Big Guy Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 (edited) I do understand that there is another thread on Ukraine but my focus for this post is specifically on current and future Canadian involvement in that conflict. As of this morning, Canadian involvement has consisted of; 1. Approximately 50 troops from the 3rd Canadian Division based in Edmonton will depart Friday to take part in Exercise Orzel Alert in Swidwin, Poland, next week. They will "conduct training in parachuting, airborne operations and infantry skills alongside Polish and American counterparts in this United States-led exercise with a view to enhancing Alliance interoperability and readiness," according to a release from the prime minister's office on Friday. 2. Six CF-18 fighter jets have joined a NATO mission in Romania. 3. The warship HMCS Regina would be redeployed to a NATO group as part of a Ukraine "reassurance mission." 4. A Canadian military officer is heading an international arms-control verification team investigating "unusual military activity" in Ukraine, but the inspections won't include the disputed Crimea region, which was annexed by Russia. 5. About 500 Canadian “observers” are being deployed into Ukraine for the coming elections. 6. The Deputy Minister of Defence described Canadian involvement as protecting “territorial integrity of Ukraine”. When did Canada commit to the “territorial integrity of Ukraine”? Ukraine is not a member of NATO. When did Canada decide to protect the territorial integrity of Ukraine? As to the “boots on the ground”, the HMCS Regina and the Cf-18's, what are the rules of engagement for these forces? When these 500 Canadian voting observers are deployed to the Ukraine, they will be entering very dangerous areas. The areas in the East and South are in turmoil. How many of these observers will have had military training? What kind of security will Canada provide to these observers in Ukraine. What will be Canadian reaction if any of our observers are kidnapped, hurt or killed as they are “observing”? There are a lot of questions that have to be answered before mission creep gets Canada mired into another conflict – be it a civil war or whatever. These questions have to be discussed and answered by our government if and before any body bags start arriving back home. Canadians deserve those answers. Edited May 5, 2014 by Big Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 Canadian military divers are (or were) also taking part in an exercise in Latvia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 Waste of time and money for us to get involved at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 Waste of time and money for us to get involved at all. If a full war breaks out (as it is looking more and more like that) we will get dragged into it. Our NATO commitments might be protecting NATO countries from an overflow of violence from Ukraine. But then that still puts us in direct conflict with Russia on the whole. It is a waste of time money and our troops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 So the question that comes to mind is when do we stand up and take action, once Ukraine is swallowed whole, or do we wait until europe is threatened....at what piont do we tell Putin and his merry gang enough...and how do we know just how far putin is willing to go... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjre Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 I guess this is part of what Harper show US his govenment can fight for US with Canadaian tax dollars. However, he can not get any reward, he can not even have oil pipe build to US be approved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 I thought the plan was we wait until NATO is attacked, go to DEFCON 1, 2 or whatever, start launching nukes and Bob's your uncle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjre Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 So the question that comes to mind is when do we stand up and take action, once Ukraine is swallowed whole, or do we wait until europe is threatened....at what piont do we tell Putin and his merry gang enough...and how do we know just how far putin is willing to go... It is not Ukraine be swallowed whole by Russia, it is US that want to swallow Ukraine as whole into NATO from very begining. Why should Canadian's life need to be lost there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 It is not Ukraine be swallowed whole by Russia, it is US that want to swallow Ukraine as whole into NATO from very begining. Why should Canadian's life need to be lost there? Complete nonsense. You don't get swallowed by NATO you join voluntarily. Unfortunately, there's no choice available if Putin wants you to "join" him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 Complete nonsense. You don't get swallowed by NATO you join voluntarily. Unfortunately, there's no choice available if Putin wants you to "join" him. Has anyone left NATO? For what reasons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted May 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 (edited) So the question that comes to mind is when do we stand up and take action, once Ukraine is swallowed whole, or do we wait until europe is threatened....at what piont do we tell Putin and his merry gang enough...and how do we know just how far putin is willing to go... I guess we could go with a "preemtive defensive attack" on Moscow and surprise them with some nuclear missiles. Oops, we don't have nuclear missiles. Too bad. We should get some soon. But we do have an armed force into which we have poured $billions and there is no war to fight right now. A ready army with no war to fight is a waste of resources. There are 44 other active shooting conflicts in the world to-day. We could always find some action there to test our weapons. Things are still hot in Iraq, we will probably have to go back into Afghanistan soon, Lots of potential in Somalia with the country being swallowed by extremist, terrorist, murdering, scumbag Islamists, Syria is still smouldering and we could always bomb Lybia again. In Central Africa and South Sudan little countries are getting swallowed up and its only a matter of time until those insurgents target Canada. There is always somebody in Nigeria and Pakistan who are attacking each other. We pick a side and then wipe out those murderers and scumbags if we can figure out who they are. Things are getting interesting in Korea and Taiwan. They could use some Canadian troops. The Middle East with Israel and the Palestinians going after each others throats is ripe for more. We must have some interests there that a preemptive defensive attack could be used as an excuse. On the other hand, I think that before we "stand and take action" that we better "sit, evaluate and discuss" with the Canadian people before we commit any kind of military support to any cause. I am looking forward to the debate in Parliament. Edited May 5, 2014 by Big Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 I'm more interested in going to war against the oligarchs who've taken over Ottawa. Screw Europe, we've got our own problems to solve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 But we do have an armed force into which we have poured $billions and there is no war to fight right now. A ready army with no war to fight is a waste of resources. A terrible mentality to have. Wars are a terrible waste of resources, period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 A terrible mentality to have. Wars are a terrible waste of resources, period. i know. Why can't we all just get along huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 i know. Why can't we all just get along huh?Who's this we you're talking about? If you don't like what's happening in Europe you go do something about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 On the other hand, I think that before we "stand and take action" that we better "sit, evaluate and discuss" with the Canadian people before we commit any kind of military support to any cause. I am looking forward to the debate in Parliament. I'm thinking the debate is already happening , NATO is building up in the area.....Canada is looking at the next move....If Russia continues then what..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 Keep the launch codes handy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 Keep the launch codes handy. Keep the hyperbole handy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted May 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 I'm thinking the debate is already happening , NATO is building up in the area.....Canada is looking at the next move....If Russia continues then what..... My point is that Canadians are ready to protect their country with their own and their children's lives. But it has been a long time since we have been consulted as to the need to go to any particular war. If the majority of Canadians are convinced that the cause is just, the conflict inevitable and the costs (both financial and in lives) acceptable then we volunteer and/or send our children out to fight. Those conditions have not been met in many, many years yet we keep getting bogged down in quagmires of mud and blood by politicians and generals who have no real understanding of the conflict, making unilateral decisions of life and death without a public mandate. A "holding" action or "security support" or "advisors on the ground" soon mission creep into flaming and deadly warfare. Then we wonder how we got there from here. Discuss, debate, consult and allow the Canadian people to decide on the danger level. That is what Parliament is supposed to be used for. Personally, I believe the Powell Doctrine is a good template to use for this kind of decision making; The Powell Doctrine states that a list of questions all have to be answered affirmatively before military action is taken by the United States. I have adapted it for Canada; Is a vital national security interest threatened? Do we have a clear attainable objective? Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed? Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted? Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement? Have the consequences of our action been fully considered? Is the action supported by the Canadian people? Do we have genuine broad international support? None of these questions have been answered as to Canadian involvement in Ukraine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 My point is that Canadians are ready to protect their country with their own and their children's lives. But it has been a long time since we have been consulted as to the need to go to any particular war. If the majority of Canadians are convinced that the cause is just, the conflict inevitable and the costs (both financial and in lives) acceptable then we volunteer and/or send our children out to fight. Those conditions have not been met in many, many years yet we keep getting bogged down in quagmires of mud and blood by politicians and generals who have no real understanding of the conflict, making unilateral decisions of life and death without a public mandate. A "holding" action or "security support" or "advisors on the ground" soon mission creep into flaming and deadly warfare. Then we wonder how we got there from here. Discuss, debate, consult and allow the Canadian people to decide on the danger level. That is what Parliament is supposed to be used for. Personally, I believe the Powell Doctrine is a good template to use for this kind of decision making; The Powell Doctrine states that a list of questions all have to be answered affirmatively before military action is taken by the United States. I have adapted it for Canada; Is a vital national security interest threatened? Do we have a clear attainable objective? Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed? Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted? Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement? Have the consequences of our action been fully considered? Is the action supported by the Canadian people? Do we have genuine broad international support? None of these questions have been answered as to Canadian involvement in Ukraine. Why are we implementing the Powell doctrine? What about the Bush doctrine or the Monroe doctrine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 No, we need a Canadian doctrine. I suggest it be titled the Mind Our Own Business Doctrine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 No, we need a Canadian doctrine. I suggest it be titled the Mind Our Own Business Doctrine. Maybe get some Canadian "launch codes" first, then worry about the Powell Doctrine CanCon style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayward Son Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 No, we need a Canadian doctrine. I suggest it be titled the Mind Our Own Business Doctrine. I assume you are advocating our exit from NATO then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 Yes, especially if NATO intends on expanding its scope of business beyond what we signed onto. Further to which, Canadians should vote directly on any new changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 Canada, a founding NATO member, actually expanded NATO's scope with policy and action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.