonna get us in deep and deeper to fight somebody else's battles.

I'm all for defending the homeland and offering assistance. I have a lot of trouble running off all over the place to fight for somebody else's ideology. And most certainly the ideology of idiolidiots...

We have done our bit in Afghastlystan. Where are the other NATO partners? Come to think of it, where is the US? Why has this turned into yet another 'War on Drugs?'

And why we are talking abiut Afghastlystan? Why is Omar Khadar still rotting in Gitmo? We've gone to the ends of the earth for Brenda Martin. The case against Khadar is equally weak. Why have we not done for Omar Khadr what Britain did for their people?

WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP.

[Topaz]

You some people on this forum don't want to believe that Canada will ended up joining the US as one country but it is going to happen because the US wants or should I say Bush wants it and I've read that the Congress didn't have any say in when Bush signed the agreement with Canada and Mexico. We are buidling our military because the plan is to have a military on ready with the US. Just watch how Harper goes about his governing with the US. The NDP has put forth a motion to stop SPP from going forward but the government is letting it sit.

[bush_cheney2004]

You some people on this forum don't want to believe that Canada will ended up joining the US as one country but it is going to happen because the US wants or should I say Bush wants it .....

Pssssssst...I will let you in on a secret...President Bush is leaving office next January. Then you can worry about whatever the next 'Merkin president "wants".

[eyeball]

It's already been done...studied to death.

Bullshit it has, not where it counts, there has not been a single public discussion where I live on the subject of Canada's military strategy or foreign policy. I'm not aware of any held anywhere else in Canada either. I mean real grass-roots level town-hall discussions on what Canadians want the military to do in our name, not the discussions the military-complex has with itself. The fact is NO government in this country has been able to push big military spending proposals past the visceral doubt of Canadians that does manage to impinge on the few sensibilities our politicians possess. The fact Harper doesn't actually have a plan only underscores this and indicates this is more about looking tough and sounding big. Maybe he was still feeling the effects of his last dose of Viagra, who knows.

Would you also promise to ignore and not whine about things such as East Timor, Rwanda, Kosovo, Darfur, and Haiti?

Only if you promise to ignore and not whine about things like Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Korea, Israel, Hamas, Al Quaeda, Chavez, Castro, the list goes on and on and on and on... Just go home and stay there. You've got enough of your own issues to deal with - all you've managed to do is cock everything up by interfering in everyone else's.

[bush_cheney2004]

Bullshit it has, not where it counts, there has not been a single public discussion where I live on the subject of Canada's military strategy or foreign policy. I'm not aware of any held anywhere else in Canada either. I mean real grass-roots level town-hall discussions on what Canadians want the military to do in our name,...

You must be joking....does the federal government have to get your two cents on all projects and military missions/scope?

Only if you promise to ignore and not whine about things like Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Korea, Israel, Hamas, Al Quaeda, Chavez, Castro, the list goes on and on and on and on... Just go home and stay there. You've got enough of your own issues to deal with - all you've managed to do is cock everything up by interfering in everyone else's.

We don't want to "just go home"...that would be very unSuperpower-like. Your country has managed to get in on the "cocking up" quite well even without PM Harper's proposed spending. Must have been decided at a "Town Hall" meeting, eh?

[M.Dancer]

You some people on this forum don't want to believe that Canada will ended up joining the US as one country but it is going to happen because the US wants or should I say Bush wants it and I've read that the Congress didn't have any say in when Bush signed the agreement with Canada and Mexico. We are buidling our military because the plan is to have a military on ready with the US. Just watch how Harper goes about his governing with the US. The NDP has put forth a motion to stop SPP from going forward but the government is letting it sit.

I would say some people, if not most on this forum have a differnt brand of toaster than yours....

[WarBicycle]

Not that Wiki is perfect in all things, but according to Wiki there are no Spruance class destroyers serving with the US navy. Most were decommisioned in the mid nineties, and the last one in 2005.

The design team for which has gone to the four winds long ago.

Otherwise known as the Lemon class.

Of very little use due to their slow speed and the lack of personnel to man them.

I'm not questioning the need for aircraft, esp patrol aircraft, but I do question whether we have the people who can design and build a modern destroyer from scratch without adding enormously to the cost and time involved. And I still think we need more inshore patrol aircraft more than we do anything else, whether they go to the Coast Guard or the navy.

And why we are talking abiut Afghastlystan? Why is Omar Khadar still rotting in Gitmo? We've gone to the ends of the earth for Brenda Martin. The case against Khadar is equally weak. Why have we not done for Omar Khadr what Britain did for their people?

WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP.

Chretien went to the ends of the earth for Khadar's father and used his influence to have him released from an Egyptian prison. Had he not the Egyptians would have probably executed him and save the world a lot of future grief. Our Left leaning press likes to paint a picture of poor Omar Khadar the child soldier; a person is only considered a child soldier if they are under the age of fifteen. Omar was fifteen and an active member of al-Qaeda as were his two brothers and father. I hope he is eventually sentenced to the supermax prison in Colorado and lives until his nineties. Seventy-five years of twenty-three hours per day in solitary is what he deserves.

[WarBicycle]

Topaz

I can't agree with him unless they are going to starting paying 25,000 bonuses to sign up especially the 18-25 just don't want anyhting to do with the military. So were is he going to get these people, maybe by creating unemployment so people will have to turn to the military for a job.

The military no longer has an age restriction; thirty and forty-year-old in good physical condition are being recruited and proving to be excellent soldiers.

[WarBicycle]

Argus

I'm not questioning the need for aircraft, esp patrol aircraft, but I do question whether we have the people who can design and build a modern destroyer from scratch without adding enormously to the cost and time involved. And I still think we need more inshore patrol aircraft more than we do anything else, whether they go to the Coast Guard or the navy.

If we don't we lose the expertise; this is exactly what happen when the Avro Arrow was cancelled, many of our best engineers moved to the States to work in the space program.

[HisSelf]

... there has not been a single public discussion where I live on the subject of Canada's military strategy or foreign policy. I'm not aware of any held anywhere else in Canada either. I mean real grass-roots level town-hall discussions on what Canadians want the military to do in our name, not the discussions the military-complex has with itself....

I hear you fellow citizen. High five.

[eyeball]

You must be joking....does the federal government have to get your two cents on all projects and military missions/scope?

I'm not joking at all, if these missions and projects involve killing people in other countries, in my name on my dime, and ESPECIALLY if it means following your gang around, I want a direct say in it - direct as in a referendum and not just some run-of-the-mill election.

We don't want to "just go home"...that would be very unSuperpower-like.

Perish then, the sooner the better - you'll be maintaing a fine old superpower-like tradition, there isn't a single one in all of history that hasn't collapsed, ever.

Your country has managed to get in on the "cocking up" quite well even without PM Harper's proposed spending.

Yup, we're just two-bit players following your country's bandwagon and dancing to your beat. Now Harper wants to buy his own bandwagon.

Must have been decided at a "Town Hall" meeting, eh?

Nope, the farthest thing from it actually.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm not joking at all, if these missions and projects involve killing people in other countries, in my name on my dime, and ESPECIALLY if it means following your gang around, I want a direct say in it - direct as in a referendum and not just some run-of-the-mill election.

Ooops...looks like you had your chance and blew it. For instance, the recent Manley Report on Canuck policy in Afghanistan is full of attributions to many members of the public who cared enough to do it. Shame on you!

[AngusThermopyle]

I'm not joking at all, if these missions and projects involve killing people in other countries, in my name on my dime, and ESPECIALLY if it means following your gang around, I want a direct say in it

Who's been killing anyone in your name? As for your direct say in it, well I doubt too many forces members really give two hoots what you think. It may surprise you to learn this but Canada does not wait with baited breath for your approval.

[Argus]

A LOAD OF CRAP.

Indeed.

[Argus]

Another item was what Harper had to say about building up the military and he was saying recruiting will be increased along with the equipment. I can't agree with him unless they are going to starting paying 25,000 bonuses to sign up especially the 18-25 just don't want anyhting to do with the military. So were is he going to get these people, maybe by creating unemployment so people will have to turn to the military for a job.

You have a cite for this? My impression is the CF have had little difficulty in attracting recruits. Their major problem is in arranging training - and in later retention.

[Argus]

You some people on this forum don't want to believe that Canada will ended up joining the US as one country but it is going to happen because the US wants or should I say Bush wants it

Bush isn't even going to be president in another six months so he'll have to hurry.

And if you applied a little thought - well beyond you, I know - you'd realize the very last thing the American Republicans want is millions of more Democratic voters in favour of gun control, abortion and homosexual rights.

[Argus]

Bullshit it has, not where it counts, there has not been a single public discussion where I live on the subject of Canada's military strategy or foreign policy.

No, the public discussions which were scheduled for your mom's basement were cancelled in favour of the basement of the guy across the road.

The fact is NO government in this country has been able to push big military spending proposals past the visceral doubt of Canadians that does manage to impinge on the few sensibilities our politicians possess.

Virtually every poll I'm aware of over the last thirty years has suggested Canadians wanted more money spent on the military. They do not want a huge military, but they want the one we have to be well-equipped and supplied. It's not a big priority of theirs, though, so the politicians have not hitherto bothered.

This does NOT constitute big military spending, btw. It's simply replacement for rusting out, worn out equipment, not a build-up.

[jdobbin]

The Vice Chief of Staff of Defence says the cost of the 20 year strategy is billions more than the Tories said.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/425389

A major Canadian defence strategy could cost more than $20-billion more over the next two decades than the Conservative government announced earlier in the week, the Vice Chief of Defence Staff says.

Lt.-Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's No. 2 soldier, said the Canadian Forces are slated to spend between $45-billion and $50-billion on planes, weapons, ships and armoured vehicles under the Canada First Defence Strategy, a 20-year plan for military recruitment, operations and equipment purchases that Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Monday in Halifax would cost $30-billion.

"Thirty-billion dollars is the value that the DND budget will be 20 years from now," said a senior military official, explaining the difference in figures. "What we're going to invest between now and then, and further on beyond that, is that $45-billion to $50-billion. These are two different numbers. They mean two different things."

Things not going on the record and not putting things down to paper really makes me question why the details are being left out. The difference in costs in major and the government should be forthcoming about what the strategy is.

[the janitor]

Canada's military is outdated and we don't need it anymore.

Canada should be spending as much on foreign aid as on national security. Foreign development should be at .7%GDP as Lester Pearson recommended and national security spending should be roughly the same, which is doable if we get rid of the military infrastructure that doesn't really secure anything.

If Harper is going to announce 30B for the military when Canada isn't facing a direct threat he's taking a real chance at the next election, especially when our foreign aid spending isn't up to standard.

[AngusThermopyle]

Canada's military is outdated and we don't need it anymore.

Yay! The new winner of most stupid post of the decade!

[M.Dancer]

Yay! The new winner of most stupid post of the decade!

There was really some stif competition there for awhile but it's nice to see someone break away from the pack...