Canada only has 28k soldiers in it's army

[I am Groot]

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

So, it all comes down to the question, Would I rather live as a slave, or die a free man.

You again reduce your options to those that are the most pessimistic. There is the option to be strong, and for NATO to be strong. Which would deter a war just as it did in the cold war.

Edited April 14 by I am Groot

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

They would have crushed Ukraine a year and a half ago were it not for Western countries feeding hundreds of billions in cash and armaments to Ukraine. And many countries, like Canada, have depleted their supplies of missiles and artillery shells and will need years to replenish them. The US has depleted its own supply of missiles, as well, and is trying to increase production so it doesn't have to wait years to replenish. 

Russia can increase its arms production much faster than Western countries because they have fewer lawyers.

 

but the Russian equipment is mostly junk

it's easily destroyed in huge quantities by cheap 3D printed drones

the drone is already the arm of decision, practically rendereding industrial warfare obsolete

[Dougie93]

25 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

 I recall the reaction of the Trump Administration after a meeting when a remark made by the Canadian Government was taken out of context and caused a response that was way out of proportion.

any Canadian government which picks a serious fight with the Americans, will get thrown out of office

the Americans can inflict exponential economic pain upon Canadians with a flick of their wrists

Canadians would surrender on day one, rather than suffer the consequences of American economic warfare

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

In 1960 Canadian defence spending was over 4% GDP and didn't drop below 2% GDP until 1973. Between 1983 and 1987 it recovered to just over 2% and it has been mostly downhill ever since.

I was in the Military in 1971.

We were going through or just gone through a downsizing to about 60K (or less)

I do not think that the Canadian population vs Military has a relationship.

In WWII, we had almost a miliion and way less population.

[Queenmandy85]

4 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

You again reduce your options to those that are the most pessimistic. There is the option to be strong, and for NATO to be strong. Which would deter a war just as it did in the cold war.

Except that not enough Canadians are willing to serve and even fewer are willing to pay for it. We have immediate problems with under funded education system, healthcare and housing. It is hard enough to get people to pay taxes to fix those immediate problems without also having to get them to pay for defence, which most people have no interest in. We need to train and hire math, chemistry, physics and geography teachers, family doctors and trades people more than infantry soldiers. People need to get a decent education in the sciences now, access to a family physician now, and a roof over their heads now. They don't see war as imminent and even if it were, the Canadian Armed Forces are not percieved by most taxpayers as sufficient to make the investment of another $20 billion over what we spend now as worth it. I have argued for an effective military for over a half a century and never changed anyone's mind except for my own.

I look at what is happening in Gaza. I understand the reaction of Israel, but all they have accomplished is to strengthen their enemies and kill tens of thousands of people who had nothing to do with Hamas. The Israeli response has achieved nothing. They have taught their enemies how to stick it to Israel. 

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

How much weight could those women in the air force carry and how far could they carry it?

Not sure why that makes a difference and why. In the early days we had personal toolboxes and they carried them.

If you are alluding to dead or injured bodies on a battlefield. I can say that there are a lot of army guys (or any guys) that cannot drag a dead injured body off the field either. It takes a team, everywhere, all the time.

[I am Groot]

14 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Except that not enough Canadians are willing to serve and even fewer are willing to pay for it.

The problems in recruitment and retention are due mainly to the incompetence of the recruitment and training process, and the rusted out, and obsolete if not entirely missing equipment that leaves those who join feeling no real pride in their organization. People who join shouldn't need to wait a year or two to get a phone call to come for training. Nor should it take ten or fifteen years just to sign a contract to acquire new equipment. Properly equip the military and fix the problem with its training/recruitment and you'll be able to recruit up easily enough.

As for being willing to pay. I have never seen any groundswell of protest at ANY spending initiative. Ever. Sure, the opposition will whine and complain about any large contract. But that doesn't really represent public concern or anger. The Liberals campaigned vigorously against buying the F15 while they were in opposition, but it was never much of a concern in the election that followed. 

And almost everyone acknowledges that the military is in terrible shape and has to be brought up to speed. I don't see a lot of opposition to doing so. Quite the contrary. Sure, the Liberals will whine and complain once they're in opposition, but few will care.

The military is an insurance policy. And most Canadians understand the need for insurance.

14 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

We have immediate problems with under funded education system, healthcare and housing.

The problems with these can be solved by cutting red tape, regulations, and legions of bureaucrats. Education is most certainly not under-funded. It is over bureacratized. And too much healthcare spending goes to bureaucrats not doctors. Housing is an immigration problem. Slash immigration, migration, and foreign workers (and families) and foreign students (and families) and the housing crisis will shrink to a very manageable level.

14 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I look at what is happening in Gaza. I understand the reaction of Israel, but all they have accomplished is to strengthen their enemies and kill tens of thousands of people who had nothing to do with Hamas. The Israeli response has achieved nothing. They have taught their enemies how to stick it to Israel. 

What happened in Israel was that they forgot to keep their military strong enough along the borders with their enemies to deter an attack or hold it in check if they were attacked. And I see no way their enemies are stronger now than they were before. Certainly Hamas is not.

[Venandi]

49 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

I had to jump through hoops for months to complete the enlistment process

Still a problem today and I suspect that CFRC postings are still seen as a mark time / punishmen event.

I'll call you right back really means that they won't bother, as a result, some of the best candidates are lost to things like community colleges and policing.

I reenrolled from the airline world as a skilled applicant during a pilot shortage, a former crew commander, ICP and pilot standards officer with 10K hours. It took a full year to get a punishment posting intended to serve as retribution for leaving in the first place.

Poor performance then, multiply by 2 and add 10% for woke nonsense now... then stand in awe of the resulting effect and blame it on being non inclusive.

As usual, my question is what did you think was going to happen?

  

Edited April 14 by Venandi

[Dougie93]

6 minutes ago, Venandi said:

Still a problem today and I suspect that CFRC postings are still seen as a mark time / punishmen event.

actually CFRC is a good go

you're getting paid DND money to work in an office

you are trying to sell young people on joining the military which you love

it beats digging trenches in the rain

[Venandi]

5 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

it beats digging trenches in the rain

Not for me though, I'll happily take the mosquitos that go with the rain.

Thanks though, I'm glad to hear it's different now.

About time I'd say...

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

I was in the Military in 1971.

We were going through or just gone through a downsizing to about 60K (or less)

I do not think that the Canadian population vs Military has a relationship.

In WWII, we had almost a miliion and way less population.

During both WW's, almost one Canadian in ten was in uniform.

[Aristides]

3 hours ago, I am Groot said:

The fourth option is you have sufficient military strength to make it unpalatable to attack you. 

The fifth option is you have sufficient military power to contribute to an alliance of like-minded nations which makes it far too dangerous for an enemy to attack any of them.

You forgot those options.

Exactly, you don't have to be able to defeat everyone on your own, just be prickly enough that you aren't worth the trouble and have alliances that will deter the more powerful threats. NATO. 

 

[ExFlyer]

16 minutes ago, Aristides said:

During both WW's, almost one Canadian in ten was in uniform.

Just pointing out the relationship of population to military is not valid

[Queenmandy85]

14 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Exactly, you don't have to be able to defeat everyone on your own, just be prickly enough that you aren't worth the trouble and have alliances that will deter the more powerful threats. NATO. 

 

But how much of a deterrent will NATO be when President Trump is back in the Whitehouse as Putin's Manchurian candidate.

[Queenmandy85]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

As for being willing to pay. I have never seen any groundswell of protest at ANY spending initiative. Ever. Sure, the opposition will whine and complain about any large contract. But that doesn't really represent public concern or anger. The Liberals campaigned vigorously against buying the F15 while they were in opposition, but it was never much of a concern in the election that followed. 

And almost everyone acknowledges that the military is in terrible shape and has to be brought up to speed. I don't see a lot of opposition to doing so.

In order to get to 2%, the average taxpayer will have to pay an extra $700 in taxes. Spending on defence is easy. Getting the revenue to pay for it is the problem. Why do you think governments have let the Forces decline so much? If the voters wanted a credible Canadian military, the governments would do it. The fact that governments don't make defence a priority is because it isn't a priority for the voters. 

Beyond the increase in the Defence budget is the re-building in our armaments industry. That is a big price tag in its self.

Edited April 14 by Queenmandy85

[Queenmandy85]

51 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

you don't even have an armaments industry by the way

We used to, and we should, but we won't. The voters don't see that as a priority.

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

But how much of a deterrent will NATO be when President Trump is back in the Whitehouse as Putin's Manchurian candidate.

That’s why we shouldn’t be depending on the US so much. Many NATO countries are preparing for it by ramping up their own defence spending.

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

In order to get to 2%, the average taxpayer will have to pay an extra $700 in taxes. Spending on defence is easy. Getting the revenue to pay for it is the problem. Why do you think governments have let the Forces decline so much? If the voters wanted a credible Canadian military, the governments would do it. The fact that governments don't make defence a priority is because it isn't a priority for the voters. 

Beyond the increase in the Defence budget is the re-building in our armaments industry. That is a big price tag in its self.

Trudeau is throwing around money on new programs like it is grass seed, he doesn’t seem concerned.

[Army Guy]

5 hours ago, I am Groot said:

That is a terrible tooth to tail ratio. 

It is the largest piece on the battlefield, just look Ukraine for a second, most NATO countries can not produce arty shells fast enough, thats one theater of war...and yet they have to worry about beans, bullets, and fuel, not counting everything else, from toilet paper, spare parts, batteries, other equipment, the list is endless, supply trains run all day and all night...by road , air, and sea....it never stops...until the war is over...and the longer distances you need to cover then the larger the tail becomes...manning it all consumes more men and equipment than the fighting forces expend... 

[Army Guy]

5 hours ago, I am Groot said:

But anyone can't hump eighty or a hundred pounds of gear for days on end on field operations. And women who can do it when superbly fit are few and far between and face all kinds of physical issues if they try. US Marine Captain Katie Petronio wrote about this a decade ago. There are basic issues with trying to make females infantry, starting with them having less muscle mass, thinner bones, smaller frames, and lower lung capacity. They take physical damage more easily, recover more slowly, and don't have the speed or stamina of men.

You don't have to be a PT god, to accomplish anything a infantrymen can, it's it's more mental than physical...you would be surprised what the human body can do when you force it...take those PPCLI guys in Afghanistan, they did not have a choice it was march or die...you could not just fall out and walk back...not everyone can keep it up for extended periods of time, some days you need your battle buddie to step up and give you a hand...

There are lots of studies done, some say it is impossible, and then we have direct examples of women doing it...even excelling at it...the major hold back right now is the higher tier you go the harder the physical and mental standards are...so if 5 % of the females make it in the Infantry, corp, not many of those are making CSOR standards and i don't think there is 1 female operator at JTF 2. 

That female medic that picked up one of my soldiers weighed in at maybe a buck 40, she managed to race down 100 meters of narrow ally way, pick up a dude with his gear weighing in at more than 220 -250 lbs pick him up , and RAN with him back to safety...and she was not running in a straight line...lots of zigs and more zags...

Everyone is forgetting there are also small framed men that are in the infantry as well, and they manage because they know what they can press their bodies to do... 

Look i used to be that guy, did not have time for any female in the infantry, it has taken years of convincing and i've seen females suck it up and do whatever is necessary to get the job done...i've seen it in unarmed combat classes, in the field, on the battlefield, those that could not make it did not last long as an infanteer, everyone in the Bn knows what is at stake...thats life's, no matter what the politicians or chain of command wants to do with wall charts, if you can't do the job, the Snr NCO corp will ensure standards are met or exceeded,or that soldier will be gone.......everyone else that made it, can push beyond what your mind thinks it an do..an infanteers career is all about finding your limits and then breaking those standards, doing it over and over again...

[Army Guy]

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

In order to get to 2%, the average taxpayer will have to pay an extra $700 in taxes. Spending on defence is easy. Getting the revenue to pay for it is the problem. Why do you think governments have let the Forces decline so much? If the voters wanted a credible Canadian military, the governments would do it. The fact that governments don't make defence a priority is because it isn't a priority for the voters. 

Beyond the increase in the Defence budget is the re-building in our armaments industry. That is a big price tag in its self.

You keep posting these unrealistic numbers...PP has already told you how he is going to increase spending, and it is not through empty promises like the liberals... he is going to shave existing things already budgeted for...like the billions we spend on foreign aid...like UNRWA for instance... cut some of these excessive social programs...that would be more than enough to pay for any increase in military spending...

Forces are in decline becasue Canadians let it happen period...

more than 30 % of Canadians answered in a poll that it is a priority...and those numbers are climbing...

Rebuilding our armaments is already happening thanks to the liberals it's a small start but atleast it is getting their...will the funding survive i don't know...

[DUI_Offender]

We need to ramp that up to 200K within a decade.

 

However, Trudeau has always hated the armed forces.  His father was the one who transformed Canada's reputation as one of the best fighting forces in the World, into a joke.

[DUI_Offender]

9 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

In order to get to 2%, the average taxpayer will have to pay an extra $700 in taxes. Spending on defence is easy. Getting the revenue to pay for it is the problem. Why do you think governments have let the Forces decline so much? If the voters wanted a credible Canadian military, the governments would do it. The fact that governments don't make defence a priority is because it isn't a priority for the voters. 

Beyond the increase in the Defence budget is the re-building in our armaments industry. That is a big price tag in its self.

Why do you post dogshit?

At this point, your posts are not even worth being called out as incorrect. They are so horrendously bad, that they are the equivalent to a dog shitting in a parking lot.  If your internet posts were a physical thing, I would dread stepping on them, since I would immediate have to wipe off my shoe on the grass, then hose it down when I returned home.

[ExFlyer]

15 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

We used to, and we should, but we won't. The voters don't see that as a priority.

We don 't have an armament industry in Canada for the same reasons we have lost most of out manufacturing industry.

We are too expensive. We would never buy from companies that have to pay the labour and expenses for products made here.

[Queenmandy85]

8 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

Why do you post dogshit?

At this point, your posts are not even worth being called out as incorrect. They are so horrendously bad, that they are the equivalent to a dog shitting in a parking lot.  If your internet posts were a physical thing, I would dread stepping on them, since I would immediate have to wipe off my shoe on the grass, then hose it down when I returned home.

Perhaps I am mathematically challenged. 

We have about 28 million taxpayers. We spend $20 billion on defence now. To get to 2%, we need another $18 Billion, but friction being what it is, I rounded it up to $20 billion over and above what we pay now. $20 billion divided by 28 million taxpayers equals $714. If we presume nothing changes and the $18 billion remains the same, (like prices never go up in government procurements) it comes out to $642.86 per taxpayer.

So, I am relying on your superior math skills to show me my error.

[Queenmandy85]

9 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

We need to ramp that up to 200K within a decade.

 

However, Trudeau has always hated the armed forces.  His father was the one who transformed Canada's reputation as one of the best fighting forces in the World, into a joke.

How do you propose to attract that many recruits? It is possible theoretically, but how do you achieve that without conscription. Anyone who has read Canadian history knows consription is a non-starter.

While Trudeau was not keen on the armed forces (this was the middle of the Viet Nam War), the credit for wrecking the Canadian Forces goes to Paul Heller and Mike Pearson. No government since then has made any move to correct the downward trajectory of the CAF. 

Even those on this forum who want to reverse this trend still want to depend on clinging to the Americans for protection. The last Canadian Prime Minister to refuse to take orders from the Americans was John Diefenbaker. This is not a criticism of the US, but we need to have the capacity to be independent of the US when our interests diverge from theirs.

Edited April 15 by Queenmandy85