Canada's NATO shell game , guess how much we spend ?

[Army Guy]

Does Justin even know what we spend on National Defense, or have the liberals been so busy with fudging the numbers that they actually don't know any more, I say that because Justin has told President trump that we spend 1.4 % of our GDP on defense, which is a large lie we are not expected to spend that amount until 2024/25, the media is saying it is 1.31 % , CBC access to info is reporting the numbers are around 1.27 %... but here is the rub....Canada really has not added any really funding to DND they just have come up with more creative ways to report much higher numbers...What is happening is we've become better at playing the old shell game...to be honest most of NATO has as well...makes it easier to decided to do this when everyone is doing it, does not mean it is right? , but hey we don't really have any moral values worth speaking of anyways right ?

 

 

Quote

 

Moving the goalposts

In early 2018, NATO's definition was updated to include "all payments, including pensions, made by a national government to meet the needs of its armed forces, regardless of the ministerial budgets from which those payments are made."

With that in mind, starting in 2017 Canada began including in its estimate of defence expenditures its spending on: pensions (both military and civilian defence); the country's electronic spy service (the Communications Security Establishment); veterans benefits, including death benefits for survivors; Global Affairs and RCMP expenses for peacekeeping; and the costs borne by other government departments when they support the Department of National Defence.

That added another $4.9 billion annually to Canada's calculation of defence spending.

 

 

what is not included is other expenditures such as Cadets, and all there wages and training costs, plus infra structure...plus many many more items that have really nothing to do with DND itself, or the defense of this nation, not to mention our NATO commitments....

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/how-natos-defence-spending-benchmark-turned-into-an-international-pr-exercise/ar-BBXGq4l?ocid=spartanntp

Quote

 

NATO further revised its definitions in February 2018. That allowed Canada to begin counting as a defence expenditure the $5 million it spends on the Afghan National Army Trust Fund, which is intended to support and train the army of that beleaguered nation.

One set of documents, dated June 5, 2018, shows the alliance doesn't allow countries to get away with charging whatever they like — and has even declared some expenses submitted by Canada to be "ineligible."

 

in 2017 we actually spent 1.34 % in 2018 defense spending has actually gone down to 1.27, so we are not steadily growing our defense budget as the Liberal government promised but we are shrieking, I mean we do have a lot of campaign promises to pay for, plus bribe money to get the other parties to play nice for a minority government  at our cost of course...This is nothing new to Canadians , the liberals lying I mean that much we pretty much have grown numb to...But now they are not only lying to us but the rest of the world as well , atleast the whole of NATO...and to trump, which I can not understand why Justin lied because trump's people will figure all these lies out in a couple of days and Justin will once again have to answer to DAD for "what" he was suppose to at the NATO conference...But hey Canadians did elect this guy back in office, knowing full well what we were all getting, and this is what we as Canadians call leadership...

It also begs the question why would we sign an agreement to pay 2 % of GDP if we had no intention of every meeting that goal...is it we are afraid to lose our seat at the table...not really we've already told the world we have no intention of meeting that goal, because we contribute in other ways which cost Canada less than actually spending on DND...thats why, it's all part of the shell game... Are we really that gullible or are we just not smart enough to care ? Maybe we don't really lack leadership, but the citizens lack moral character to correct all of this , or maybe it's true its hockey season so f***k off were busy with really world stuff... 

[Dougie93]

They are smart to duck it, because America is not really going to do anything about it.

America is out to stick it to the Europeans, they are the target, Trump is actually giving Canada a pass.

 

[Dougie93]

Canada does not need full spectrum armed forces,  DND is a big boondoggle.

Of course the military doesn't want to be out of a job, but they are not needed.

Canada can go to the Iceland model, just an armed constabulary and a coast guard.

Canada's contribution to NATO is insignificant in the grand scheme of things, waste of blood and treasure.

Just stop the pretense, Canada, end this charade, disband the Canadian Forces and replace them with something actually relevant.

[Dougie93]

In terms of honoring the history of the once proud Canadian military ?

The Royal Canadian Navy has never fought a war independent of the Royal Navy, there is no Canadian naval war history to speak of.

The Royal Canadian Air Force never fought in the Wars, they just provided squadrons to the RAF overseas. Canadians fought as RAF.

Even after the wars, the RCAF has never fought an action independent of the US Air Force, so not much Canadian history there neither.

 

Canada's military history is all about the Militia.   The Militia is the only formation to fight for Canada, the Militia was the bulk of Canada's contribution in the wars.

Thus Canada should simply go back to where it all started, with the Permanent and Non Permanent Militia, established in 1885.

Just expand and improve upon the the fifty odd Militia infantry regiments, and keep the regular force infantry Regiments as a quick reaction force.

Get rid of the rest of the Army, Canada doesn't need tanks, nor artillery, engineers can be combined with logistics, since Canada doesn't need combat engineers.

Other than that, you have the RCMP and the Coast Guard.  The money is more effectively spent there instead of wasted on a fake military.

That's all Canada needs, get rid of DND and move it all under the Department of Public Safety, save billions every single year.

 

It's the Woke Canadian way, Canada stands for nothing, Canada fights for nothing, the Post National State is Isolationist.

Just stop pretending Canada has full spectrum armed forces when they were actually collapsed back in the 1990s;  problem solved.

This ramshackle boutique military is an international embarrassment, even in the depths of collapse the priority is:  Diversity Is Our Strength!

That's all the government cares about, pandering to their loonie leftist base, that proves they have no intention of taking this seriously

Canada is a laughing stock because of this sad state of affairs, just take it out behind the woodpile and put it out of its misery;

Edited December 4, 2019 by Dougie93

[bush_cheney2004]

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

They are smart to duck it, because America is not really going to do anything about it.

America is out to stick it to the Europeans, they are the target, Trump is actually giving Canada a pass.

 

 

Agreed, as Trump's main target is Germany, which benefits the most (including trade with Russia) while spending far less on defense.   Current German defense spending levels are now about 20% of West Germany before the great "peace dividend" slashed EU spending.   Trump's favourite weapon is trade tariffs, just as he did with Canada and Mexico for NAFTA...he can't directly force the NATO deadbeats to spend more, but he can make it painful.

The post WW2 "grand bargain" is coming to an end, but it is much more about Europe and the EU than tiny Canada, which must rely on collective defense no matter what the spending levels.   Canada could diminish Trump's NATO deadbeat rhetoric by procuring the F-35 JSF, and milk that for all it's worth.

 

[jacee]

We don't need no stinkin' wars. 

[Boges]

It's a stupid benchmark. 

Most countries would rather actually spend that money on keep debt in control and/or providing social services. Just because the US pride military spending above all else, doesn't mean other's should. 

Imagine if JT spend the 20 or so billion it would require to reach 2%. . . Because Murika said so? I don't think anyone would be happy with that. The NATO is mostly made up of Liberal democracies, not autocratic regimes like the ones Trump seems to admire. 

[Boges]

7 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

The post WW2 "grand bargain" is coming to an end, but it is much more about Europe and the EU than tiny Canada, which must rely on collective defense no matter what the spending levels.   Canada could diminish Trump's NATO deadbeat rhetoric by procuring the F-35 JSF, and milk that for all it's worth.

It would only come to an end because Trump seems to see more to like coming from Putin than he does from Liberal democracies. 

There is no real justification for the US to spend what it does on the Military. Especially when it's the only Liberal democracy in that doesn't really offer a single payer healthcare option for its people. 

[Argus]

7 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Agreed, as Trump's main target is Germany, which benefits the most (including trade with Russia) while spending far less on defense.   Current German defense spending levels are now about 20% of West Germany before the great "peace dividend" slashed EU spending.

I read a report last year that just four of Germany's fighters were combat capable. Four. They and the other Europeans don't seem to care that Putin called the breakup of the Soviet Union the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century, and is working to rebuild it. Russia could roll over Germany in a few days at most. As to the French, they've got a much more robust military. A report not that long ago showed half their military aircraft were still airworthy. Kudos to the French.

[Argus]

14 minutes ago, Boges said:

It would only come to an end because Trump seems to see more to like coming from Putin than he does from Liberal democracies. 

There is no real justification for the US to spend what it does on the Military. Especially when it's the only Liberal democracy in that doesn't really offer a single payer healthcare option for its people. 

Because you don't think the Russians or Chinese are a military threat? Because their leaders are such nice, unambitious people?

Edited December 4, 2019 by Argus

[Argus]

20 minutes ago, Boges said:

It's a stupid benchmark. 

Most countries would rather actually spend that money on keep debt in control and/or providing social services. Just because the US pride military spending above all else, doesn't mean other's should. 

Imagine if JT spend the 20 or so billion it would require to reach 2%. . . Because Murika said so? I don't think anyone would be happy with that. The NATO is mostly made up of Liberal democracies, not autocratic regimes like the ones Trump seems to admire. 

Imagine if the US decides to end NATO and Canada was on its own. We have no military to speak of. If the world is warming then the Arctic is soon going to be filled with resource development. And Russia has made it clear it is going to grab as much as it can, and does not much care about where other countries claim their borders to be when those countries don't have any ability to defend their claims. The Americans are not going to defend Canada's arctic. They don't even agree with half our claims anyway.

It is also not going to be too far in the future when China starts sending its new aircraft carriers around the world to flex its muscles and enforce its will. And it will do so a lot more brutally than the US ever did.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Argus

[Yzermandius19]

18 minutes ago, Boges said:

There is no real justification for the US to spend what it does on the Military.

Rule of Acquisition #34: War is good for business.

Preferably, Cold War.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Boges]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

Because you don't think the Russians or Chinese are a military threat? Because their leaders are such nice, unambitious people?

Sure. But even they don't spend even close to what the US does on Military. 

They clearly are being most nuanced about destabilizing the US.

You know like helping a divisive wannabe dictator get elected so he can get into fights with all of America's allies over defence spending while being BFFs to the world's most brutal dictators. 

[Boges]

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

Imagine if the US decides to end NATO and Canada was on its own. We have no military to speak of. If the world is warming then the Arctic is soon going to be filled with resource development. And Russia has made it clear it is going to grab as much as it can, and does not much care about where other countries claim their borders to be when those countries don't have any ability to defend their claims. The Americans are not going to defend Canada's arctic. They don't even agree with half our claims anyway.

It is also not going to be too far in the future when China starts sending its new aircraft carriers around the world to flex its muscles and enforce its will. And it will do so a lot more brutally than the US ever did.

China has a more friendly way of expanding influence throughout the world. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/china-belt-and-road-cbc-1.5372916

Why invade when you can help developing nations build infrastructure in exchange for resources. 

All this while the US shrinks away from its role internationally. MAGA!!!

Edited December 4, 2019 by Boges

[Argus]

Just now, Boges said:

Sure. But even they don't spend even close to what the US does on Military. 

What has that got to do with anything? The Russians can field an entire division for what it costs the Americans to field a regiment. Every piece of gear the Russians and Chinese own costs one fifth to one tenth as much as the same gear the US or Canada or Britain has, in no small part because their workers are paid a fraction of what western workers are. Their soldiers make far, far less money. They get far, far less benefits and pensions.

Give the Americans and Russians the same amount of money to spend on their militaries and the Russians will squash the Americans flat in no time.

[Argus]

Just now, Boges said:

China has a more friendly way of expanding influence throughout the world. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/china-belt-and-road-cbc-1.5372916

All this while the US shrinks away from its role internationally. MAGA!!!

Yes, true. But they're not building aircraft carriers for nothing. The only use for aircraft carriers is to expand your power out well beyond your shores. To threaten people far away. Had a look at what the Russians are spending on military bases in the Arctic lately? Did you know they have the best icebreakers in the world, and that they're armed? Guess why?

[Yzermandius19]

3 minutes ago, Boges said:

China has a more friendly way of expanding influence throughout the world. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/china-belt-and-road-cbc-1.5372916

Why invade when you can help developing nations build infrastructure in exchange for resources. 

All this while the US shrinks away from its role internationally. MAGA!!!

America has more friendly ways too. America's soft power dwarves Chinese soft power, and they also have more hard power to go with it, it's not either or, you can do both and America does both far better than China.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

America has more friendly ways too. America's soft power dwarves Chinese soft power, and they also have more hard power to go with it, it's not either or, you can do both.

America's soft power has been fading steadily under Trump. And its hard power isn't worth much if it's president is on the side of its enemies.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Argus

[Yzermandius19]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

America's soft power has been fading steadily under Trump. And it's hard power isn't worth much if it's president is on the side of its enemies.

America's soft power has been increasing under Trump, and Trump isn't on the side of America's enemies. China is nowhere near matching America in hard power or soft power, so quit your concern trolling "the sky is falling because of Trump" routine.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Argus]

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

America's soft power has been increasing under Trump

It has? Evidence of this? Half the senior positions in the State Department are still unfilled. Many ambassadorships are empty. I read some time ago that every time there's an internatioinal meeting China sends two dozen people to gladhand and make deals. America sends maybe one junior diplomat with no authority.

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

and Trump isn't on the side of America's enemies.

If Russia decides its going to take back Ukraine, Georgia and the baltic states, and Putin orders Trump to stay out of it or he'll release certain information he has about Trump's loans and money laundering deals with eastern Europe oligarchs Trump will simply say the US is not going to interfere. The rest of Europe certainly hasn't got the muscle or the courage to go against Russia alone.

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

China is nowhere near matching America in hard power or soft power, so quit your concern trolling.

China is building up its power and influence in Asia, and expanding its bases throughout the world. It's prepared to take what it wants in the way of raw resources, and has no independent press or courts or government critics to stand in its way.

[Yzermandius19]

5 minutes ago, Argus said:

China is building up its power and influence in Asia, and expanding its bases throughout the world. It's prepared to take what it wants in the way of raw resources, and has no independent press or courts or government critics to stand in its way.

China increasing it's power and influence does not mean that America is about to be overtaken. That does not follow, non-sequitur. Lack of freedom of speech and rule of law is not a strength, those are weakness that hold them back.

You see American strengths as weakness, and Chinese weaknesses as strengths. No wonder your analysis is so off the mark.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Argus]

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

China increasing it's power and influence does not mean that America is about to be overtaken. That does not follow, non-sequitur.

China's navy is already bigger than the US. They've built 83 ships in just the last eight years and are continuing construction.

By way of comparison the British navy is made up of 75 ships. Canada has about 15.

[Yzermandius19]

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

China's navy is already bigger than the US. They've built 83 ships in just the last eight years and are continuing construction.

By way of comparison the British navy is made up of 75 ships. Canada has about 15.

China's navy is not bigger than the US navy, nor is it anywhere near as powerful. Building shitty ships doesn't turn you into naval power to rival America, that's not how it works. China's navy is nothing to write home about, reports of America's demise have been greatly exaggerated, you need to stop listening to the "America Is Falling" crowd, they don't have the slightest clue what they are talking about.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[DogOnPorch]

Historically, Red China has been a dismal opponent in any war it has fought in.

Human wave attacks to make-up for lack of tactics...

Ninety MiGs (shot down) vs a single F-86 Sabre...that sort of result.

 

But this time it'd be different...they swear.

Edited December 4, 2019 by DogOnPorch

[Yzermandius19]

Just build a navy that can't even compete with Japan and the "America Is Falling" rubes will think "America is doomed naow"!

ZeroHedge is a helluva drug.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Yzermandius19