Harper's Tough Talk on Defense and Russia is just empty words

[Bonam]

The most powerful military in western Europe is Switzerland. They have the ability to take on the Russians.

Care to back up this statement?

[-1=e^ipi]

Argus, I don't understand your constant cold-war like paranoia with respect to Russia. Nor do I understand your desire to put Canada more into debt with unneccessary military spending. I think that the 2% GDP military spending pledge makes about as much sense as the 0.7% GDP aid spending pledge and Canada should reject both of those pledges.

The current situation in Ukraine is the result of poor diplomacy on all sides and could have been avoided with proper diplomacy. Unfortunately, numerous people have unnecessarily lost their lives as a result of the poor diplomacy.

[PIK]

Argus, I don't understand your constant cold-war like paranoia with respect to Russia. Nor do I understand your desire to put Canada more into debt with unneccessary military spending. I think that the 2% GDP military spending pledge makes about as much sense as the 0.7% GDP aid spending pledge and Canada should reject both of those pledges.

The current situation in Ukraine is the result of poor diplomacy on all sides and could have been avoided with proper diplomacy. Unfortunately, numerous people have unnecessarily lost their lives as a result of the poor diplomacy.

Putin has a plan and nothing short of war will change his mind. And I don't think war will either.

[Queenmandy85]

Care to back up this statement?

Switzerland has conscription. Every able-bodied male from 19 years of age to 49 is in the armed forces. There are over 1.5 million men available for military service with an almost equal number of women. As I recall, according to The Military Balance some years ago, Switzerland could field a force of 1.2 million on 72 hours notice. They have recently cut back on their regular forces but they provide an example of what we could be doing.

As for Derek 2.0's question "Does the National Post and/or the Economist suggest where the Government of Canada is to find the additional 40 billion dollars in funding to achieve 2% defense(sic) spending per our GDP?", the simple answer is raise taxes.

That being said, Canadians don't want a military. They won't join it and they won't pay for it. After the way the Government treats those few who have served, who can blame people for not joining up.

[Bonam]

Switzerland has conscription. Every able-bodied male from 19 years of age to 49 is in the armed forces. There are over 1.5 million men available for military service with an almost equal number of women. As I recall, according to The Military Balance some years ago, Switzerland could field a force of 1.2 million on 72 hours notice.

A force of 1.2 million doing what? What kind of military equipment do they have for this force in these kinds of numbers? A bunch of guys with rifles is an entirely ineffective force when faced with a military force with modern air, sea, and ground equipment. And even more importantly, what methods do they have at their disposal to counter Russia's nuclear trump card?

Canada does not need the kind of military that Switzerland has.

[Derek 2.0]

Switzerland has conscription. Every able-bodied male from 19 years of age to 49 is in the armed forces. There are over 1.5 million men available for military service with an almost equal number of women. As I recall, according to The Military Balance some years ago, Switzerland could field a force of 1.2 million on 72 hours notice. They have recently cut back on their regular forces but they provide an example of what we could be doing.

No thanks.........

There's something almost too civilised about a country whose fighter jets stick to office hours (note to would-be terrorists and airspace infiltrators: they also stop for an hour and a half for lunch, and there's no service at weekends). It was French and Italian jet pilots who escorted the Ethiopian Airlines plane hijacked by its co-pilot safely to Geneva airport on Monday morning – because, at 6.02am, it was still nearly two hours before the Swiss air force came to work.

As for Derek 2.0's question "Does the National Post and/or the Economist suggest where the Government of Canada is to find the additional 40 billion dollars in funding to achieve 2% defense(sic) spending per our GDP?", the simple answer is raise taxes.

Clearly that is not a simple answer..........Outside of war, the Tories/Liberals/NDP wouldn't raise taxes to fund an increase to our military........

…..And as I said above, simply throwing money at DND will not solve the waste and inefficiency found within the organization, which would have to addressed prior to any increase in funding.........Hopefully, the current ongoing review of defense policy will make some headway in this regard.

[Queenmandy85]

It is all academic until Canadians are willing to serve their country. It is ironic that in 1945 we had over 750,000 men in the Canadian Armed Forces, the fifth largest military in the world, with the third largest navy. The token force we have now is incapable of defending our borders. Therefore, the $20 billion spent each year is wasted.

I have always been an admirer of Colonel J. Sutherland Brown, (thanks to Tim Schentag), but alas, he was faced with a Canadian population that had no interest in defending Canada either.

[Derek 2.0]

A force of 1.2 million doing what? What kind of military equipment do they have for this force in these kinds of numbers? A bunch of guys with rifles is an entirely ineffective force when faced with a military force with modern air, sea, and ground equipment. And even more importantly, what methods do they have at their disposal to counter Russia's nuclear trump card?

Canada does not need the kind of military that Switzerland has.

None, the Swiss Citadel model of defense became obsolete on August 6^th 1945………….Likewise National Service/Conscription, which greatly reduces the effectiveness of a modern military reliant upon technology....hence why most European nations have forgone it's use.

Alas Russia poses no threat to the Swiss..........Swiss banks gladly hold the amassed fortunes of the Russian leadership.

[Queenmandy85]

The purpose of a military is two fold. The primary purpose is to defence the country against any enemy. The second purpose is to project the will of the country beyond our borders.

The second function does not require as large a commitment. Defending a nation the size of Canada is a formidable challenge.The cheapest way is to create a nuclear defence force. I can't see voters going for that, either.

A Swedish politician came up with the novel proposal to replace the armed forces with a telephone recording saying "We Surrender" in 90 languages.

[Derek 2.0]

The purpose of a military is two fold. The primary purpose is to defence the country against any enemy. The second purpose is to project the will of the country beyond our borders.

Agreed 100%.

The second function does not require as large a commitment. Defending a nation the size of Canada is a formidable challenge.The cheapest way is to create a nuclear defence force. I can't see voters going for that, either.

There is nothing cheap about employing a viable, independent, nuclear deterrent………..As a minimum, we would require similar financial commitments as the United Kingdom or France........Hence our mutual defense treaties with nuclear armed allies.

[Argus]

Does the National Post and/or the Economist suggest where the Government of Canada is to find the additional 40 billion dollars in funding to achieve 2% defense spending per our GDP?

Also, do either the Liberals or NDP agree with such a dramatic increase to defense spending, an increase that will indirectly subsidise European Defense?

Of course, nearly every other European NATO member has cut their own militaries to the bone, coupled with the numerous caveats placed on their forces in Afghanistan, which restricted their capacity in a combat role……

And yet almost every other European NATO member still spends more than Canada. Interesting, that. The government has taken almost four billion out DND. They can start be putting it back. Maybe instead of spending billions on goodies next year in the pre-election run-up Harper can put our money where his mouth is and increase the military's budget, hmm?

[Argus]

Argus, I don't understand your constant cold-war like paranoia with respect to Russia. Nor do I understand your desire to put Canada more into debt with unneccessary military spending. I think that the 2% GDP military spending pledge makes about as much sense as the 0.7% GDP aid spending pledge and Canada should reject both of those pledges.

The current situation in Ukraine is the result of poor diplomacy on all sides and could have been avoided with proper diplomacy. Unfortunately, numerous people have unnecessarily lost their lives as a result of the poor diplomacy.

Funny, I think I heard this before. Oh yes, it came from Neville Chamberlain, claiming that what had happened in Czechoslovakia could have been avoided with proper diplomacy. He then exercised that diplomacy with regard to Poland, ensuring peace in our time.

The moral of the story is twofold. First, there are some people who DO NOT GIVE A SHIT about diplomacy and whiny complaints, and will do whatever they feel like doing unless someone stops them.

The second part is you never know when you need to stop someone, and assuming, as you have stated you do, that once we know there's going to be a crisis (because, of course, we always get a decades warning) we can then recruit a military, train it, buy equipment, and be all ready, is short-sighted lunacy.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Argus

[Derek 2.0]

And yet almost every other European NATO member still spends more than Canada. Interesting, that. The government has taken almost four billion out DND. They can start be putting it back. Maybe instead of spending billions on goodies next year in the pre-election run-up Harper can put our money where his mouth is and increase the military's budget, hmm?

Not in actual dollars…….as was said already, is further defense spending a priority of the Canadian populace?

[Argus]

None, the Swiss Citadel model of defense became obsolete on August 6^th 1945………….Likewise National Service/Conscription, which greatly reduces the effectiveness of a modern military reliant upon technology....hence why most European nations have forgone it's use.

You're completely wrong, of course. The Swiss model was to make it too expensive to conquer them. That remains an effective tactic.

[Argus]

Not in actual dollars…….as was said already, is further defense spending a priority of the Canadian populace?

They are spending more than Canada does as a percentage of GNP.

As for the Canadian populace, I don't recall there ever been any great demand to cut the military budget. Further, Harper is supposed to be a leader, isn't he? Let him lead. He's been talking about the importance of the military for a very long time now. If he doesn't have the courage to make it happen then let him move aside and let someone else take over his job.

[Derek 2.0]

You're completely wrong, of course. The Swiss model was to make it too expensive to conquer them. That remains an effective tactic.

How was it intended to make it "too expensive"?

[Derek 2.0]

They are spending more than Canada does as a percentage of GNP.

Why is GDP used as a measure?

As for the Canadian populace, I don't recall there ever been any great demand to cut the military budget. Further, Harper is supposed to be a leader, isn't he? Let him lead. He's been talking about the importance of the military for a very long time now. If he doesn't have the courage to make it happen then let him move aside and let someone else take over his job.

Do you recall any great demand to increase it ~40 billion a year?

[Argus]

How was it intended to make it "too expensive"?

In terms of men, equipment, blood, time. It would simply be too expensive to conquer Switzerland.

Yes, you can nuke it. So? What does that get you? Can Putin nuke Ukraine? I suppose. What is that going to get him?

[Peter F]

Harper understands that the only realistic and rational means of Canadian Defence is the Munroe Doctrine.

No need to spend a dime and tough talk costs nothing.

[Argus]

Why is GDP used as a measure?

As a measure of the nation's ability to pay. Clearly a country of 40 million with a reasonably good economy can afford to spend more on its military than a country of five mlllion, or a bigger one with a backward economy. It's still not the perfect measure, since, of course, it fails to take into account that countries like Canada spend most of the money they spend on high salaries and benefits for their mlitary, while other countries spend very little on that, allowing them to have a much larger military.

Do you recall any great demand to increase it ~40 billion a year?

As I said, if he'd left it at 1.4% it wouldn't be horrifically difficult to at least move it closer to the goal of 2%, especially in light of what is happening around the world.

[Argus]

Harper understands that the only realistic and rational means of Canadian Defence is the Munroe Doctrine.

No need to spend a dime and tough talk costs nothing.

If you can't protect your own sovereignty then you are not a sovereign country. Do you feel we should join the United States?

[Derek 2.0]

In terms of men, equipment, blood, time. It would simply be too expensive to conquer Switzerland.

Yes, you can nuke it. So? What does that get you? Can Putin nuke Ukraine? I suppose. What is that going to get him?

Three low yield nukes detonated, ~10km above Geneva, Bern and Zurich and the Swiss are conquered.......

[overthere]

In terms of men, equipment, blood, time. It would simply be too expensive to conquer Switzerland.

Yes, you can nuke it. So? What does that get you? Can Putin nuke Ukraine? I suppose. What is that going to get him?

The sustained applause of most of the Russian population.

There is a general earning for the good old days of the USSR.

It will be interesting to see how former subordinate territories, like the 'Stans, react to Russian aggression on Europes back porch. The Stans should be worried, very worried..

[Argus]

Three low yield nukes detonated, ~10km above Geneva, Bern and Zurich and the Swiss are conquered.......

And there's nothing left but chaos, which would be a colossus drain on any country trying to absorb the place. The banking industry would be ruined. The result would be zero profit for the Russians. It would actually be a negative to them. A sullen population living in poverty with millions of military rifles taking potshots at every Russian that wandered down a street at night.

What would be the point in that?

Putin's entire goal is to conquer territory to increase the size of his empire. Territory which is radioactive is of little value.

[overthere]

Very ironic that the French are selling two large amphibious assault vessels to the Russians, and the French navy is currently training Russian sailors at one of their fleet bases……….I’m sure they’ll prove handy to the Russians once they’ve had their war with the Ukraine, and start “liberating” ethnic Russian populations in Estonia and Lativa…..What did Lenn say about rope dealers again????

There is never, ever any need to wonder at the reason or nature of the foreign policy of France. They are wholly selfish bastards and always have been. End of.

Rainbow Warrior anybody?