Dougie93 Posted March 27, 2022 Report Share Posted March 27, 2022 for the NATO contribution ? Canada could reinforce the Battle Group at Camp Adazi in Riga Latvia bring it up to full strength that's 1 infantry battalion in LAV 6 1 armored squadron of Leopard 2A6M 1 battery of M777A2L39 howitzers 1 combat engineer field squadron 1 combat service support company 1 field hospital then for the RCN, 3 FFH-330 patrol frigates 1 SSK-876 patrol submarine 1 NSU supply ship for RAS then the RCAF sends 1 squadron of CF-18's with the latest upgrades 1 squadron of CH-146 tactical helicopters that's all that is required, and Canada can sustain that contribution indefinitely as of right now 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 27, 2022 Report Share Posted March 27, 2022 It would be sweet if we could fund this with oligarch laundry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 27, 2022 Report Share Posted March 27, 2022 in the event of war in Europe, NATO Article V is invoked the most Canada could sustain in the field logistically is a Brigade Group in theater 4 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group reactivated that's three Battle Groups worth there's no point in shooting for more than that and in a pinch, Canada could provide that right now, by cannibalizing the other two Brigade Groups but since there is no land threat to Canada, that is totally doable within the current budget & force structure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted March 27, 2022 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2022 4 hours ago, Dougie93 said: for the NATO contribution ? Canada could reinforce the Battle Group at Camp Adazi in Riga Latvia bring it up to full strength that's 1 infantry battalion in LAV 6 1 armored squadron of Leopard 2A6M 1 battery of M777A2L39 howitzers 1 combat engineer field squadron 1 combat service support company 1 field hospital then for the RCN, 3 FFH-330 patrol frigates 1 SSK-876 patrol submarine 1 NSU supply ship for RAS then the RCAF sends 1 squadron of CF-18's with the latest upgrades 1 squadron of CH-146 tactical helicopters that's all that is required, and Canada can sustain that contribution indefinitely as of right now It sounds like a lot of troops and equipment but in reality it is less than 2000, sad for a G-7 nation...but, there is always a but, currently every Company is short a full plt of troops, so in reality there are only 2 company's of infantry in each BN...which is good becasue each BN only has 2 companies of LAV6 anyways...which are not designed for high intensity warfare...they are lightly armored at best...just as the Russians are finding out now, wheel IFV are not very good at fighting...anything other than insurgences and light infantry... good thing you only want a Sqn of tanks we only purchased 20 leo A6M, hope none of them break down...don't worry those are only 2 complete generations old...but we do have 20 LeoA4M tanks for spares , but they are only 5 generations old, the rest of the tanks trainors...so no combat for them...well might be better than the LAV 6.0 Having towed arty in todays world is a death sentence...takes to long to engage then tear down...great for Afghanistan, but then again not so great when enemy arty response time is before your round slashes , the bad guys got one coming your way... We have no AOR that is combat capable... we have a rental, but not rigged for combat in any form... Our subs, into combat that would be a brave move, if you can find one not in dry docks... 40 year old F-18 are still 40 year old planes...regardless of how you dress them up... they are gen 3 aircraft at best...and while most Russian aircraft would outclass them, those F-18 would not stand a chance from modern ground air defenses A Canadian battle group will not let Canada down on the battle field, but a battle group is the lowest unit battle piece on the map.... .. and for a G-7 nation is is disgusting . shit even Belgium can force generate more...a lot more... Russian forces don't have to be good, they have lots of them...and don't mind killing them all off to accomplish objectives.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 (edited) It's just such a colossal waste of money and it's ludicrous to invest in more of the same when we know full well we will back down from bullies like Putin. Would somebody please explain to me why we can't use MAD as a defense given how successfully it has prevented anyone else who uses it from being invaded? Seriously. And would someone also please explain why we should give up social programs and ignore climate change so we fund the military for wars against the same people our betters are getting rich stinking laundering money for? This is fucking retarded. Quote Canada is such an appealing money-laundering destination that there is a coined term to refer to illegal money laundered here: snow-washing. https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/money-laundering-is-pervasive-but-little-is-done-about-it-experts Edited March 28, 2022 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted March 28, 2022 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 41 minutes ago, eyeball said: It's just such a colossal waste of money and it's ludicrous to invest in more of the same when we know full well we will back down from bullies like Putin. Would somebody please explain to me why we can't use MAD as a defense given how successfully it has prevented anyone else who uses it from being invaded? Seriously. And would someone also please explain why we should give up social programs and ignore climate change so we fund the military for wars against the same people our betters are getting rich stinking laundering money for? This is fucking retarded. Just like car insurance, home insurance, life insurance, medical insurance, all a waste of money until you need them...Having a well equipment conventional force has the same effect as having nukes...if you are prepared then people will think twice, if your not then well your a target... having a strong military also gives you some political clout on the world stage...having none like we do gives you sock boy... Well i would not say it is that successful, Israel, Pakistan, India, China have all had conflicts while holding Nukes... Pakistan and India has had conflicts with out flinging nukes...India and china have had conflicts without flinging nukes, China and US have had conflicts and not nuked each other...So i guess it still happens... What other social programs do we need ? that we don't have now...and nobody is talking about giving up anything...do we talk about giving anything up when we want a new social program...like pharma, and dental, what are we giving up for them... Not having a well equipped military is what is retarded... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Just like car insurance, home insurance, life insurance, medical insurance, all a waste of money until you need them...Having a well equipment conventional force has the same effect as having nukes...if you are prepared then people will think twice, if your not then well your a target... having a strong military also gives you some political clout on the world stage...having none like we do gives you sock boy... Well, you've got to admire the fact he can arm other people and get them to fight for our freedom against the same people we're still attracting who knows how many billions of dollars from every year. Quote Well i would not say it is that successful, Israel, Pakistan, India, China have all had conflicts while holding Nukes... Pakistan and India has had conflicts with out flinging nukes...India and china have had conflicts without flinging nukes, China and US have had conflicts and not nuked each other...So i guess it still happens... I did say invade. Again why does it need to be pointed out our only potential invader is the US? Okay, so we don't actually need to build cobalt bombs to store for a rainy day but we could easily say fuck off or we'll build one when/if required. Quote What other social programs do we need ? that we don't have now...and nobody is talking about giving up anything... People talk about giving up all sorts of things, from the CBC to carbon taxes. Quote do we talk about giving anything up when we want a new social program...like pharma, and dental, what are we giving up for them... Military funding for useless conflicts I hope. Quote Not having a well equipped military is what is retarded... No, believing we really need one is. Now that said...I could get behind building up our offensive capabilities to join in the struggle for competing visions between liberalism and authoritarianism. There are lots of smaller bastards out there we can start dealing with militarily immediately while fomenting strife in Russia and China through longer term economic strangulation. Edited March 28, 2022 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 14 hours ago, Army Guy said: It sounds like a lot of troops and equipment but in reality it is less than 2000, sad for a G-7 nation...but, there is always a but, currently every Company is short a full plt of troops, so in reality there are only 2 company's of infantry in each BN...which is good becasue each BN only has 2 companies of LAV6 anyways...which are not designed for high intensity warfare...they are lightly armored at best...just as the Russians are finding out now, wheel IFV are not very good at fighting...anything other than insurgences and light infantry... good thing you only want a Sqn of tanks we only purchased 20 leo A6M, hope none of them break down...don't worry those are only 2 complete generations old...but we do have 20 LeoA4M tanks for spares , but they are only 5 generations old, the rest of the tanks trainors...so no combat for them...well might be better than the LAV 6.0 Having towed arty in todays world is a death sentence...takes to long to engage then tear down...great for Afghanistan, but then again not so great when enemy arty response time is before your round slashes , the bad guys got one coming your way... We have no AOR that is combat capable... we have a rental, but not rigged for combat in any form... Our subs, into combat that would be a brave move, if you can find one not in dry docks... 40 year old F-18 are still 40 year old planes...regardless of how you dress them up... they are gen 3 aircraft at best...and while most Russian aircraft would outclass them, those F-18 would not stand a chance from modern ground air defenses A Canadian battle group will not let Canada down on the battle field, but a battle group is the lowest unit battle piece on the map.... .. and for a G-7 nation is is disgusting . shit even Belgium can force generate more...a lot more... Russian forces don't have to be good, they have lots of them...and don't mind killing them all off to accomplish objectives.. so 1 RCR only has two rifle companies now ? which company did they get rid of ? hopefully Bravo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 everything has to be viewed in the context of Canada no longer being a serious country Canada is propped up by America, Canada is protected by America so Canada can be a la la land of left wing lunacy and get away with it in terms of the military commitments, it's just a token force, it's not actually meant to fight if the Russians attacked Latvia, the Canadians would immediately withdraw to Poland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 13 hours ago, eyeball said: It's just such a colossal waste of money and it's ludicrous to invest in more of the same when we know full well we will back down from bullies like Putin. Would somebody please explain to me why we can't use MAD as a defense given how successfully it has prevented anyone else who uses it from being invaded? Seriously. And would someone also please explain why we should give up social programs and ignore climate change so we fund the military for wars against the same people our betters are getting rich stinking laundering money for? This is fucking retarded. Stop with the climate change hysteria. No one can prove that it poses an existential threat or the extent to which humans cause it. What’s more, and this is the key point: If climate change poses a real existential threat over the next century, it’s highly likely that even if we shut down our growth and spent all of our budgets to fight climate change, it would barely move the needle on climate change. End punishing carbon taxes and stupid expensive subsidies on power sources that barely provide power. Instead, focus on obvious, easy fixes to efficiencies through building code and technology. We have enough damn social programs. Can we please have a military that isn’t a laughingstock? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 mind you, that is how the Second World War first came crashing down on Canadians hard Ottawa sent the troops to Hong Kong on behalf of London whereupon they were annihilated by the Japanese two big disasters for Canada in the war, one was Dieppe, the other was Hong Kong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: everything has to be viewed in the context of Canada no longer being a serious country Canada is propped up by America, Canada is protected by America so Canada can be a la la land of left wing lunacy and get away with it in terms of the military commitments, it's just a token force, it's not actually meant to fight if the Russians attacked Latvia, the Canadians would immediately withdraw to Poland Except that once Latvia got invaded, all of NATO would be at war with Russia. Canada needs to pull its weight as a contributor to NATO. Trudeau is all talk. Edited March 28, 2022 by Zeitgeist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 Just now, Zeitgeist said: all of NATO would be at war with Russia. NATO is already at war with Russia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: NATO is already at war with Russia Well not officially because no NATO country was attacked. NATO won’t enforce a no fly zone over Ukraine. They’re basically providing anti-aircraft and anti-tank artillery and firearms. I don’t really see the point in that except to limit Russian bargaining power in a negotiated settlement. In the end Ukraine will have to be neutral and its regions will need to be self-determining, including whether to remain under Ukrainian federal government, Russian government, or as independent regions. What other long term outcome can work? Edited March 28, 2022 by Zeitgeist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 5 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: Well not officially because no NATO country was attacked. where is it written that Article V must be declared before NATO goes to war ? whoever said NATO can't go on the offensive like we are now ? NATO went to war against Russian proxy Serbia, Article V was never declared Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 France has deployed three of their four ballistic missile submarines to sea at the same time now for the first time since the height of the Cold War oh, but this is not war, just the brink of thermonuclear Armageddon ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: where is it written that Article V must be declared before NATO goes to war ? whoever said NATO can't go on the offensive like we are now ? NATO went to war against Russian proxy Serbia, Article V was never declared True. However, proxy wars are one thing. Our media doesn’t seem to understand that these current engagements are highly limited. Russia is using similar tactics to the ones they used in Syria. If they wanted to they could turn Ukraine into ash in 24 hours. That’s in no one’s interests and would have a spillover cross border impact that could be Article 5. This invasion is highly controlled. NATO’s involvement is something like 1% of their equipment. Edited March 28, 2022 by Zeitgeist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 the war with Russia never ended the silent war is perpetual DEFCON 5 is not peace DEFCON 5 is 15 minutes notice to launch of warning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: True. However, proxy wars are one thing. it's not a proxy war when you are trying to destroy the Russian economy down to the wood that is embargo which is an act of war, casus belli, by the Hague Convention this is what America, Britain & Holland did to Imperial Japan which incited Pearl Harbor in the wake NATO has already mission creeped over the line, on the offensive Edited March 28, 2022 by Dougie93 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: it's not a proxy war when you are trying to destroy the Russian economy down to the wood that is embargo which is an act of war, casus belli, by the Hague Convention Good point. I’m not sure that’s fully understood by most citizens of NATO countries. Also, massive realignment of the geopolitical order is underway, especially financially, as Russia, China, Venezuela, and other countries enter into the Mir currency agreement. That’s significant. Freeland and Trudeau need to think about the real impacts of messing with access to international funds. Biden too seems quick on that trigger. Hell, he was talking regime change for the second largest nuclear power. Strange tactic. Edited March 28, 2022 by Zeitgeist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 (edited) "blah, blah, blah, Article V" is just a media construct if Russia were to launch a first strike, the war would be over in thirty minutes you wouldn't have time to invoke Article V hence why France already has 48 x M51 SLBM's on patrol at sea Edited March 28, 2022 by Dougie93 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: "blah, blah, blah, Article V" is just a media construct if Russia were to launch a first strike, the war would be over in thirty minutes you wouldn't have time to invoke Article V hence why France already has 48 x M51 SLBM's on patrol at sea I’ll say it like this: If all out war with Russia is on the table, then negotiations should be taking place directly with Russia to hammer out an agreement. If Zelensky is so reliant on NATO and western financial sanctions to chisel at Russia, I’m not sure how much of a role he plays here, other than to sign the neutrality agreement and run the regional referendums. Probably UN blue helmets will need to help with transitioning out the invading force. Edited March 28, 2022 by Zeitgeist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: I’ll say it like this: If all out war with Russia is on the table, then negotiations should be taking place directly with Russia to hammer out an agreement. If Zelensky is so reliant on NATO and western financial sanctions to chisel at Russia, I’m not sure how much of a role he plays here, other than to sign the neutrality agreement and run the regional referendums. Probably UN blue helmets will need to help with transitioning out the invading force. you know what else is just a media construct ? "Mutually Assured Destruction" MAD is just a bluff why ? because if the enemy cripples you with a preemptive counterforce ? you are not really going to massively retaliate as that would just bring their ICBM's down upon your cities in reality, you would capitulate, sue for peace MAD is idealpolitik the realpolitik of thermonuclear war is actually : he who strikes first wins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 if the Russians are going to attack NATO it's not going to be in Latvia it will be on the high seas, or rather beneath them the nuclear submarine is the arm of decision Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted March 28, 2022 Report Share Posted March 28, 2022 Just now, Dougie93 said: you know what else is just a media construct ? "Mutually Assured Destruction" MAD is just a bluff why ? because if the enemy cripples you with a preemptive counterforce ? you are not really going to massively retaliate as that would just bring their ICBM's down upon your cities in reality, you would capitulate, sue for peace MAD is idealpolitik the realpolitik of thermonuclear war is actually : he who strikes first wins Yes but if the prize of having less of your country nuked than the enemy is the near complete mass murder of humanity, total economic collapse, nuclear winter, and decades of radiation contamination, then everyone loses. 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.