The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming!

[Argus]

So we see the Russians moving their elbows around, announcing militarization of the north in preparation for enforcing their claims. The Conservatives have replied to the effect that Canada won't be bullied and there are plans - somewhere - in someone's lower drawer under the crossword puzzle and his coffee maker - to substantially build up Canada's military resources up there - some day. I hear Harper has even spoken about the possibility of one day building some kind of icebreaker, maybe, eventually. So that if the Russians do decide to go out and mine the sea bed in areas we've claimed we can at least watch them do it.

No movement on that, though.

[Sabre Rider]

Sadly, when it comes to supporting the Canadian Military, the Conservative record is on par with that of the Liberals..........piss poor pathetic, they talk a good game, but are as tight as a Scotsman when it comes time to open the purse strings

Edited March 28, 2009 by Sabre Rider

[eyeball]

Sadly, when it comes to supporting the Canadian Military, the Conservative record is on par with that of the Liberals..........piss poor pathetic, they talk a good game, but are as tight as a Scotsman when it comes time to open the purse strings

Will this make any Canadian soldier think twice next time before running off and doing and dying without wondering why? I doubt it.

[bush_cheney2004]

Will this make any Canadian soldier think twice next time before running off and doing and dying without wondering why? I doubt it.

Methinks this is far more disrespectful than anything said on Fox's "Red Eye".

[eyeball]

Methinks this is far more disrespectful than anything said on Fox's "Red Eye".

No, its just far more truthful.

[bill_barilko]

Sadly, when it comes to supporting the Canadian Military, the Conservative record is on par with that of the Liberals..........piss poor pathetic, they talk a good game, but are as tight as a Scotsman when it comes time to open the purse strings

Yup it's all hot air and no dough. :angry:

[Smallc]

Yup it's all hot air and no dough. :angry:

Sure...if you don't count all the big purchases that have already been made.

[YEGmann]

Sadly, when it comes to supporting the Canadian Military, the Conservative record is on par with that of the Liberals..........piss poor pathetic, they talk a good game, but are as tight as a Scotsman when it comes time to open the purse strings

??? Have you ever heard about such toys like C-17 or C-130J?

[wulf42]

This is the reason Canada should build and maintain a small but modern Nuclear deterrent and a full squadron of Fighter aircraft stationed at a newly created airbase up north as well as CP-140 aircraft that are capable of carrying Nuclear tipped and conventional Torprdoes and a new Navy base with and updated naval fleet...our ships(H.M.C.S. Halifax ,St Johns) are getting ready to go into refit with more modern arms being placed on them....... Ivan must know we are serious, Russia has and will always be the enemy!.........God i would love to be P.M. of this country for a year!

Edited March 29, 2009 by wulf42

[Argus]

??? Have you ever heard about such toys like C-17 or C-130J?

There's no question the Conservatives have been a lot better than the Liberals.

But that is such a low bar to pass that I give them very little credit for it. Almost anyone would have been better than the Liberals. Where is the increase in the size of the infantry which was promised years ago in order to help them cope with all these missions the government keeps sending them on? Where are the new icebreakers? Why is it taking so long to get equipment? I realize that DND purchasing is absurdly slow and unwieldy, but the Tories have been in power long enough now for me to suggest they should have done something about that - and they haven't.

[Smallc]

Trivia question. How many countries have a bigger military budget than Canada?

[Argus]

Trivia question. How many countries have a bigger military budget than Canada?

Not only trivial but wildly misleading. The vast majority of Canada's military budget is spent on the salaries of the people who work at DND or for the military. Those salaries are enormously larger than the salaries of most of the military people on this planet. A Canadian corporal probably gets a higher salary, with better benefits, than whoever leads whatever passes for the joint chiefs of staff in 90% of the world's countries. A colonel in the Russian military takes home something in the neighborhood of $200 per month, including benefits, while privates can get $60-$70, and that's AFTER Putin doubled military salaries a few years ago.

Edited March 29, 2009 by Argus

[Smallc]

Not only trivial but wildly misleading. The vast majority of Canada's military budget is spent on the salaries of the people who work at DND or for the military.

Yes....the numbers I have heard is about 1/2 for personnel and training...are you saying that's a bad thing? Do you hate our troops Argus? The fact is, Canada has the 15th largest military budget in the world as per the latest compiled figures. The fact is that since 1999, large equipment purchases have been made that have upgraded the capability of our forces. Fact is, there are still some holes,....namely when it comes to new supply ships, search and rescue aircraft, and all water patrol ships. There is also the matter of the almost new tanks sitting waiting to be refurbished.

Some things in the military still need work, yes, but in a country such as this with a diverse population that demands spending in so many areas, there is only so much money to go around....especially when you cut taxes and increase spending on everything at the same time.

Edited March 29, 2009 by Smallc

[Argus]

Yes....the numbers I have heard is about 1/2 for personnel and training...are you saying that's a bad thing? Do you hate our troops Argus?

Do you have nothing better to do with your time than ask stupid rhetorical questions?

The fact is, Canada has the 15th largest military budget in the world as per the latest compiled figures

.

Yes, and I explained to you why that was an utterly meaningless comparison.

[Smallc]

Do you have nothing better to do with your time than ask stupid rhetorical questions?

In a few minutes I will

Yes, and I explained to you why that was an utterly meaningless comparison.

Of course you did....it doesn't serve your purpose.

[tango]

If we truly are 15th in terms of military spending, then we are ahead of expectations, because we are the 36th largest country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population

Interesting facts. Can anyone verify?

My suspicion is that our US neighbours constantly denigrate Canada's military because they do not grasp the huge difference in population (and thus spending).

If these facts are true, I think we should ALL stop criticizing Canada's military funding !

Re the comparison, Argus, it's a valid comparison if it's done the same way for all countries, even if it reflects both admin and actual military. Can't have a military without purchasing, accounting, etc. admin functions.

Edited March 29, 2009 by tango

[Sabre Rider]

??? Have you ever heard about such toys like C-17 or C-130J?

Yes I have, a rather tasty bone tossed to Boeing.

Big deal, so Air Command gets some nice new shiny non-combat toys to play with. Meanwhile our aging fleet of CF-18's keeps getting smaller and more obsolete, the navy had to spend more time tied up at the dock last year because of a lack of fuel. Plus the navy will soon be down to one supply ship, when it had three of the buggers when I was a member back in the '70s. As for the army, it Leopard 1's are long past their best before date, and we had to "borrow" some second hand Leopard 2s from our NATO allies. The Iltis jeeps have been replaced by the G-Wagon thankfully, however they are still in use by the reserves. Speaking of the reserves, they really could use an increase in their training budgets, especially if they going to continue to flesh out the ranks of the regulars in Afghanistan.

Come back and talk to me when either the Liberals or the Conservatives actually start funding and supporting the combat arms.

[Argus]

Of course you did....it doesn't serve your purpose.

Because it was stupid. Sorry if I have failed to make clear before that I have a low tolerance for stupid comparisons.

[Argus]

If we truly are 15th in terms of military spending, then we are ahead of expectations, because we are the 36th largest country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population

Interesting facts. Can anyone verify?

My suspicion is that our US neighbours constantly denigrate Canada's military because they do not grasp the huge difference in population (and thus spending).

If these facts are true, I think we should ALL stop criticizing Canada's military funding !

Re the comparison, Argus, it's a valid comparison if it's done the same way for all countries, even if it reflects both admin and actual military. Can't have a military without purchasing, accounting, etc. admin functions.

No it's not a solid comparison. You cannot compare the cost of our maintaining one infantryman in Canada to the cost of a single soldier in Zaire or Yemen and insinuate that this is in any way valid.

[Smallc]

Meanwhile our aging fleet of CF-18's keeps getting smaller and more obsolete,

Do you realize what type of upgrades these jets just underwent? They are far from obsolete. They aren't due for replacement until 2017 - 2020.

[Sabre Rider]

Do you realize what type of upgrades these jets just underwent? They are far from obsolete. They aren't due for replacement until 2017 - 2020.

Of the 138 CF-18's acquired between 1981 to 1988 only 103 are left, of which only 80 are operational, that is over a 36% reduction of our fighter strength. The youngest airframe among the fleet is pushing 21 years, which is old by fighter standards. And will be between 28 or 34 years old age by the time they are retired, and that is just for youngest of the fleet.

As military aircraft age, their maintenance costs escalates rapidly requiring them to spend more time being serviced then either in the air or on operational stand-by. This also puts their pilots at greater risk due to mechanical, electrical and air-frame failures, such as has been witnessed in the past with our aging Seaking and Labrador Helicopter fleets.

Air Command conservatively projects a loss of 1 CF-18 every two years under normal peacetime operational conditions. This means we can expect to lose between 3 to 5 more CF-18's before they are replaced.

The upgrades during both phase I and II of the programme brought the existing fleets operational standards up to 1990/2000 standards. Which means they are again becoming out of date and will have to be refitted and upgraded again in the very near future if they going to be able co-operate with more modern NATO fighter-bombers, such as the Eurofighter and the American JSF.

The CF-18 was an excellent aircraft in its day, however its day is fast coming to an end and it will be and is being completely out-classed by new generation 3.5 & 4 fighters coming out of the US, Europe, Russia and even China. Now is the time to start replacing them, not 7 to 10 years from now. And Canada should not limit its selection of replacement fighters to US marks, but should also look at what Europe and Russia have to offer.

[Smallc]

The upgrades during both phase I and II of the programme brought the existing fleets operational standards up to 1990/2000 standards.

The program went beyond the original planned upgrades. The fighters will be in service until 2017 - 2020. That is when the military has said they need replacing and that is when they will be replaced. When they are replaced, they are only being replaced with 65 fighters according to the Conservatives.

[bush_cheney2004]

The program went beyond the original planned upgrades. The fighters will be in service until 2017 - 2020. That is when the military has said they need replacing and that is when they will be replaced. When they are replaced, they are only being replaced with 65 fighters according to the Conservatives.

The reality is even more grim:

Air Force analysis indicates that modernizing 80 aircraft does not mean that 80 ... would be available on a daily basis. The planned allocation of the 80 CF-18s is four operational squadrons of 12 aircraft each, with the remaining 32 available for training, testing and evaluation, and depot level maintenance. Of the 48 aircraft in operational squadrons, ... 34 ... are normally mission-ready on a daily basis. With an expected attrition rate of one aircraft every two years, [DND] has recommended a review of how well the modernized 80-aircraft fleet will meet Canada's ongoing commitments, particularly in a post-September 11, 2001 environment.

http://www.casr.ca/id-cf18-oag3.htm

[Sabre Rider]

The program went beyond the original planned upgrades. The fighters will be in service until 2017 - 2020. That is when the military has said they need replacing and that is when they will be replaced. When they are replaced, they are only being replaced with 65 fighters according to the Conservatives.

65 eh? May as well not bother spending the money and just surrender our airspace sovereignty and defense to the Yankees.

Our current operational fleet of 80 CF-18's can't even cover our airspace, and I would not be all that surprised to learn that some US States ANG's have a greater number of front line fighters than Canada has in total. Sad when you consider that at the end of WWII we had one of the largest and arguably the most professional airforces in the world.

As I said earlier in this thread, the Conservatives record for supporting and funding our front line units is on par with that of the Liberals, piss poor. It was that way back in the '70s and the 80's and it remains that way today.

[Smallc]

Our current operational fleet of 80 CF-18's can't even cover our airspace, and I would not be all that surprised to learn that some US States ANG's have a greater number of front line fighters than Canada has in total.

Considering that California has a larger population, they probably should have more jets than Canada.