Canada's military is broken and falling apart.

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

They weren't "junked", they were only in service four years before they were put in storage after the Brits decided to go all nuclear. 

They're definitely not fit for a northern country like Canada.  They appear very fragile and junky.  They would not be able to withstand the Arctic for one thing.  A vessel in the Arctic must be capable of breaking through heavy ice.  These would not fit that category.  Guess the never thought of that when they bought them.  They were purchased just to be able to say we have some subs.  Useless.

 

[Aristides]

Just now, blackbird said:

They're definitely not fit for a northern country like Canada.  They appear very fragile and junky.  They would not be able to withstand the Arctic for one thing.  A vessel in the Arctic must be capable of breaking through heavy ice.  These would not fit that category.  Guess the never thought of that when they bought them.  They were purchased just to be able to say we have some subs.  Useless.

 

They were never intended for the arctic and neither were the Oberon class which they replaced.

[blackbird]

21 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

And on the right... we have politician that do nothing more than condemn and criticize and besmirch anything and everything. No plans, no beliefs, no foresight, no promoting Canada and unity.

Unfortunately, one side is as divisive as the other.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, that's exactly how politics works if you want to win an election.  People vote for the party that can best expose the other party.  Its called politics.  Conservatives point out the legitimate failures of the Trudeau government.  Of course it requires criticizing them because those are the facts and only facts that people listen to.

[TreeBeard]

36 minutes ago, blackbird said:

They would not be able to withstand the Arctic for one thing. 

Why do we need subs in the Arctic?

[Moonbox]

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Riiight...

https://pl.usembassy.gov/demonstration-alert-u-s-embassy-warsaw-november-10-2022/

What is this supposed to show us?  That there were independence day parades, rallies and/or demonstrations in Warsaw and Krakow on Polish independence day last year?  WOW!? 

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

This too.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-36239756

That's from 2016, so good job making yourself look even more foolish.  

Thanks for confirming what we already knew and removing any doubt of it.  You're so desperate to find anything whatsoever that supports your clownworld viewpoint that you've sunk to quoting news out of Iran.  Even the dumbest posters here are usually smart enough to avoid doing that.  

[Aristides]

54 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Why do we need subs in the Arctic?

Why do we need a navy? 

[TreeBeard]

14 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Why do we need a navy? 

Clearly, we need a navy for coastal defence.  The fleet make up of the navy is pretty open to argument.  Subs?  Aircraft carriers?  Etc, etc.  
 

But you have no compelling arguments to make for your assertion that we need submarines that can operate in the Arctic.  

[herbie]

17 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Why do we need a navy? 

To keep China from fishing salmon and thumbing their noses at us. And our NATO allies stealing cod on the East coast.

Edited January 31, 2023 by herbie

[TreeBeard]

5 minutes ago, herbie said:

To keep China from fishing salmon and thumbing their noses at us. And our NATO allies stealing cod on the East coast.

When was the last time China fished salmon in Canadian waters?

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

Why do we need subs in the Arctic?

"Canada needs an Arctic defence strategy as Russia, China eye the north"

COMMENTARY: Canada needs an Arctic defence strategy as Russia, China eye the north - National | Globalnews.ca

[herbie]

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

During the Cold War we had an armoured brigade stationed in Germany.

During the Cold War we had... the operative word. Not having a base in Germany there's no need for our tanks there. And aside from training crews and tech, little need for them here either.
You don't fly 40 ton tanks to where the war IS.

And this arctic panic shit = WTH would Russia send vessels through "our Arctic"? What possible benefit would they derive from that? There's no need for oceanic shortcuts from Russia and only range disadvantages for boomer subs.
 

[TreeBeard]

3 minutes ago, blackbird said:

"Canada needs an Arctic defence strategy as Russia, China eye the north"

COMMENTARY: Canada needs an Arctic defence strategy as Russia, China eye the north - National | Globalnews.ca

Americans saw the Chinese/Russians in open waters.  Can’t we just use ships too?  Why do we need submarines?  That article from 2 years ago had nothing compelling in it to convince me that subs would grant us some magical status in the Arctic.  

[Dougie93]

3 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Serious question….  does Canada’s navy  need submarines?

Canada doesn't even need a navy

in fact, Canada doesn't need any armed forces at all

Canada could easily get away with just the RCMP & Coast Guard

there is no conventional military threat to Canada whatsoever

and no, the Americans would not care

Canada cannot support its armed forces logistically

America has to support Canada's armed forces overseas

so the Canadian Forces are an operational burden to the Pentagon not a boon

so long as Canada is supportive of Washington's foreign policy, America is satisfied

[Dougie93]

3 hours ago, Aristides said:

Yes, particularly ones that can operate under ice.

only nuclear submarines can operate under the ice

America has already made it clear that they will not allow Canada to have nuclear submarines

reason being : the Americans are Canada's chief rival in the Arctic

it is the Americans who dispute Canada's claims in the Arctic

it is the Americans who deny Canada's claim to the Northwest Passage

so it is the Americans who do not want Canada up there following them around under the ice

the Americans will allow Australia to have nuclear submarines

although that will be highly restricted with America in charge of what they can do with them

but the Americans do not want Canada in the club, they already prevented Canada from joining

Canada tried to buy SSN's in the 80's, and the Americans told Ottawa no, you can't have them

and you'll note that they did not invite Canada to join AUKUS neither

Canada is the only American ally who has territorial disputes with America

so Canada uniquely has to be kept under thumb therein

the Americans claim that the Northwest Passage is international waters

the Americans claim that they have freedom of navigation through the Northwest Passsage

with their warships, particularly their submarines

furthermore, it is obvious that they do not trust Ottawa at the highest levels

they do not trust Ottawa to know where American nuclear submarines are operating

so they are not going to allow Canada any capabilities whatsoever which could challenge them

and they are not going to allow Canada to track their submarines neither

Edited January 31, 2023 by Dougie93

[herbie]

11 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

When was the last time China fished salmon in Canadian waters?

True enough. I guess we need a West coast navy to stop Columbian drug cartels from smuggling all that marijuana into BC?

[Dougie93]

the actual threats to Canada are in thee areas

1. at the highest level : global thermonuclear war

2. at the lowest level : terrorism, insurrection & transnational criminal cartels

3. the Americans disputing Canada's claims to sovereignty

there's nothing Canada can do about number 1

 there's Canada is going to do about number 3

so the only threat that Canada can realistically address is number 2

and since that is not a military threat, Canada only needs an armed constabulary to address it

RCMP, Coast Guard, CBSA, CSIS

the Department of Public Safety is the only Canadian arm of decision

thus Canada could do away with the Canadian Armed Forces altogether, and nobody would notice the difference

again,  Canada has only ever fought one war on its own behalf

the Northwest Rebellion of 1885 against Louis Riel

and it was the Mounties who crushed the Metis, not the military

Canada's enemies are all at home :  Indians, Bikers & Canadians who want American freedom

and it is the Mounties who are the bulwark for the Crown therein

Maintiens le Droit

Edited January 31, 2023 by Dougie93

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

What is this supposed to show us?  That there were independence day parades, rallies and/or demonstrations in Warsaw and Krakow on Polish independence day last year?  WOW!? 

That's from 2016, so good job making yourself look even more foolish.  

Thanks for confirming what we already knew and removing any doubt of it.  You're so desperate to find anything whatsoever that supports your clownworld viewpoint that you've sunk to quoting news out of Iran.  Even the dumbest posters here are usually smart enough to avoid doing that.  

Was it? Oh it was. My bad.

 

 

So...I believe the question here was...are the Poles united as a people...or more united than Canucks...?

Well...apparently the answer is still...

No.

And while I find your dismissal of news sources outside your little msm bubble...amusing as hell...the geopolitical atmosphere today...pretty much throughout everywhere...is very binary. 2 staunch factions. One based on "feelings" and has already proven to live in an...altered reality, and one based on contemplative analysis and common sense.

Not to long ago, both factions lived in an understood harmony. Then the Prog thing happened, Trump happened in response, and gangs of supposedly grown adults went outside one night...all over America...turned their heads to the moon...and howled like dogs.

The political left...had lurched to Never Never Land...and became Libbies.

[Nationalist]

3 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

And on the right... we have politician that do nothing more than condemn and criticize and besmirch anything and everything. No plans, no beliefs, no foresight, no promoting Canada and unity.

Unfortunately, one side is as divisive as the other.

Horseshit.

https://www.conservative.ca/pierre-poilievre/

 

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

Americans saw the Chinese/Russians in open waters.  Can’t we just use ships too?  Why do we need submarines?  That article from 2 years ago had nothing compelling in it to convince me that subs would grant us some magical status in the Arctic.  

first of all, there is zero chance that Canada would open fire on a Russian or Chinese vessel

those decisions are taken in Washington on Canada's behalf

so there's no Canadian military solution to either the Russians or the Chinese

but moreover, in order to operate under the polar ice in the Arctic, your submarine has to make its own air

and for that you need a nuclear reactor

so these non nuclear submarines Canada has now are not particularly useful for operations in the Arctic at all

[Dougie93]

in fairness, I will present the RCN argument for why you need these submarines

a submarine is the most complex and difficult to operate machine in human history

a submarine program is more complex and difficult than a space program

it takes decades to get a submarine program up and running

Canada spent decades getting a submarine program up and running

if you end that program, it's gone forever

you will have no submariners, no submarine school, no submarines to train with

the RCN doesn't know the future

maybe someday Canada will need submarines

so they are maintaining the minimum capability required for Canada to operate submarines, for all time

they would argue that this submarine program is actually quite modest and affordable compared to most

bear in mind that Australia's Collins class submarines are no better than Canada's Victoria class

and yet Australia's submarines cost $1 billion each to buy, and they cost $3.5 billion per year to maintain

so in comparison, Canada's submarine fleet is in fact a deal, one of the most (relatively) affordable in the world

 

[Army Guy]

4 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Serious question….  does Canada’s navy  need submarines?

Subs are the Navy's most potent weapon, And i don't want to sound like a angry dick, but perhaps you should do some research, i will give you a much better understanding why we have the equipment we do , and what equipment we are missing...

[Army Guy]

4 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Can we shoot them when they climb out of the subs and up onto land?  I’m not entirely sure what we’re supposed to be scared of…. we clearly haven’t needed the ice-subs yet.   And our current subs have defended our coastlines by going to Japan and the Mediterranean!  Canada’s reach is far and wide!  
 

I haven’t heard a compelling case for why Canada needs more and better subs. 

We do not have the ability to travel under the ice pack for long periods , our current subs can travel in the norths once the ice pack is broken up..as the it needs to surface to replenish fresh air supply...I'm sure some navy guy here can explain it much better...

Our subs are deployed by the government DND does not have much say in where they go, that being said these subs we have currently have are old in the tooth, and need to be replaced , but have been put on hold until after the Ship building program is resolved...and with the price it is at now there won't be any new subs...Australia is trying to build 6 to 9 nuke  subs and they are priced out to 90 Bil....So it is not why do we need them the need is always going to be there , but rather can we afford to have them.

[Moonbox]

40 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

So...I believe the question here was...are the Poles united as a people...or more united than Canucks...?

You decide for yourself.  You can always find an angry group of people protesting something, but the last polls I saw showed nearly 80% of Poles supportive of sending weapons to Ukraine.  I suspect if they weren't restrained by NATO they'd have probably intervened themselves already.  Other than Ukrainians, nobody hates Russia more than the Poles...well the Poles and almost all of Russia's other neighbours. 

40 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

And while I find your dismissal of news sources outside your little msm bubble...amusing as hell...

Trust me, it's not nearly as amusing as seeing some donkey cite state-sponsored news from the Islamic Republic of Iran to try and prove his point, and to do so with a straight face.  ??

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, Army Guy said:

We do not have the ability to travel under the ice pack for long periods , our current subs can travel in the norths once the ice pack is broken up..as the it needs to surface to replenish fresh air supply...I'm sure some navy guy here can explain it much better...

the fight with the Russians is way further north

you can't track a Russian SSBN once it gets up under the ice

the ice makes too much noise, so you have to be right on top of them

so in order to track Russian SSBN's

American & British SSN's go into the Barents, right to Zapadnaya Litsa bay

they follow the Russian Boomers as they come out of their bases

all the way up under the ice, and then back again

non nuclear subs play no role in this mission whatsoever

the Canadian SSK's are not useful at all for the silent war in the Arctic

if Canada was going to fight with these submarines, they would be sent to Europe, to operate in the Baltic etc

[Army Guy]

2 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Clearly, we need a navy for coastal defence.  The fleet make up of the navy is pretty open to argument.  Subs?  Aircraft carriers?  Etc, etc.  
 

But you have no compelling arguments to make for your assertion that we need submarines that can operate in the Arctic.  

Here is just a thought, since none of us here are experts in things navy, ask our navy why we need subs, there are thousands of these Q&A on the web, from yes our naval commanders...all one has to do is goggle that...