Does Canada face any imminent military threat to its territory?

[Machjo]

Your thoughts.

[M.Dancer]

Wrong question

[Keepitsimple]

Why do you want to know?

[Machjo]

Wrong question

So what question would you ask?

[M.Dancer]

So what question would you ask?

What are the military threats that Canada, as part of a Global Alliance need be prepared for.

we don't live in a bubble..

[M.Dancer]

*glitch*

Edited June 10, 2010 by M.Dancer

[wyly]

why would any country attack us...

1-if we attacked or interfered in another countries domestic politics like the USA does...our taking part in the coup in Haiti wasn't smart, nor is our interference in Afghanistan but normally we mind our own business or are involved in ways that do not invite violent retaliation...

2-if we have something another country wants, resources...the only country we need to fear in this regard is the USA and as long as we're willing to sell our resources to them and other countries their is no point in invading us...we even let China buy into the tar sands...the cost of purchase is much less then the cost of a war...Russia is the only country other the US capable of invading us and it has absolutely no need to do so, Russia is incredibly wealthy in resources...Russia is fully capable of reclaiming all it's former republics but it does not, only Georgia got a slap down but the Georgians also provoked the Russians...

the practicality of invading Canada, it's as crazy as Napoleon or Hitler invading Russia, the logistics of it are insane...

the rational of buying multi billion dollar super planes for fighting a non existent enemy that will never invade us is absurd...

[Machjo]

What are the military threats that Canada, as part of a Global Alliance need be prepared for.

we don't live in a bubble..

We're not members of any global alliance that I'm aware of. We are members of an international alliance, but certainly not a global alliance.

Honestly, though I'm opposed to an international alliance, I'd actually support a global alliance.

[eyeball]

What are the military threats that Canada, as part of a Global Alliance need be prepared for.

we don't live in a bubble..

What Global Alliance?

Is Mars about to attack us?

[M.Dancer]

We're not members of any global alliance that I'm aware of. We are members of an international alliance, but certainly not a global alliance.

Honestly, though I'm opposed to an international alliance, I'd actually support a global alliance.

Global-international...same thingy...we are members of NATO, the UN..we have particpated in NATO and UN military missions...need I say more?

[Machjo]

Global-international...same thingy...we are members of NATO, the UN..we have particpated in NATO and UN military missions...need I say more?

Not the same thing. International means, literally, inter- (between) -national (nations). An agreement between individual nations. Global refers to the globe, the planet, thus an alliance comprising all nations of the planet. Not at all the same thing.

The UN is not an alliance as such by the way. NATO is, but that is an international and not global alliance.

It's also a prejudiced aliance, and for that reason I'd rather Canada pull out of it.

Personally, I like Sweden's approach. It has no alliances, yet it's still committed to UN peacekeeping operations. In fact, Swedish soldiers have died in Afghanistan, and though I don't know in detail the rule they're playing, I do know that they are operating under UN command, thus avoiding any impression of possible prejudice in their operations.

And let's face it, impressions and appearances do matter.

Edited June 10, 2010 by Machjo

[Army Guy]

why would any country attack us...

But can you say with 100 % certainity that we will never be attacked.

I mean even the Swiss have a robus military capable of defence....

the practicality of invading Canada, it's as crazy as Napoleon or Hitler invading Russia, the logistics of it are insane...

And yet they did it anyways, and with out a robus military to defend again'st such attacks they would have been successful.....as for the Logistics could not be any worse than the US or Canada and it's NATO Mission in europe proving that it can be done for a price....

the rational of buying multi billion dollar super planes for fighting a non existent enemy that will never invade us is absurd...

As for Non existent enemies that is another fallacy....Canda has signed onto defence agreements that dictate our military response in regards to attacks an any NATO member, currently that includes a shit load of countries all with natural or furture enemies....and with this commitment comes some rules in regards to how our military is armed, trained, and equiped...we must all be able to atleast fight with one another, be inter operable...

other threats include Failed or failing states , Terrorism, WMD,and regional flash pionts such as Korea, middle east, etc....the last time Canada provided troops for high intenisty warfare was Gulf war. So sitting there and spilling off Canada has no threats is a crock....there is plenty of threats which you seem not to consider...all of which the military has something to do with....

Something that you tend to forget is our nation which includes me and you decides to send our young men and women into combat be it for domestic or foreign policy relateds operations have thier lives on the line....but when it comes to us opening up our wallets to ensure we have done all we can here at home for our soldiers Sparks fly out our asses because we are so tight with money.....when it comes to defense....but hey whats a bil on security for the olyimpics, or g summit.....i guess lives do have a dollar value on it.....

[madmax]

Thank you Army Guy.

To bad those in the Military doing the leg work abroad are taking a backseat in this Security Boondoggle for the G8 here in Canada. The Billions being spent on the weekend photo op are Billions spnt like Candy, while the Military always has to be begging for funding and tools to do the the job of defending the nation and enforcing foreign policy decisions.

To those that think there is no threat, only proves that our military does a good job or that some people have a False sense of security.

Comparing the post above regarding a lack of threats and Federal Government monies spent on the G8/20

I'd say we are witnessing two visions not reflective of realistic the situation at hand.

The Feds are blowing money on smokescreen maginotline security.

While someone believes there is no chance of conflict.

Perhaps people have no idea that our soldiers are currently engaged in combat and some have made the ultimate sacrifice.

Edited June 10, 2010 by madmax

[ZenOps]

Maybe.

But I'd be more worried about the "real" G-20 summit in South Korea in November. If Kim Jong hasn't nuked it by then.

[dre]

The threat Canada faces is that if we allow Countries like the US or organizations like NATO and the UN to fly our flag over missions like Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, then we may become a target for the worlds militants and nutjobs. We may face whats known in the intelligence community as blowback.

So in fact, contrary to conventional wisdom having a large and active military actually INCREASES the threat and COMPROMISES our defense interests and our national security.

Canada should not send so much as a single troop for ANY Nato or UN operation unless the situation is very clear cut, and unless theres some sort of compelling interest. And when we do send troops the goals and plan should be well defined up front, and the whole project should be subject to a cost/benefit analysis and a national debate.

Furthermore Nato should be immediately and completely shut down and disbanded. It serves no real purpose beyond bilking western taxpayers out billions of dollars vitally needed for other things. Its an outdated dinosaur that is not configured to address the global threats of today.

[M.Dancer]

The threat Canada faces is that if we allow Countries like the US or organizations like NATO and the UN to fly our flag over missions like Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, then we may become a target for the worlds militants and nutjobs. We may face whats known in the intelligence community as blowback.

[wyly]

But can you say with 100 % certainity that we will never be attacked.

unless we proke an attack yes we will never be attacked...

I mean even the Swiss have a robus military capable of defence....

not all that robust there lots of myhts concerning Swiss ability, they're down sizing their air force and still fly the F-5 which Canada retired a decade ago...

And yet they did it anyways, and with out a robus military to defend again'st such attacks they would have been successful.....as for the Logistics could not be any worse than the US or Canada and it's NATO Mission in europe proving that it can be done for a price....

they did it because they were led by gun strokers who believed in their delusionary superiority, winter has no respect for gun strokers...

As for Non existent enemies that is another fallacy....Canda has signed onto defence agreements that dictate our military response in regards to attacks an any NATO member, currently that includes a shit load of countries all with natural or furture enemies....and with this commitment comes some rules in regards to how our military is armed, trained, and equiped...we must all be able to atleast fight with one another, be inter operable...

NATO was formed to oppose the Warsaw Pact which no longer exists some of those countries are now part of NATO...being inter operable doesn't require flying identical planes, each country still chooses what is appropriate for it's needs and what it can afford...we'll see how long NATO holds together if Israel and one of our NATO allies Turkey come to blows...I don't expect NATO to remain together much longer Afghanistan has pushed it to the breaking point, Canada pulling out others refusing to fight, NATO is farce...

other threats include Failed or failing states , Terrorism, WMD,and regional flash pionts such as Korea, middle east, etc....the last time Canada provided troops for high intenisty warfare was Gulf war. So sitting there and spilling off Canada has no threats is a crock....there is plenty of threats which you seem not to consider...all of which the military has something to do with....

a failed state is a threat? they can't get their shit together to run their own country and you think they're logistically capable of attacking another country on the other side of the globe, we're not even capable of attacking another country on our own....Terrorism? fighting terrorists with F-35s, ya lets bomb the Toronto 18 instead of using the police....you see reds under beds, terroists flying advanced fighters, and failed states invading our arctic, PARANOIA!...

Something that you tend to forget is our nation which includes me and you decides to send our young men and women into combat be it for domestic or foreign policy relateds operations have thier lives on the line....but when it comes to us opening up our wallets to ensure we have done all we can here at home for our soldiers Sparks fly out our asses because we are so tight with money.....when it comes to defense....but hey whats a bil on security for the olyimpics, or g summit.....i guess lives do have a dollar value on it.....[

something you forget is you voluntered for the job don't want to get sent to some hell hole where someone may shoot at you don't join...

[dre]

Thats about the normal level of depth people expect your posts to have.

You can laugh all you want but nobody with a brain would be suprised if there was an attack on some Canadian interest as a result of our participation in Afghanistan, and various intelligence agencies around the world have been warning for decades that military action in some other parts of the world would eventually have negative consequences for the west.

[M.Dancer]

Thats about the normal level of depth people expect your posts to have.

You can laugh all you want but nobody with a brain would be suprised if there was an attack on some Canadian interest as a result of our participation in Afghanistan, and various intelligence agencies around the world have been warning for decades that military action in some other parts of the world would eventually have negative consequences for the west.

Let me sum your argument more succinctly...

If we act like pussies and ignore our responsibilities to our allies and friends, bad people might ignore us.

Edited June 10, 2010 by M.Dancer

[dre]

Let me sum your argument more succinctly...

If we act like pussies and ignore our responsibilities to our allies and friends, bad people might ignore us.

Yeah I guess thats how an 8 year old might summarize it.

I would be more inclined to say that our actions should primary serve our own interests, and that the possible consequences of our actions be carefully evaluated up front.

If we act like pussies

The way for Canada to act like a pussy is to allow foreign countries or organizations to pressure us into taking actions thats contrary to our own interests.

[M.Dancer]

not all that robust there lots of myhts concerning Swiss ability, they're down sizing their air force and still fly the F-5 which Canada retired a decade ago...

They also fly the F-18...the F-5 is to be replaced and is only used for target towing and EW training and is scheduled to be replaced by 22 modern front line fighters.

[M.Dancer]

Yeah I guess thats how an 8 year old might summarize it.

I would be more inclined to say that our actions should primary serve our own interests, and that the possible consequences of our actions be carefully evaluated up front.

The way for Canada to act like a pussy is to allow foreign countries or organizations to pressure us into taking actions thats contrary to our own interests.

I suppose it would be an effort for you to identify what our intrest are...

[Bonam]

The way for Canada to act like a pussy is to allow foreign countries or organizations to pressure us into taking actions thats contrary to our own interests.

If we back out of our alliances, on what basis could we expect to have those former allies help to defend us if we ever needed it? Canada may face no threat now, in the current geopolitical climate, but we are a vast and sparsely populated and weakly defended territory with some of the world's most extensive and richest reserves of natural resources of almost every variety. If ever in the future some entity was bent on large scale conquest, we would be an easy and juicy target were it not for our alliances. This may or may not be a situation that ever arises, but it is possible.

For the meager price of maintaining a relatively small and modest military force and helping occasionally with allied initiatives, we maintain our place as a respected member of a major alliance of powerful nations. This is definitely in our overall, long-term, national interests, even if some of those individual small initiatives that we partake in do not directly serve our interests.

Edited June 10, 2010 by Bonam

[segnosaur]

The threat Canada faces is that if we allow Countries like the US or organizations like NATO and the UN to fly our flag over missions like Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, then we may become a target for the worlds militants and nutjobs.

Did you ever think that maybe one of the reasons many of those 'nutjobs' exist because the rest of the world hasn't actually taken action to produce a world where human rights and the rule of law are major driving forces?

Canada should not send so much as a single troop for ANY Nato or UN operation unless the situation is very clear cut, and unless theres some sort of compelling interest.

Compelling for whom? Are you considering only self interest? Or do you also consider the plight of humans in other countries to be grounds for military intervention?

Would you have gotten Canada involved in World War 2 in 1939? After all, the war was over in Europe. We were at no risk to have our territory invaded by Germany.

What about Korea, where a militarily-aggressive North Korea invaded South Korea?

What about Kosovo, where there was large-scale displacement and possible genocide against non-combatants?

What about Rwamda, where almost 20% of the population was killed?

In none of those cases did Canada have benefit significantly (at least economically) from getting involved militarily. However, I'd like to think the moral choice would have been to intervene.

Furthermore Nato should be immediately and completely shut down and disbanded. It serves no real purpose beyond bilking western taxpayers out billions of dollars vitally needed for other things. Its an outdated dinosaur that is not configured to address the global threats of today.

Far from it.

First of all, keep in mind that 'NATO' involvement basically involves a bunch of independent countries/armies. Each country/army would probably still have the same general level of forces even if NATO didn't exist. Whatever costs that are due to the existence of 'NATO' itself (e.g. infrastructure allowing proper communication among members) is probably a drop in the bucket compared to overall costs.

Secondly, I think NATO is much more useful than (lets say) the U.N. when it comes to global security. The countries making up NATO are all democratic, and actually have a real respect for human rights; compare that with the U.N., where many member states are dictatorships and human rights are only given lip service.

[segnosaur]

unless we proke an attack yes we will never be attacked...

Umm...I assume you meant 'provoke'.

Please define what you mean by 'provoke'.

If we trade with the 'great Satan' the United States, are we 'provoking' an attack?

If we vote at all on any resolution that (for example) a terrorist group disagrees with, are we 'provoking' an attack?

If we send humanitarian aid to an area in conflict, are we 'provoking' an attack by one or both sides of the conflict?

Tell me, prior to the overthrow of the Taliban, did you think it was OK for women to be stoned for leaving their homes in Afghanistan? You think Canada should just remain silent about that?

What if North Korea decides to invade the south. Should Canada be silent if Kim Jong Il decides he wants to control both the north and south?

a failed state is a threat? they can't get their shit together to run their own country and you think they're logistically capable of attacking another country on the other side of the globe...

Well, the 'failed state' of Afghanistan back in 2001 managed to end up getting thousands killed and threw the entire world's economy into chaos.

Terrorism? fighting terrorists with F-35s, ya lets bomb the Toronto 18 instead of using the police...

Umm... why are you assuming that one method of fighting terrorism (the police) can be done in isolation without the other (i.e. military action)?

Both methods have their place.

.you see reds under beds, terroists flying advanced fighters, and failed states invading our arctic, PARANOIA!...

Straw man. Rather pathetic one at that.

Nobody here has claimed bin Laden was putting together his own air force. We did give several possible scenarios that we can and should protect against, where military capability has some importance.