A Stronger Canadian Military?

[Oliver]

With the new purchase of F-35s, the question of increased Military power comes in mind. What do you think about Canada's military power and whether it should be increased and more involved or not?

http://www.UnitedOnCampus.com

Edited October 27, 2010 by Oliver

[PIK]

Of course we need them, nobody knows what the future holds, but IMO things are not going to get better. We are sitting on a gold mone up north and mostly everyone is coming to get it. And one thing we don't need is to be fighting over this for 20 years, as in the helecopters.

[M.Dancer]

Amazingly the link has nothing to do with the topic...

[M.Dancer]

Well thought out questions...

Should Canada use its military for unilateral humanitarian intervention in failed states?

• 
  

Only with a confirmed coalition of willing from other states

[Oliver]

Well thought out questions...

Should Canada use its military for unilateral humanitarian intervention in failed states?

• 
  

Only with a confirmed coalition of willing from other states

haha, you're right, I guess I should have included a "no" before the answer

[William Ashley]

With the new purchase of F-35s, the question of increased Military power comes in mind. What do you think about Canada's military power and whether it should be increased and more involved or not?

http://www.UnitedOnCampus.com

What I think - what does it do? Canada is a major spender - like 13th in the world - meanwhile its population ranks 36th. It is the 2nd largest country in the world. Russia ranks 5th. NATO allies France and the UK rank 3rd and 4th while China ranks 2nd. The USA spends more than anyone else apparently and has the 2nd largest military after China, in terms of overall military personnel and equipment capacities.

Canada is rated somewhere north of 20 in power rating by Globalfirepower.com (23rd actually) But it is outspending 10 other countries on that list.. lets take a look - it is bizare even Taiwan has a higher rating than Canada... yet with only a few billion dollars - what is this? Even Greece and Sweden could apparently out do Canada. Canada last year spent twice as much as Greece and Sweden --- whoa what is going on here.

Some of the probelms with this is that Canada has for the last few years made some large purchases of extremely overpriced limited use equipment - and the equipment costs a lot ot run - and it gets run over a much larger distance than those countries. Canada is also a much larger contry so moving equipment costs a lot more. Moving personnel costs a lot more, etc..

Should it be increased? The power - why not? The cost - hell no. Canada needs to take a totally different approach than acting as a suplimentary division of the US military. The approach to how the forces administer should be looked at closely. For example - politicians should not approve or deny military deals - they should set "ends policy" policy directives on what objectives the forces should be prepared for - based upon feedback - and how those forces should interact with the public.

On my website I highlight a few things I would do to restructure the forces ( http://williamashley.info/SOCIAL/SP/SP.htm ). Some that I have been planning but not unveiled on the website are implementations to have the forces supplement as special constables and peace officers. I also favour deploying the forces to construction and works projects, especially those in remote areas that might serve as double function - that is doing defence planning and development as well as defence planning in contingency locations and strategic sites. In both economically and defense enhancing activities - and training including field excursions and survival training in Canadas remote areas - as well as acting as surety patrols.

I favour heavily promoting a higher health standard for the forces and moving towards training the forces as special forces in totality as much as is reasonbly possible through punishing training not just basic training. This means using olypmic models for force trainin.

I think the intelligence capacity is important for the forces as well as low cost beneficial technologies. Be it remote helicopters (model helicopters) for drone survielance or otherwise not all useful equipment needs to cost 10000 times as much. Actually in many instances it is more usable than military equipment because it can blend in in some instances or not fit standard engagement models of enemy forces.

I favour self equiping also - and modification - something special forces have the advantage of. I also favour self ownership of equipment including firearms. I also favour bonuses based on performance - that is the better you perform on testing the more bonsues receive, the more you contribute or volunteer to economic building projects the more shares you have in those projects in terms of actual share holdings in the companies.

I am not confident in the forces ability to respond adequettely in the event of actual war not kitty picking on have not states. Canada has been a tag alonger and as a middle power (#23 is pretty high up) but really what is Canada fighting over? What type of actual defence for exerting sovereignty is needed.

1. Private Militias and Private security companies (mercenaries and private militias) - we need more in Canada - we need to empower the public - we need private militias with supplimentary support roles if there is anyone - not only does this reduce the reserve force budget but it potentially allows for more firearms training and practice on peoples own time. Hey they may be ineffective but atleast they are there and armed. (I favour social credits for various social programs including militia involvement (militias to receive have to meet some performance criteria and a cerain level of involvement - with audits of performance and honesty of reporting ex. covert surveillance etc..)

2. More peace officer training this is not direct military power but it will assist in a time of emergency - I'm not talking about hiring cops I'm talking about people who can help maintain social order even if they are unarmed but give them easier access to firearms - like sherrifs but not connected to the politics of police forces or military command. Something that can also assist intelligence - but not like csis - a backup but not a force.

3. Equipment self sustainance INSIDE CANADA - we need to build our own equipment - we need to have a supply chain if the US gets bombed for instance. Canada should be self sovereign not a statlite dependant on US support - in Chaos happened in the US canada might need to depend on itself and that model is increasing leading up to the collapse of the US social system in 2040 - it takes 10 to 20 years to implement a working defence policy we already only have 10 to 20 years to plan for things like that. I don't think the current defence outlook adequately address the future security situation.

4. Technology issue - the US owns massives amounts of technology and canada needs to address their own position in defence procurement - it needs to support more development it needs to promote its engineers it needs to train them within the forces - and by this offering labs and equipment for militaries to equip and train themselves with what they make - not what is on the table from other states. This needn't be cost prohibitive, there should be some funds set aside for " approved military projects from within the forces to build equipment they require for force engagemnet, not simply logistics processing for operations. We need a self adaptive military. We need to revive the militia - every able bodied willing male to be part of and help defend the nation - not as part of our force deployment or reserve forces but as part of the militia - to provide for peace and order of Canada not to fight wars and shoot people.

Should it be more involved? I favour only deploying Canadians on operations in English and French speaking COuntries or the Caribbean for cost and clarity reasons, aslo where Canada ought to be among its brothers and cousins not its astranged second cousins 87 positions removed. For helping maintain economic ties. Canada shouldn't be in the business of cultural enforcement. The other point is in the event of supporting alliances in REAL wars, that members of the alliance cannot fight by themselve - and by real wars I mean wars that are real not wars that are fluffed up by to be a threat when they involve people as far away as can be and no real military threat exists. I believe that was the case in 2001 with Afghanistan. They had no airforce no navy - wasn't this just a customs issue? The people stated as being behind 911 were US citizens or legal residents.. this is surely Customs or immigration or local police forces or air security or screening or bad intel since they were warned by British defence and the person who funded it was with the senate foreign intelligence committee at the time the attacks occured. But Osama the guy not behind it was still on the loose and so he had to be found even though the Taliban offered to give him up to Pakistan for trial .... because no extradition treaty existed with the US nor was the taliban recognized by the us while Pakistan did recognize them. The point here is that our wars are not with nations we have limited contact with - they are with countries who don't like us - not because we want to kill them, but because they want to kill US - part of that force projection is in diplomatic activity - yes we should have sent taliban jack to afganistan instead of 6000 soilders on rotation - it would have acheived more in the long term - he may die anyway - that was not the right thing to say regardless but the point is... we need a stronger force we need a more involved for ce - but not halfway around the world - we need it where it is needed most - defending our poorly defended huge poorly developed country. We need more forces but we need to train them and blend them into the civil service heck I favour every public servant being part of the militia. Get the most for your money - get them to handled calls if it helps - put them to use - balance it out - the war to stay alive is more than just killing the enemy it is in positioning both economic - including fiscal - and in so much more - we need stronger more involved forces - in Canada - but at a lower cost.

oh and every willing able bodied female too.

Edited October 27, 2010 by William Ashley

[wyly]

Of course we need them, nobody knows what the future holds, but IMO things are not going to get better. We are sitting on a gold mone up north and mostly everyone is coming to get it. And one thing we don't need is to be fighting over this for 20 years, as in the helecopters.

delusional, no one is coming for our resources, why should they we sell them to everyone...

[The_Squid]

With the new purchase of F-35s, the question of increased Military power comes in mind. What do you think about Canada's military power and whether it should be increased and more involved or not?

We certainly don't need these Ferraris of the fighter-jet world. We have made do with F18 while the USA have always had a mix of several jets, including the most advanced stealth-jets ever made.

We don't need them.

And judging from the chopper fiasco, they will be late and over-budget. This military/government is fleecing the taxpayers. The Conservatives have opened the pulic purse to the military, and they have grabbed whatever they could.... It's time to put the brakes on this out of control spender of our money.

[Wilber]

delusional, no one is coming for our resources, why should they we sell them to everyone...

Don't know how you can be sure of that. History doesn't support such a statemment. Many a war has been fought over access to resources.

[The_Squid]

Don't know how you can be sure of that. History doesn't support such a statemment. Many a war has been fought over access to resources.

Not in the 20th century... at least none that Cnada has been involved in.

[bush_cheney2004]

Not in the 20th century... at least none that Cnada has been involved in.

See World War 2 and Gulf War 1...Canada was most definitely "involved".

[Evening Star]

How was WWII about resources?

[bush_cheney2004]

How was WWII about resources?

Ask Japan.

[Wilber]

How was WWII about resources?

Why do you think Hitler invaded Russia and Norway among other countries? Why do you think Japan entered the war? Time for a history lesson.

[Oleg Bach]

A stronger military? - What a dumb question - This is like asking to we need a stronger boxer in the ring? Of course your military should be as strong as the nation can create...why bother having a gun that shoots BBs when a 12 gauge will do the job right - Plus - If we want to get back to the honourable mission of peace keeping then you need power..physical force..and the ability to deploy that force...THEN you will be respected......Either have a valid military or get rid of it and continue to depend on those crooks the Americans for protection - But as we pay protection tributes to the Americans - we forfiet our honour... One must know how to and be capable of waging full out war in order to be a real and effective PEACE KEEPER...

Nothing sadder than a hippy liberal who shows you the peace sign but can not manage himself in a bar fight...that is called a worm...Canada can not act like half a worm...or a worm with teeth...Canada if we must - MUST power up and like a good knight...have honour - and not depend of the American Mafia for protection - and the protection money we pay the Yanks is payed in coins called honour...Honour is not for sale.

[M.Dancer]

Why do you think Hitler invaded Russia and Norway among other countries? Why do you think Japan entered the war? Time for a history lesson.

For resources to fight the war. Then invasions of both were post Poland. No war, no vital need for resources that they could have traded with. Unfortunately the Nazi economic plan was smoke and mirrors, what they could have traded with for oil and food was pissed away on guns...

[bush_cheney2004]

...don't forget the Great Turbot War with Spain. Drop those fish!

[Oleg Bach]

Come to think of it - brains and spirit might be more powerful than guns - Look at the huge Military Industrial machine that the Americans have - YET - they fair no better than us Canadian hicks in Afghanistan ...maybe what Canada needs is more real men that can go talk to the trouble makers and get some respect - Now were do we find such a human weapon in Canada - a man to be respected?

[waldo]

an expanded military?

expanded how, in what regard and with what intent/need in mind?

increased military power?

measured how, in what regard and with what intent/need in mind?

[Oliver]

Nothing sadder than a hippy liberal who shows you the peace sign but can not manage himself in a bar fight...that is called a worm...Canada can not act like half a worm...or a worm with teeth...Canada if we must - MUST power up and like a good knight...have honour - and not depend of the American Mafia for protection - and the protection money we pay the Yanks is payed in coins called honour...Honour is not for sale.

I smell rhetoric. Get your point though, but don't diss the question. Many might argue that soft power now plays a more important role in International System. You clearly disagree but its something to think about.

[Evening Star]

Right... I guess I just thought of Hitler's ambitions of global conquest as being driven by more than just a concern for resources. But, OK, yeah, resources were definitely important.

[Evening Star]

xposts Dancer explained that better than I did.

[Saipan]

...maybe what Canada needs is more real men that can go talk to the trouble makers and get some respect

Britain and France had that. They talked to Hitler and got some respect (for couple of months) by selling their own ally to Hitler.

Should we follow?

[bush_cheney2004]

...maybe what Canada needs is more real men that can go talk to the trouble makers and get some respect - Now were do we find such a human weapon in Canada - a man to be respected?

You mean like this in 2006?

Canadian soldiers saw a routine tribal meeting in Afghanistan turn into an ambush, with one officer critically wounded by an axe-wielding assailant.

"The guy lifted up the axe, and called out Allah Akbar, the jihad prayer, before they do suicides, and he swung the axe into Trevor's head," Capt. Kevin Schamuhn, the platoon commander, told CTV News on Saturday (an audio account of the incident by Schamuhn is available in the video section at right).

Canadian soldiers shot and killed the attacker, who was in his 20s.

A helicopter took the reservist soldier, Lieut. Trevor Greene of Vancouver, from the village of Gumbad to the hospital at Kandahar Airfield where he underwent treatment.

He is in serious but stable condition and will be transferred to a U.S.-operated military hospital in Landstuhl, Germany, said CTV's Steve Chao from Kandahar.

[Wilber]

For resources to fight the war. Then invasions of both were post Poland. No war, no vital need for resources that they could have traded with. Unfortunately the Nazi economic plan was smoke and mirrors, what they could have traded with for oil and food was pissed away on guns...

Hitlers plan was always expansion to the East. Lebensraum, Ukrainian wheat, Caucasus oil, etc. Doesn't really matter what he wanted them for, he was prepared to take them by force.

He didn't want a war in the West, at least not until after he had dealt with Russia. He just miscalculated in believing Britain and France would roll over when he invaded Poland, just as they had over Czechoslovakia.

When you get right down to it, most wars are fought over access to resources and control of trade. In a word, money. Including the wars which formed Canada and the US. Other than religious wars, few are motivated solely by the desire to dominate other humans.