How Canadians view our military

[Jerry J. Fortin]

But not Canada, which couldn't even find 50 measley APCs or the means to airlift them there even it had them. Nope, just blame the Americans for turning him dowm....but hell....you have free health care !

No wonder Dallaire drank himself to sleep.....

BC you are ignorant of the facts in this case. The UN defines the mission and the TOE, it also writes the rules of engagement. The General was sent into a den of vipers with nothing but his dick in his hand. Read up on this please.

[DogOnPorch]

How exactly? Hitler didn't have enough ships to invade North America and Japan would be lucky if it managed to hold all of the Pacific. Even if Hitler managed to take all of Europe there would be multiple resistance movements that would have to be dealt with before he even had a chance to think about invading North America.

Economic warfare would have been the big threat...cut off from this or that supply by U-Boat. Victory in Russia would have freed-up a couple hundred divisions + oil fields...but invasion of NA? Not likely. Capture of all of Asia would have been a far more realistic goal for the Axis. This would be assuming Japan could have pulled off another solid year of victories after hypothetically 'winning' at Coral Sea and Midway. Too many US carriers by 1944 if not....

[bush_cheney2004]

BC you are ignorant of the facts in this case. The UN defines the mission and the TOE, it also writes the rules of engagement. The General was sent into a den of vipers with nothing but his dick in his hand. Read up on this please.

Screw that....Dallaire was shafted by Anan if you want to stick to UN protocol. He thinks UNAMIR was abandoned by member states, including Canada. Read up on that.....

[DogOnPorch]

(continued from previous post)...not to mention the US submarine fleet was giving it to the Japanese merchant fleet up the you-know-where.

Edited September 27, 2009 by DogOnPorch

[bush_cheney2004]

(continued from previous post)...not to mention the US submarine fleet was giving it to the Japanese merchant fleet up the you-know-where.

...and every bit as "unrestricted" compared to German wolf packs in the Atlantic. But it was the "good guys" doing it....starving Japan to death. The USA had long planned for Britain's fall in Europe....that's why the B-36 was born.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Screw that....Dallaire was shafted by Anan if you want to stick to UN protocol. He thinks UNAMIR was abandoned by member states, including Canada. Read up on that.....

I have dude, thats why I said what I did.

[DogOnPorch]

...and every bit as "unrestricted" compared to German wolf packs in the Atlantic. But it was the "good guys" doing it....starving Japan to death. The USA had long planned for Britain's fall in Europe....that's why the B-36 was born.

Convoy escort was viewed with disdain by the IJN...that was if they even bothered to form merchants and tankers into convoys. The B-36's job was indeed to bomb Europe from NA and retrurn. Axis air defences would no doubt have improved...but they had better be very improved due to the increasing number of Mk-III Atomic Bombs rolling off the line...plus this baby. Bye-bye Berlin.

[bush_cheney2004]

I have dude, thats why I said what I did.

If you had, you wouldn't have laid all the blame at Bill Clinton / USA's feet. Dallaire was writing checks with his mouth that the UN would not cash.

[xul]

atom bomb was possible because of Einstien(austrian)E=mc2, Leó Szilárd(hungarian)chain reaction, and the Germans first split the atom in 1938...rocket, ancient chinese invention, Werner von Braun(German) leader responsible for modern rocketry, V-2 to the Saturn V-..radar many people but Robert Watson-Watt (Britian)made workable system first...jet engine, Frank Whittle (Britian)...guided missle, Henschel(germany)

american's arent stupid but crediting them for every advance in science is silly, most scientific advances are built on the accumulated knowledge of many people from many countries...

I just said that ironically because Wild Bill thought America had been as powerful as today before WW2.

By the way, American submarines did not sink many Japanese ships in 1941,1942 and maybe 1943, because the fuzes of the torpedos they equiped were all malfunction and the manufacturer spent years to figure it out, according to the autobiography of Fleet Admiral Chester William Nimitz I read many years ago. American fighters could not match Japanese Zero fighters when the war began. American tanks were powered by gasoline engine and thanks heaven almost all German diesel tanks were in Russian side so there were not a lot of American boys died for these tanks.

Generally, American industry then was kinda like today's China, it could mass produce a lot of good with low cost because of its scale and because there were huge population and domestic market proped it, which did give it strength, but its technology could not be considered as the first class at the time. America gained a lot from the war(mostly because it spent more time being a spectator than anyone else. ).

Edited September 28, 2009 by xul

[xul]

How exactly? Hitler didn't have enough ships to invade North America and Japan would be lucky if it managed to hold all of the Pacific. Even if Hitler managed to take all of Europe there would be multiple resistance movements that would have to be dealt with before he even had a chance to think about invading North America.

If British surrendered, that meant Hitler had ruled Europe, he would have whole European industry, technology, natural and human resource. It would just be a matter of time he would be able to rule the Oceans and then lanched a aggression to North American even if without Japanese help.

Exactly, Hitler did not need to land his troops directly to America, he got a lot of friends in South America then. It could be worked to Hitler as British to America in D-day.

The "multiple resistance movements" mostly just some myth creaded by Hollywood war movie writers. The culture in Europe doesn't like the culture in Afghanistan, European people had used to conquer or to be conquered for thousands year, the history told us if the kings or governments give up, most of the people will accept the fact of their defeat and stop to fight.

Edited September 28, 2009 by xul

[Guest TrueMetis]

If British surrendered, that meant Hitler had ruled Europe, he would have whole European industry, technology, natural and human resource. It would just be a matter of time he would be able to rule the Oceans and then lanched a aggression to North American even if without Japanese help.

Exactly, Hitler did not need to land his troops directly to America, he got a lot of friends in South America then. It could be worked to Hitler as British to America in D-day.

He would have the first three but probably not the most important the human resource. The likelyhood of him manageing to get enough ships to control the Atlantic let alone land ships in the Americas is very low.

Edited September 28, 2009 by TrueMetis

[bush_cheney2004]

....Generally, American industry then are kinda like today's China, it could mass produce a lot of good with low cost because its scale and because there were huge population and domestic market proped it, which did give it strength, but its technology could not be considered as first class at the time. America gained a lot from the war(because it spent more time being a spectator than anyone else. ).

American industry was not like China's today, which is partially dependent on foreign investment and intellectual property. Russia was also dependent on American war materials and steel technology. America was far more than just cheap labor.

How many military grave sites for Chinese army in the USA?

Edited September 28, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[xul]

American industry was not like China's today, which is partially dependent on foreign investment and intellectual property.

Where do you think American industry and technology come from? All created by Indian aboriginal?

[bush_cheney2004]

Where do you think American industry and technology come from? All created by Indian aboriginal?

It came from all over the world, just like Americans do today. China even copies the mistakes.

[Wild Bill]

Where do you think American industry and technology come from? All created by Indian aboriginal?

No, it came from America's free society! For years America was a magnet for some of the best of other countries. Nicola Tesla did not leave Serbia to go to South America. He and thousands like him saw their future in America! Few other countries were even considered by people like him!

This gave America a pool of human resources unequalled by any other country in the world at that time. When war broke out, America may have started out behind in some areas but the size of its industry and the mobility within its society for creative inventors and other people to flourish gave it a hell of a competitive advantage.

[ToadBrother]

No, it came from America's free society! For years America was a magnet for some of the best of other countries. Nicola Tesla did not leave Serbia to go to South America. He and thousands like him saw their future in America! Few other countries were even considered by people like him!

This gave America a pool of human resources unequalled by any other country in the world at that time. When war broke out, America may have started out behind in some areas but the size of its industry and the mobility within its society for creative inventors and other people to flourish gave it a hell of a competitive advantage.

Well, the US had already been upping its industrial capacity because of Lend-Lease before they entered the war. The disaster of their first campaigns in Africa was, ironically (because they had been exporting tanks and the like) was poorly equipped troops.

But Britain was hardly a slouch, and what really won the war in the end was Russia basically throwing enough people at the Eastern Front to keep Hitler preoccupied. People love to talk about how the Americans won the war, or how without staunch British resistance in the first two years, that all would be lost, and these are true to a point, but at the end of the day, if Hitler had not had the Eastern Front to worry about, he could have locked his Atlantic and Mediterranean borders far better, and something like D-Day, if not outright impossible, would have been far bloodier, and maybe would have failed. Even with the collapse of Italy, that would have been no route into Europe.

So I think we can all thank the Russians for playing a substantial role.

[bush_cheney2004]

So I think we can all thank the Russians for playing a substantial role.

...and the Russians thanked America for also playing a "substantial" role:

from "The Role of Lend-Lease in Soviet Military

Efforts, 1941-1945" by BORIS V. SOKOLOV, which clearly states that the USSR

was all but done for without Lend Lease.

Quoting Zhukov:

"Speaking about our readiness for war from the point of view of the economy and

economics, one cannot be silent about such a factor as the subsequent help from

the Allies. First of all, certainly, from the American side, because in that

respect the English helped us minimally. In an analysis of all facets of the

war, one must not leave this out of one's reckoning. We would have been in a

serious condition without American gunpowder, and could not have turned out the

quantity of ammunition which we needed. Without American `Studebekkers' [sic],

we could have dragged our artillery nowhere. Yes, in general, to a considerable

degree they provided ourfront transport. The output of special steel, necessary

for the most diverse necessities of war, were also connected to a series of

American deliveries."

Moreover, Zhukov underscored that `we entered war while still continuing to be a

backward country in an industrial sense in comparison with Germany. Simonov's

truthful recounting of these meetings with Zhukov, which took place in 1965 and

1966, are corraborated by the utterances of G. Zhukov, recorded as a result of

eavesdropping by security organs in 1963:

"It is now said that the Allies never helped us . . . However, one cannot deny

that the Americans gave us so much material, without which we could not have

formed our reserves and ***could not have continued the war*** . . . we had no

explosives and powder. There was none to equip rifle bullets. The Americans

actually came to our assistance with powder and explosives. And how much sheet

steel did they give us. We really could not have quickly put right our

production of tanks if the Americans had not helped with steel. And today it

seems as though we had all this ourselves in abundance

[M.Dancer]

In the meeting to vote on the draft U.S./UK resolution, both U.S. and UK Ambassadors to the UN formalized the raised UNSC member concerns to the use of force and both Ambassadors acted to negate said concerns by reinforcing that the Resolution 1441 did NOT provide the language to authorize force against Iraq; specifically:

Sorry, did you not again post where 1441 required a second resolution?

I will explain to you...1441 is a contract. Opinions as to what the contract should have had in it, or what other hoped to expect from it aren't worth the paper they are printed on.

All that matters is what is written in 1441. The obligation were met. Serious conseauences followed..ergo, the war was not illegal.

[xul]

No, it came from America's free society! For years America was a magnet for some of the best of other countries. Nicola Tesla did not leave Serbia to go to South America. He and thousands like him saw their future in America!

This is the future he looked for...

Nikola Tesla

Death

Tesla died of heart failure alone in room 3327 of the New Yorker Hotel, on 7 January 1943. Despite having sold his AC electricity patents, Tesla died with significant debts on the books. Later that year the US Supreme Court upheld Tesla's patent number 645576, in effect recognizing him as the inventor of radio.

Soon after his death Tesla's safe was opened by his nephew Sava Kosanović. Shortly thereafter Tesla's papers and other property were empounded by the United States' Alien Property Custodian office in Tesla's compound at the Manhatten Warehouse, even though he was a naturalized citizen.

I didn't deny America was the most favourable destination for European immigrants at the time, but that doesn't mean it could draw the best European moving to America just due to its merit.

This gave America a pool of human resources unequalled by any other country in the world at that time. When war broke out, America may have started out behind in some areas but the size of its industry and the mobility within its society for creative inventors and other people to flourish gave it a hell of a competitive advantage.

Most best European scientists moved to America just because of wars and persecutions in Europe---Hitler and Stalin helped a lot. Einstein left Europe becasue he was a Jew and Hitler was raising at the time. Werner Von Braun on the contrary came to America becasue he was a Nazi, major of SS and "chose slave labours from a concentration camp in body to build his V2 rocket", "people died for building V2 rockets were far more than people killed by them"---according to BBC I heard, he needed American covering up his crime in the war.

Edited September 28, 2009 by xul

[ToadBrother]

Most best European scientists moved to America just because of wars and persecutions in Europe---Hitler and Stalin helped a lot. Einstein left Europe becasue he was a Jew and Hitler was raising at the time. Werner Von Braun on the contrary came to America becasue he was a Nazi, major of SS and "chose slave labours from a concentration camp in body to build his V2 rocket"---according to BBC I heard, he needed American covering up his crime in the war.

You're talking about two separate events. Prior to WWII, and particularly prior to the real campaign against the Jews began in the mid-30s, a lot of German intellectuals left for Britain and the US, some because they were Jewish, others because they felt that the direction that Germany was heading in was going to make their lives pretty miserable.

When you speak of von Braun and his ilk, well, basically there was a race between the US and the Russians as to who could grab Nazi technology and the guys that designed and built it. Both sides were quite happy to bury inconvenient facts about the people that the either caught or who surrendered to them (I believe von Braun and his team surrendered to the Americans, but I'm going from memory here). What von Braun had was what would amount to short and medium range missile technology, along with fairly good guidance systems, and that was worth burying his wartime conduct. Maybe it was morally wrong, but to the Americans it seemed the lesser of two evils.

[ToadBrother]

...and the Russians thanked America for also playing a "substantial" role:

I never said the Americans didn't play a substantial role. Lend-Lease was absolutely key to the Brits and Russians being able to continue prosecuting the war. But, as Churchill observed in his history of WWII, he knew the Germans had lost the war when they invaded Russia. The opening of a second front was a supreme military blunder, and the German generals knew it, but Hitler's Bolshevik obsession was so strong that he overruled them and ordered Operation Barbarossa to go ahead, and for the next four years, the German Army repeated on an even grander scale Napoleon's folly.

What Lend-Lease did do was prevent the worst-case scenario where the Soviet government simply fled beyond the Urals and and let Hitler have European Russia. That seems to have been Hitler's hope, that Stalin would fold and get out. His generals, of course, knew that invading Russia was an insane gambit, and that any invasion of Russia should wait until Britain had been neutralized.

[DogOnPorch]

When you speak of von Braun and his ilk, well, basically there was a race between the US and the Russians as to who could grab Nazi technology and the guys that designed and built it. Both sides were quite happy to bury inconvenient facts about the people that the either caught or who surrendered to them (I believe von Braun and his team surrendered to the Americans, but I'm going from memory here). What von Braun had was what would amount to short and medium range missile technology, along with fairly good guidance systems, and that was worth burying his wartime conduct. Maybe it was morally wrong, but to the Americans it seemed the lesser of two evils.

The Russians didn't get to use their German scientists to the same extent that the Americans did...Von Braun and his team were definately the big prize. The Russians had their own genius in the rocket building field, anyways...Korolev...his design routinely goes to space even to this day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-7_Semyorka

While a member of the Nazi party...he had to be to continue work on rockets...Von Braun was a poor Nazi...often at extreme odds with Himmler who hated him. Von Braun was even arrested by Himmler and nearly executed.

[Army Guy]

Yes I realize that. I was wrong on the numbers. We don't really need all that many tanks for what we'll probably be doing after Afghanistan. We'll have a few, and that will probably be enough for our uses.

Coyote is on its way out. It and the RG - 31 will be replaced jointly by a new vehicle.

Say's who, those that advocated the retirement of hvy armour forces in Canada, those same individuals who are now coming to the conclusion that tanks are playing a vital role in the Afghan mission.

Those that are still advocating tanks are past thier usefulness on todays battlefield are full of BS, and have never been on a live battlefield when tank support could have saved lives....that whole idea of going to a MGS sys was a polictical statement made by politicians and bean counters, trying to save a buck....and those Military pers who where saying so where following thier political masters....not advice from the soldiers themselfs...

And while the MGS sys might have been a great peace keeping machine " one that would not have to be put into use" or fire a round in anger it was designed for recce forces....not a nations main Hvy armoured force..

To sum it up, because we are a nation that takes years to purcure equipment we need we need to stay focused on the worse case situation IE high intensity warfare , which still demands that each Brigade have a complete tank regt , thats 3 to 4 tank sqns, or approx 40 to 50 tanks per regt....currently we have one regt that operates tanks,the old C4 Leo's ...thats right we are still awaiting the A4 to be modified.... the one out west 1 CMBG, the rest have been converted to lt recce forces ie they run Coyotes , and LUV jeeps....they've taken a powerful tool out of our brigades arsenal for conducting offensive and defensive ops....

We know there is limited dollars out there, and we know our government is trying it's best to fix things....but it is also important that the people know that our military forces are not even close to have the equipment or personal to cover it's commitments that the government has assigned us....that it should be no surprise to them if and when the shit hits the fan, we can not function, or do our jobs....as a result many soldiers will once again pay with there lives getting the job done...because thats is what we do...and that is what the Canadian people do, make excuses until the first soldiers come back in bags then the demand an inquiry and piont the finger at someone else.

[madmax]

Say's who, those that advocated the retirement of hvy armour forces in Canada, those same individuals who are now coming to the conclusion that tanks are playing a vital role in the Afghan mission.

Those that are still advocating tanks are past thier usefulness on todays battlefield are full of BS, and have never been on a live battlefield when tank support could have saved lives....that whole idea of going to a MGS sys was a polictical statement made by politicians and bean counters, trying to save a buck....and those Military pers who where saying so where following thier political masters....not advice from the soldiers themselfs...

There has always been a lobby against Tanks. They serve a purpose not a solution. Their function on the battlefield and in support missions and security cannot be denied. Yes they are expensive, but compared to WHAT?

[DogOnPorch]

xul: By the way, American submarines did not sink many Japanese ships in 1941,1942 and maybe 1943, because the fuzes of the torpedos they equiped were all malfunction and the manufacturer spent years to figure it out, according to the autobiography of Fleet Admiral Chester William Nimitz I read many years ago. American fighters could not match Japanese Zero fighters when the war began. American tanks were powered by gasoline engine and thanks heaven almost all German diesel tanks were in Russian side so there were not a lot of American boys died for these tanks.

The first 6 months of the War in the Pacific do not count re: US kicking Japan's rear back across the Pacific. US subs at that time were mostly pre-war...even WW1 vintage in some cases. Then along came the Tambor Class, Gar Class, et al...until the magnificent Gato Class submarine which really raised hell in the Japanese convoy routes. It only got horribly worse from there.

The US used magnetic fuses for the first part of the war which indeed were very unreliable. The Japanese had the extremely effective and deadly Type-93 Long Lance torpedo which the Allies didn't match during WW2 for explosive strength. They were, however, very touchy things and didn't have the safeguards against accidental detonation that Allied torpedos had.

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Japan/IJN/...C-Losses-4.html Merchant losses

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Japan/IJN/...C-Losses-3.html IJN losses

Edited September 28, 2009 by DogOnPorch