Wasting Canadian Blood and Treasure

Argus · July 11, 2016

Canada has what, the 6th largest defense budget in Nato? I doubt anyone is going to want us to leave.

You continue to repeat that inane comment about what Canada spends on salaries as if that matters one iota to other NATO nations.

"Well, yeah, guys, I mean, our trucks are sitting rusting in a field and we don't have enough armored vehicles so soldiers have to take buses, and we have no ammo for training, and our planes are rusting out but hey, look at the generous salaries we pay the huge legion of paper pushers we have in NDHQ! That's OUR contribution!'"

Argus · July 11, 2016

Billions of Canadian tax dollars being wasted on foolish NATO wars around the world. I wish Canada were like Switzerland. Switzerland says you go ahead and fight your battles and we will sit back and just watch. Instead we are going to spend our tax dollars on more useful things

Switzerland, despite having a population of only about 8 million, has a much larger military than Canada and mandatory military service for young men.

Argus · July 11, 2016

The more correct term in ~~"tripwire"~~ speed-bump, even then its not much of one........the 4000 person brigade couldn't even be expected to slow two Russian Tank Armies,

And now, back to reality.

There is little fear the Russians will send whole armies into the Baltic states. That is not the way Putin works. What is more likely is funding for pro-Russia groups within the Baltics, having them agitate against 'discrimination' and such, foment armed rebellion, and then move in after they've established control and held a 'referendum'.

Smallc · July 11, 2016

You continue to repeat that inane comment about what Canada spends on salaries as if that matters one iota to other NATO nations.

Do you think that Italy and Germany are paying their people appreciably less? They're at 1.1%, and are two of only 5 countries that spend more than us within NATO.

Smallc · July 11, 2016

"Well, yeah, guys, I mean, our trucks are sitting rusting in a field and we don't have enough armored vehicles so soldiers have to take buses, and we have no ammo for training, and our planes are rusting out but hey, look at the generous salaries we pay the huge legion of paper pushers we have in NDHQ! That's OUR contribution!'"

Most of those problems either have to do with equipment that is already on order (the trucks and armored vehicles) or come as a direct result to the Conservatives going back on their funding commitments.

Argus · July 11, 2016

Do you think that Italy and Germany are paying their people appreciably less? They're at 1.1%, and are two of only 5 countries that spend more than us within NATO.

Italy is a basket case, and yes, they pay their people appreciably less. Germany has started increasing its military spending.

I don't know if their tooth to tail ratio is as big as ours. What I do know is we have more HR bureaucrats in DND than we have combat soldiers.

Argus · July 11, 2016

Most of those problems either have to do with equipment that is already on order (the trucks and armored vehicles) or come as a direct result to the Conservatives going back on their funding commitments.

Nothing is on order. Trudeau has made it clear he intends to spend zero money on acquiring equipment for the military aside from the already signed contracts for ships. And that's probably only safe because the Liberals took all the seats in Atlantic Canada.

?Impact · July 11, 2016

Switzerland, despite having a population of only about 8 million, has a much larger military than Canada and mandatory military service for young men.

You can serve in the military for 9 months or civilian service for 13 months. Most however choose the military option.

Smallc · July 11, 2016

Nothing is on order. Trudeau has made it clear he intends to spend zero money on acquiring equipment for the military aside from the already signed contracts for ships.

Actually, no - that's not true. We've already bought new trucks. They start to arrive next year (and the procurement is going to cost us more, as Oshkosh successfully sued over the rigged competition) and the TAPV starts to arrive this year, as most of the kinks have been worked out the design. Canada's procurement budget is set to increase this year, even with the deferred funding (The same kind of deferment the Conservatives did twice - for the same reason). We should see a contract for the fixed wing search and rescue aircraft, the Joint Support Ship, and possibly the new fighter jet and Canadians Surface Combatant within this mandate If we're going to paying for the CSC, the JSS, and the fighters post 2020, we'll need to sigh contracts within the next 3 years. The Liberals have also (very smartly) decided to go with an off the shelf warship design for the Canadian Surface Combatant. It should speed things up by two years and cut costs.

Edited July 11, 2016 by Smallc

Smallc · July 11, 2016

The Conservatives and their cuts to operations and maintenance are responsible for us not having either anti aircraft or anti tank weapons for our ground troops. The ironic thing is that they themselves bought one of those weapon systems just three years earlier, and sold it to the US Marines for a song.

Paul Martin, as prime minister, increased the budget so that we could afford the forces that we had at the time. Harper increased the budget because he wanted to have a bigger more capable force. He then cut the budget back to Paul Martin levels, and tried to keep his bigger force at the same time.

taxme · July 11, 2016

Switzerland, despite having a population of only about 8 million, has a much larger military than Canada and mandatory military service for young men.

But Switzerland does not go out into the world and start wars, now do they?

taxme · July 11, 2016

Many observers who are generally vicious, murdering tyrants, Muslim religious fanatics, or brainless ultra left morons.

Some observers do have a brain, and are very intelligent, and do use their brains. Sadly, they are in the minority.

taxme · July 11, 2016

The Conservatives and their cuts to operations and maintenance are responsible for us not having either anti aircraft or anti tank weapons for our ground troops. The ironic thing is that they themselves bought one of those weapon systems just three years earlier, and sold it to the US Marines for a song.

Paul Martin, as prime minister, increased the budget so that we could afford the forces that we had at the time. Harper increased the budget because he wanted to have a bigger more capable force. He then cut the budget back to Paul Martin levels, and tried to keep his bigger force at the same time.

As a Canadian taxpayer, I cannot afford to have a military anymore. It's time to dissolve the military, and just buy our military personal out. In the end it will be cheaper in the long run to just buy them off. War is nothing but a racket and I don't want to play that racket game anymore. Works for me.

Argus · July 11, 2016

But Switzerland does not go out into the world and start wars, now do they?

Switzerland doesn't belong to military alliances. That means they have to be prepared to look after themselves, since they can't rely on anyone else helping them. Their military is twice as big as ours even though Canada has a population four times bigger and its territory is twenty five times larger.

Canadians are most definitely not willing to look after themselves, so we need to be part of military alliances.

Edited July 11, 2016 by Argus

Argus · July 11, 2016

As a Canadian taxpayer, I cannot afford to have a military anymore. It's time to dissolve the military, and just buy our military personal out. In the end it will be cheaper in the long run to just buy them off.

You're the kind of guy who didn't have car insurance until it was made mandatory, aren't you.

Argus · July 11, 2016

Some observers do have a brain, and are very intelligent, and do use their brains. Sadly, they are in the minority.

They certainly are among the ones you're reading.

taxme · July 11, 2016

You're the kind of guy who didn't have car insurance until it was made mandatory, aren't you.

If i get your drift here I think that we do need mandatory insurance for some things, like car insurance. But I don't really believe that need to have a military unless you are a warmonger. A military is to expensive to run. So are you one a warmonger? Just asking?

taxme · July 11, 2016

They certainly are among the ones you're reading.

What I read and listen too makes a lot more sense to me than what you like to read and listen too. I enjoy reading and learning the truth, you enjoy listening and reading and enjoy keeping the lie going. Common sense and logic works for me. Political correctness and emotionalism, and the MSM media lies works for you. That's life.

Derek 2.0 · July 11, 2016

Now we get back to looking at maps again, during the Cold war, the Russian and US tactical nukes based in Europe weren't on each others borders. Too nuanced?

I never said they were based on either borders (nor that US tac nukes should be based along the borders with Russia), again that reverts to maps......none the less, both nations employed tactical nukes in bordering nations, likewise theater nukes that could target European Russia and the UK and France......The deployment of the Pershing II (and nuclear tipped Tomahawks) was an upping of the ante with the Soviets, and combined with Star Wars, brought the Russians to Reykjavik.

There's that nuance you're stumbling with again.

Derek 2.0 · July 11, 2016

And now, back to reality.

There is little fear the Russians will send whole armies into the Baltic states. That is not the way Putin works. What is more likely is funding for pro-Russia groups within the Baltics, having them agitate against 'discrimination' and such, foment armed rebellion, and then move in after they've established control and held a 'referendum'.

The Russian tank armies are very much real, and are the the direct equivalent to the Americans deploying several Carrier Battlegroups off a nations shores.......they are no less or more a threat then the Soviet hordes of the Cold War.

Would Putin screw around in the Baltic States? Maybe, but to be successful, he'd need a majority of ethnic Russians like he had in the Eastern Ukraine.

Army Guy · July 12, 2016

Actually, no - that's not true. We've already bought new trucks. They start to arrive next year (and the procurement is going to cost us more, as Oshkosh successfully sued over the rigged competition) and the TAPV starts to arrive this year, as most of the kinks have been worked out the design. Canada's procurement budget is set to increase this year, even with the deferred funding (The same kind of deferment the Conservatives did twice - for the same reason). We should see a contract for the fixed wing search and rescue aircraft, the Joint Support Ship, and possibly the new fighter jet and Canadians Surface Combatant within this mandate If we're going to paying for the CSC, the JSS, and the fighters post 2020, we'll need to sigh contracts within the next 3 years. The Liberals have also (very smartly) decided to go with an off the shelf warship design for the Canadian Surface Combatant. It should speed things up by two years and cut costs.

SmallC is correct some what....but get ready for the smoking mirrors.

So DND had put in place a massive project to replace the LSVW, MLVW and HLVW, with more than 80% of these vehs now sitting rusting out in army compounds around the country, grounded due to maintances conditions, such as rust out, no parts, or no parts available, this portion of the fleet is now being used to keep the other vehs operating, That project of taking these vehs off the road was started in 2013.....today in 2016, units would be hard pressed to have one example on the road.....

So the Cons threw DND a bone , yes we will buy some trucks 1500 9.5 ton trucks and 300 trailers. For a grand total of 843 Million dollars....to replace your MLVW fleet....the Orginal project was meant to be a 4 bil project....No other funds where made available.... So lets put the new purchase into context shall we....

There was over 2700 MLVWs 2.5 ton trucks orginal purchased these trucks are used for cargo, office, workshops, CP, maintence trucks MRT, Medical and dental sevs etc etc....this entire fleet will be replaced by a truck not even in the same class....

Now what about the LSVW, with over 2800 vehs in various types, or the HLVW fleet of over 1200 vehs. There is a Military project, but no funding...In fact the Cons had said this to the military, I

A fiery internal debate followed the project cancellation in 2012, according to a separate set of internal briefing notes obtained by The Canadian Press under access to information laws.

The word went out to the military -- the army in particular -- that they were to rein in their expectations. Two scenarios were developed, with the government willing to fund a maximum 1,500 trucks, although defence planners were skeptical.

"There have been and will continue to be some compromises required as we cannot afford all the capability we think we need," said a March 3, 2014 memo to the commander of the army. "Significant heavy lift capability improvements are affordable but there remains a considerable appetite for heavy logistics capability in the Army that is unaffordable."

So the DND, will have to swallow this pill, 1500 trucks will replace , over 7500....Now DND has been prying to the Liberal gods for something to be done....but no movement yet, nor plans of movement....

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canadian-military-to-get-logistics-trucks-11-years-after-first-being-proposed-1.2472903

The TAPV project:

This is the Cons answer to Not buying enough LAV 6.0....it has decided to fill in some of those shortfalls with a much cheaper veh call the TPAV....this 2 bil contract will see the possibly creation of up to 700 Canadian jobs in Quebec....

The TPAV will be used in a role it is not designed to do, be a Infanty fighting vehs....< it is also being used to replace Coyote Recce vehs (240 vehs), plus the RG mine protected veh fleet, (100 Vehs) ....,what is left over will be divided across the army.

The ironic part of this rant is the US government offer Canada a sweet deal on Brand new FMTL, or 2.5 trucks as well as the Hemmit line of trucks, They also asked each NATO nation that was in Afghanistan and Iraq if they wanted the same vehs for free, as they did not want to transport them back to the states....all we had to do was pay for the freight, and overhaul....these vehs ended up being shredded and sold for scrap, thousands of them....along with thousands of mine protected vehs, Modified M113, even tanks and IFV's....

Wilber · July 12, 2016

I never said they were based on either borders (nor that US tac nukes should be based along the borders with Russia), again that reverts to maps......none the less, both nations employed tactical nukes in bordering nations, likewise theater nukes that could target European Russia and the UK and France......The deployment of the Pershing II (and nuclear tipped Tomahawks) was an upping of the ante with the Soviets, and combined with Star Wars, brought the Russians to Reykjavik.

There's that nuance you're stumbling with again.

If NATO really wants to deter Russia, aside from a massive buildup of conventional forces along the lines of the Cold War, they would restart and expand missile defense in Eastern Europe (what Obama halted) and (the Americans) would deploy tactical nuclear weapons to Eastern European NATO members and expand the numbers already shared with the Germans, Dutch, Belgians and Italians.........

Derek 2.0 · July 12, 2016

nuance.........

Borders vice bordering nations........ :rolleyes:

Wilber · July 12, 2016

Borders vice bordering nations........

Oh, so they are going to deploy them on their western borders and fire them into their own territory as the Russians advance.

Derek 2.0 · July 12, 2016

Oh, so they are going to deploy them on their western borders and fire them into their own territory as the Russians advance.

Huh? The American (and Russian) weapons based in Central Europe, namely West (and East) Germany, were not based along the borders, but far inside their own territory.......and NATO (including Canadians) very much so planned to use tactical nukes, for decades, to plug the Fulda Gap and Northern German plain........