New Vehicles Ordered To Modernize Army

[SirRiff]

  OTTAWA - The Defence Department will spend more than $500 million on 66 combat vehicles as part of a plan to modernize the army, Defence Minister John McCallum said on Wednesday.

    The army won't take delivery of its first Mobile Gun System, known in the U.S. as a Stryker, until 2006. The vehicle has a crew of three and carries a large cannon.

The United States has an order of the vehicles in production. By ordering exactly the same vehicle now, Canada can take advantage of the production run already underway, McCallum said.

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/10/29/notstrykers031029

RELATED STORY about security at the ontario plant-

my father is an accomplished US educated aerospace/metalergic engineer who has worked in the defense industry in canada during his last 28 years in canada (the canadian navy frigates in saint john ship building, Point Lepreau nuclear power plant in new brunswick) and has run the quality department of a company that has produced many small specialized projects for US defence (predator anti-tank missles, satellite parts, attack helicopters and so on) and various other aerospace projects worldwide.

he was hired in a mid-senior position at the canadian production location which makes these Strykers in ontario. unfortunately he was born overseas in islamic country. the offer was suspended after this was revealed and the position and him have been on hold approaching a year. apparently a official piece of paper is needed saying he is not a "citizen" of this country anymore. of course 50 years ago this developing nation didnt have any kind of record keeping for kids born on farms in the middle of absolutly nowhere, and certainly no piece of paper would have survived 50 years anyways in such a backwards system. and of course you cant go to a developing nation and demand heath care or something, being born in africa, or india, or indonesia, or malasia isnt going to get you anything other then funny looks.

i just find it odd that a US educated man, who then spent 28 years working in high tech canadian companies with strong links to US defence/aerospace, would be a threat at the age of 55. just doesnt make sense. and of course the already struggling ontario plant had to suspend alot of other foreign born workers after sept 11, and the whole plant is underproducing and could be shut down and moved to teh US. talk about a loss of great manufacturing plant.

just wanted to link the story to a real life story.

its good that canada is going to get light armored vehicles. it seems more likely to fit future deployment needs even peacekeeping. they are cutting edge from what i have heard and seen about them. $500 million for 66. we should put another $500 million and replace the sea kings.

we could get rid of some rampant health care fraud to pay for it. what do you think?

SirRiff

[KrustyKidd]

I think the request for proof of non citizenship is a reasonable one. Howver what I find outlandish is that there is no way or provision to get around the red tape. Something simple like an official letter from Foreign Affairs to the embasy of the country in questin saying in effect; You have 30 days to prove he is one of yours or you forfit all rights.

Now to the new vehicle. I say bravo! About time we started working with common sense instead of against it. These machines have more than likely been tested and blueprinted to the highest level for performance and economic reality instead of simply awarding it to Bombardier. A thought I had the other day was to do more of this joint manufacturing and as part of the deal have Canadians either manufacture some of it here or allow our people to go there to work on these defense contracts.

[SirRiff]

I think the request for proof of non citizenship is a reasonable one. Howver what I find outlandish is that there is no way or provision to get around the red tape. Something simple like an official letter from Foreign Affairs to the embasy of the country in questin saying in effect; You have 30 days to prove he is one of yours or you forfit all rights.

yeah the policy makes sense in an policy kind of wayi guess

but i see my dad every morning wearing 1980s sweaters eating cereal and watching the financial news every morning . if this guy is a national security threat i am a japanese schoolgirl. and you have to ask what exactly would this piece of paper accomplish? if someone was a spy with a piece of paper, would you let him go? if you arrested someones spy with imporant information and he didnt have a piece of paper, would it make any difference to his host country? they could still demand him back or retaliate in kind, so the paper would make little difference if he was or wasnt a spy.

A thought I had the other day was to do more of this joint manufacturing and as part of the deal have Canadians either manufacture some of it here or allow our people to go there to work on these defense

contracts.

i worked in an aerospace company during summers, and if i recall several years ago when the Eurofighter was coming up to production Canada had an opportunity to get in but we didnt. i belive that was a big mistake for two reasons, 1) the technological upgrade could have brought us right back beside the US and helped us integrate into nato missions like afganistan and such, thus we could actually send some usefull planes and kill some badguys, 2) by going with european design we could actually maintain an individual military supplier and not just take american leftovers, possibly a good way to pronounce our intent to remain clear headed about our military policy.

i do recall reading an article a month ago criticising the Strykers for not being able to take an explosive round full on. i dont they they were talking about a big tank round, but the worst of the RPGs maybe. anyways, it was critical of the amor plating in terms of the nasty places it would have to go, it wouldnt be taking heavy machine guns, it would be taking the biggest RPGs.

SirRiff

[Communist_boy]

The american army is trying out this vehicle along with a few others as they always do, the fact is, they are complaining about there inability to truly support the troops. They the Lepards are not suited for current conditions, but the truth is, no vehicle is suited for these conditions.

If the want to fix something then buy new helicopters for the navy. The sea kings are a very versatile helicopter, they are one of the most videly used naval helicopters around the world, but the problem with ours is our age. Chretien says that since President Bush uses them then they are good enough for Cnadaian soldiers. America purchased theres in the 1990s and also has a budget that suites them. For every 1 hour flying time we spend 3 hours fixing them.

We canabalies our forces by taking things apart to fix other things. I think that the Military requires a major budjet infusion. I also think that the outgoing PM should get going and let Martin take over.

[Schilly]

^agreed, a huge increase in military spending should be expected from the next PM if he wants to do the right things...

[Black Dog]

Another band-aid solution. All the new equipment in the world, even a massive (and IMO unecessary) spending increase won't mean a damn thing if our Armed Forces continue to flounder about with no clearly defined role. A comprehensive review of the CF should be the first order of business. Canada's military cannot be all things to all people. We need to focus on the morst pressing needs of our nation (ie. maintaining territorial integrity and soverignty, domestic roles) before we even think of increasing our committment to peacekeeping or the farce that is The War Against Terror.

[Communist_boy]

Another band-aid solution. All the new equipment in the world, even a massive (and IMO unecessary) spending increase won't mean a damn thing if our Armed Forces continue to flounder about with no clearly defined role. A comprehensive review of the CF should be the first order of business.

the fact is, they have a pretty clearly defined role, The fundamental goal of DND and the CF is to protect Canada, and Canadian interests and values, while contributing to international peace and security.

that is text taken strait from there mandate.

[Black Dog]

The fundamental goal of DND and the CF is to protect Canada, and Canadian interests and values, while contributing to international peace and security.

Gee, that's not vague at all.

Sorry, but "mission satements" don't cut it. There are serious questions to be asked, and we need to establish what kind of jobs we want our Forces to be able to do.

Personally, I think the CF is plenty well-funded. It's just that there's far too much waste and inefficiency.

[KrustyKidd]

The fundamental goal of DND and the CF is to protect Canada, and Canadian interests and values, while contributing to international peace and security.

Gee, that's not vague at all.

Sorry, but "mission satements" don't cut it. There are serious questions to be asked, and we need to establish what kind of jobs we want our Forces to be able to do.

Personally, I think the CF is plenty well-funded. It's just that there's far too much waste and inefficiency.

CAF Mandates in Order of Priority.

!. Defense of Canada

2. Aid to the Civil Power

3. Defense of North America

4. NORAD

5. NATO Commitments

6. UN Commitments

7. Search and Rescue

Note that bombing the hell out of the Serbs did not fit into any of these Mandates but you don't hear much about that.

[Black Dog]

CAF Mandates in Order of Priority.

!. Defense of Canada

2. Aid to the Civil Power

3. Defense of North America

4. NORAD

5. NATO Commitments

6. UN Commitments

7. Search and Rescue

Again: all well and good, but it seems to me people are constantly bitching about the state of dissaray the Forces are in. What's wrong with focussing on whatever we do best. The above is a tall order.

Note that bombing the hell out of the Serbs did not fit into any of these Mandates but you don't hear much about that.

Nor is "blasting hell out of Iraqis" but you sure heard a lot of whining when we didn't do that.

[KrustyKidd]

CAF Mandates in Order of Priority.

!. Defense of Canada

2. Aid to the Civil Power

3. Defense of North America

4. NORAD

5. NATO Commitments

6. UN Commitments

7. Search and Rescue

Again: all well and good, but it seems to me people are constantly bitching about the state of dissaray the Forces are in. What's wrong with focussing on whatever we do best. The above is a tall order.

Note that bombing the hell out of the Serbs did not fit into any of these Mandates but you don't hear much about that.

Nor is "blasting hell out of Iraqis" but you sure heard a lot of whining when we didn't do that.

It is not a tall order. My job is to dres for work, show up, do my thing, not kill anybody, get paid, go home, play dad, take care of some house chores and relax so I can be mentally and physically prepared to do it again the following day. These things are not all crammed into the same minute as they take place at different times and some of them do not take place at all. It's priorities. That's all. The list I provided is the official one. If followed it sets the priorities for the allocation of personel and materials. If for example we are patrolling our coast lines with all our ships we cannot send any to aid the UN.

Iraq was in violation of the 1991 cease fire so it was still legal to partake in Gulf II as Gulf I had never ended.

[Boydfish]

Note that bombing the hell out of the Serbs did not fit into any of these Mandates but you don't hear much about that.

Refer to point #5; Kosovo was done under a NATO mandate.

[Lost in Manitoba]

I've heard over the past year interviews with senior officers of the CF who have all reiterated the need for a clear objective for our millitary. People don't seem to want a huge war machine like the US, who's role is whatever the gov't wants it to be. Give them a Defense/peace keeping role with clear terms of what they can and can't do, where they can and can't go, and where their ultimate obligations lie (Obviously 1st is defense, but who are our allies? Do we go to war for the UN or is NATO just as valid?)

[KrustyKidd]

Note that bombing the hell out of the Serbs did not fit into any of these Mandates but you don't hear much about that.

Refer to point #5; Kosovo was done under a NATO mandate.

NATO is a defense organisation, not a problem fixer like the UN. If one is attacked they all defend. Serbia did not attack any NATO country.

[Boydfish]

NATO is a defense organisation, not a problem fixer like the UN. If one is attacked they all defend. Serbia did not attack any NATO country.

That depends on your definition of attacked and if you actually think that the UN is a problem "fixer".

First, were we to play it on strict terms, the Serbs became valid military targets for NATO the first moment they opened fire on Canadian troops, no matter if they were wearing blue beanies or not. An attack on the citizens of a nation(Which, in case you weren't aware, CF troops are.)are an act of war.

Next, if you want to move into less technical terms, nations have a right, in fact a duty, to act in the best interests of humanity. Mass murder is mass murder, no matter if committed under the orders of a government.

NATO is an organization of nations; "NATO" in and of itself is unable to do anything. It is simply the vehicle from which the will of those collective nations. If the NATO countries feel that taking action under that treaty is appropriate, then it is appropriate under the treaty.

The UN proved in Rwanda and Iraq that it does nothing of value anymore. They need to be cut down to a simple talking room and nothing more.

[KrustyKidd]

If by "strict" you mean out to lunch then sure. I would suppose that a Canadian beaten in a Mexican jail is reason for the Belgians to mobilize to attack Mexico. I doubt that is you supposition and also doubt that NATO was formed to do what is right around the world. It was merely an organization that had the power to do what was right at the time.

Funny isn't it? NATO had more moral grounds to bomb the Serbs and no legal ones yet the US is blamed for continuing Gulf I because Iraq never abided by the ceasefire?

[Boydfish]

But Kosovo isn't in Mexico, it's in Europe, where all but two of the members of NATO are. This was not a "Save the World" mission for NATO, this was a "No more land wars in Europe" mission.

[KrustyKidd]

Ah, got it. Not the defense of NATO then, (like it's mandate dictates) but rather "premption"?