Canadian Forces in sad shape!

[bush_cheney2004]

....Its just something that was floated for a while. This really worries me because there is no saying that the delivery will not again be delayed.

Very very likely at this juncture....the "Maple Hawk" is looking better and better in hindsight.

[Smallc]

Very very likely at this juncture....the "Maple Hawk" is looking better and better in hindsight.

Not nearly enough room inside. It would be like having nothing....which we might yet end up with.

[bush_cheney2004]

Not nearly enough room inside. It would be like having nothing....which we might yet end up with.

You already have nothing.....because:

The MHP illustrates the larger problem of a Canadian defence policy that is attempting to be all things to all people. By trying to retain combat helicopter tasks in particular, the maritime helicopter procurement process has been made more politically and economically difficult since it is apparent that few helicopters can carry all the equipment and meet all the tasks required. A reassessment of role priorities away from deep-sea combat and towards coastal surveillance and patrol duties could extend the options and lower the costs of the program.

http://www.ploughshares.ca/libraries/monitor/monj03i.htm

....and this is what vexes Canadian rotary-wing aircraft procurement.

At least eight other nations have taken delivery of a proven maritime airframe solution.

Edited November 16, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[Smallc]

You already have nothing.....because:

Ummm, no. As old as they are, we still have helicopters that can do what we need (if not constantly as a result of their age). We have unique requirements. It was stupid that the program was canceled the first time around, but we have to deal with the current problem and not worry about the past.

[bush_cheney2004]

Ummm, no. As old as they are, we still have helicopters that can do what we need (if not constantly as a result of their age). We have unique requirements. It was stupid that the program was canceled the first time around, but we have to deal with the current problem and not worry about the past.

Unique requirements? What differentiates Canada's needs compared to other nations other than trying to multi-role on the cheap?

[Smallc]

Unique requirements? What differentiates Canada's needs compared to other nations other than trying to multi-role on the cheap?

Every nation has unique needs. We really do need multi roll on the cheap as we have a large area to cover and very little to work with relatively speaking. Now, we could do like other countries and not even try to balance our budget. Then we could spend as much as we wanted. Because thats not the case though, we have to make due with what we can afford.

[bush_cheney2004]

Every nation has unique needs. We really do need multi roll on the cheap as we have a large area to cover and very little to work with relatively speaking. Now, we could do like other countries and not even try to balance our budget. Then we could spend as much as we wanted. Because thats not the case though, we have to make due with what we can afford.

Then it would seem that Canada has gotten exactly what it is willing to pay for.

[Sir Bandelot]

Then it would seem that Canada has gotten exactly what it is willing to pay for.

Thats exactly the problem, they wanted a copter that could do so many different things it is now marginalized, which usually means it won't do anything particularly well. It was designed by committee- the maple platypus.

The government was warned during the procurement process that this deadline could not be met. They put a clause in the contract to bill the company $100k per day if late, up to a maximum of $36 million. Out of a $5 billion contract its a mere drop in the bucket. Thats called good business savy on the part of the company sales team.

Anyway its only for some helicopters. Is this alone enough to provide everything our forces need in combat?

[Argus]

By now the CPC should have done something about it.

But they chose to bail out banks who make windfall profits year after year instead.

The helicopter crashed 2 years ago, genius. And the government has not bailed out any banks.

[Argus]

There wasn't as much going on during those 13 years.

The Sea Kings are not involved in the war, genius.

And lest we forget, the CPC government authorized the mission to go into southern Afghanistan and hunt for the Taliban, a more dangerous mission.

Actually, that was the Liberals, genius.

[Argus]

Yes, because they've blown big money and gotten away with it. So if this kind of problem still exists, it is their fault.

Because.......... they should have....... created helicopters out of magic beans, yeah, that's it! You're another genius!

[Sir Bandelot]

The helicopter crashed 2 years ago, genius. And the government has not bailed out any banks.

Who said anything about the sea kings, or a helicopter crash... been drinking already this morning?

[Sir Bandelot]

Actually, that was the Liberals, genius.

"From August 2003 to December 2005, Canada's military commitment was largely Operation Athena, based in the capital, Kabul, as part of the International Assistance Force, which had the aim of providing intelligence and security to allow rebuilding the democratic process.

On July 31, 2006, NATO troops assumed command of all military operations in southern Afghanistan."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/canada.html

For your info the CPC won the federal election in January 2006. Operation Archer began about one month later.

There's genius, and theres mere trolling.

Edited November 16, 2008 by Sir Bandelot

[Sir Bandelot]

Here's one to help drive my point home about the failure of leadership:

May. 17 2006

"Harper argued that extending the mission meant backing Canada's troops. He said, "We honour those who take risks and make the ultimate sacrifice by staying the course and supporting their mission."

Layton hit back at Harper's suggestion, saying Canadians know that a vote against the motion is not a vote against Canada's military. "Let me be very clear: Canadians will not be lured into this false trap of the prime minister's borrowed sloganeering," he said.

Liberal member Dennis Coderre agreed that the debate was not about defending Canada's troops. He also said MPs needed more time to go over the extension's details before rushing to any decision. "The issue is not about whether we are supporting the troops, the issue is do we have the capacity right now to address the extension of the mission by two years. The answer is no," he said.

Meanwhile, an Ottawa think tank slammed the government for "virtually abandoning UN peacekeeping." Polaris analyst Steven Staples said operations in the war-torn country were "consuming all available resources" and preventing vital resources being diverted elsewhere, such as in Darfur.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...60517/20060517/

The truth outs itself, eventually.

Edited November 16, 2008 by Sir Bandelot

[wulf42]

Here is how bad things are getting.....the Chretien Years so screwed the military!

http://www.cda-cdai.ca/library/milhardware.htm

[eyeball]

The real problem is having a minority Government, those guys in Ottawa will never get anything through! One party suggests something the other shoots it down even if they did agree with it! and our Military gets screwed in the middle.

On the other hand, this indecisiveness coupled with our lack of resources probably means we're not as likely to go sticking our noses in other people's business in the future. There's a silver lining in every cloud.

[Topaz]

Here is how bad things are getting.....the Chretien Years so screwed the military!

http://www.cda-cdai.ca/library/milhardware.htm

Right or wrong the Lib did what they had to do, pay off the 40 Billion debt. Would you have preferred higher income taxes? The military today is what it is and IF the present day Federal government wants to go into wars, invited by the creator of the war, the US, then Canadians better get ready for higher taxes or high government debt because it is goign to cost to be apart of the world police!! IF some miracle you get that military are you going to have the personnel to make it work and from what I've seen and heard from people coming back, they are getting out of the military.

[wulf42]

Right or wrong the Lib did what they had to do, pay off the 40 Billion debt. Would you have preferred higher income taxes? The military today is what it is and IF the present day Federal government wants to go into wars, invited by the creator of the war, the US, then Canadians better get ready for higher taxes or high government debt because it is goign to cost to be apart of the world police!! IF some miracle you get that military are you going to have the personnel to make it work and from what I've seen and heard from people coming back, they are getting out of the military.

Of course they are getting out of the military! that is because the Government keeps screwing them over and Canadians in general rather support their favorite hockey team and drink their timmy's more than support our military, it takes more than stupid bumber stickers to support the CF....disgustng really, that is why nobody on the planet takes us Canadians seriously and never will....poor old ww1 and 2 vets

must be rolling in their graves and the few that are left must shake their heads seeing what a once proud military the envy of the world is now the laughing stock of the world at no fault to the brave men and women who make do with what they have. Shady Government officials rather line their own pockets rather than give a damn about the military! In WW2 the Germans used to refer to Canadian troops as the British SS because we fought so hard and were ruthless...nowadays our guys are just trying to keep the few pieces of outdated equipment still running...even our CF-18's, they have to cannabilize parts off some aircraft to keep the others flying! One thing i admire about the Americans, the people there support 100% their soldiers and all the towns and villages and cities have parades for their men and women and treat them like Heros, here in Canada? well we do that for our hockey players...pathetic! No wonder we don't have a national identity.

[Wilber]

"From August 2003 to December 2005, Canada's military commitment was largely Operation Athena, based in the capital, Kabul, as part of the International Assistance Force, which had the aim of providing intelligence and security to allow rebuilding the democratic process.

On July 31, 2006, NATO troops assumed command of all military operations in southern Afghanistan."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/canada.html

For your info the CPC won the federal election in January 2006. Operation Archer began about one month later.

There's genius, and theres mere trolling.

Just tokenism I suppose

[bush_cheney2004]

On the other hand, this indecisiveness coupled with our lack of resources probably means we're not as likely to go sticking our noses in other people's business in the future. There's a silver lining in every cloud.

I guess that is one strategy...worked real well for "Canadian values" in Rwanda.

[Sir Bandelot]

Just tokenism I suppose

That article is dated July 30 2005, almost a year before major operations began on the new mission and 2-year extension. Thats not quite the same as the new more dangerous mission that began in spring of 2006.

I'm not going to defend anyone who sends troops to war without proper equipment, although whats done is done and we should be doing something now, not arguing about who to blame while the mission continues to be at risk. But obviously, the current government is not doing that much either, although they did vote for an even more dangerous mission. Along with power mongering Liberals like Ignatieff, they are all responsible.

Edited November 16, 2008 by Sir Bandelot

[Argus]

"From August 2003 to December 2005, Canada's military commitment was largely Operation Athena, based in the capital, Kabul, as part of the International Assistance Force, which had the aim of providing intelligence and security to allow rebuilding the democratic process.

On July 31, 2006, NATO troops assumed command of all military operations in southern Afghanistan."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/canada.html

For your info the CPC won the federal election in January 2006. Operation Archer began about one month later.

There's genius, and theres mere trolling.

And then there's ignorance, ignorance which has no excuse other than you being too lazy to look things up. I'm guessing also that you are so young you were still worrying about your Algebra tests in 2005. It was the Liberals who agreed to the enhanced role, and to moving us to Kandahar. Bill Graham, then defense minister, was very blunt about warning that this was a different mission, and that there would be casualties as a result.

"Canada will be there for establishing a PRT in Kandahar in August, that will be the first step," Graham told AP on the sidelines of an international security conference in Munich. "We will have the 600 in Kabul still, so that means we'll be up to the 1,000 to 1,100 range."

Canada to Double Troops in Afghanistan

As many as 1,250 Canadian soldiers will be serving in Afghanistan by February 2006. Troops are expected to take part in combat patrols in the mountainous country surrounding Kandahar. Defence Minister Bill Graham has been warning the public for months to expect casualties.

No more troops for Afghanistan

[Sir Bandelot]

See my post immediately above yours

[Argus]

Right or wrong the Lib did what they had to do, pay off the 40 Billion debt.

Canceling the Eh-101 had nothing to do with deficits. It was a political ploy, and nothing more, an election gimick, something which would sound good in a sound byte. Most of the money "saved" wound up being wasted on legal fees, or spent on canoe museums and golf courses - gifts to various Liberal riding associations.

As for the rest of the military, the Liberals had enormous deficits for many years, and Martin played all kinds of accounting games to hide the size of them so no one would bug him to spend it on health care or education - or the military.

[eyeball]

I guess that is one strategy...worked real well for "Canadian values" in Rwanda.

I thought those were humanity's values on display in Rwanda.

Is there a saying anywhere that merges the futility of leading horses to water with the point of rubbing a puppy's nose in its own shit? There should be.