# Canada pledges jets, troops  to NATO Force



## The_Falcon (2 Jan 2005)

I should probably go to bed but instead I will post this


> Sun, January 2, 2005
> 
> 
> Canada pledges jets, troops
> ...


----------



## Bill Smy (2 Jan 2005)

If the deployment of DART is an indication of Canada's concept of rapid deployment, I think NATO would be in for a surprise.


----------



## bossi (2 Jan 2005)

Bill Smy said:
			
		

> If the deployment of DART is an indication of Canada's concept of rapid deployment, I think NATO would be in for a surprise.



Aw, geez ... you guys both beat me to the punch ...   ;D

My other reaction was ... frigates, F-18's ... and our over-worked Army ... riiiiiiiight ...


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (2 Jan 2005)

This is NRF (NATO Response Force) 06.  The units involved (from the Army side anyway) have known about it for almost a year.  Shouldn't be a huge problem.  The story is slightly in error - NRF is currently running (don't ask me which units are earmarked from which countries, but I do know of one Italian Alpini battalion that was pulled off NRF for Afghanistan).


----------



## Sandbag (2 Jan 2005)

Is this what our SHIRBRIG committment is supposed to do?  Or am I really out to lunch on this one?


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (2 Jan 2005)

Nope - totally different.  NRF is a "new" thing.  SHIRBRIG is on a much lower readiness level...and is UN rather than NATO.

Cheers,


----------



## Sandbag (2 Jan 2005)

Teddy R, thanks.   Of course more questions...does this mean earmarked units deploy overseas for a year, or is workup/training done in the first 6 months at home, followed by the 6 month deployment as part of NRF?


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (2 Jan 2005)

Sandbag - no problem...

It's been a few months and I don't want to get into readiness levels on these means.

However, if I remember correctly - meaning I could be stale dated and/or wrong (!) - there's a readiness "window" similar to the old IRF(L).  Meaning: there's a work-up period (starting in xxx 2005), the unit is declared operationally ready (in 2006), then deploys (if required) during the "window" when it is declared to NATO - in all probability for a six month tour (given previous practice).  I can't remember how long the window for NRF is, to be honest...

Hope this helps.


----------



## Sandbag (2 Jan 2005)

Definitely helps, and I suspect I am the one with staledated info. Thanks.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (2 Jan 2005)

Its not a big thing for us to provide a ship we have been providing ships to Standing Force Force Atlantic since its inception with Op Apollo being one of the few times we never provided a CPF or a 280 (only provided when we are in command).


----------



## George Wallace (2 Jan 2005)

Too late to reopen Lahr and Baden, but they would have been great incentives......making it a two to three year posting to a NATO Rapid Response Unit in Europe training with the other partners while 'awaiting the call'.   That would make a little more sense than recreating AMF(L) type of units here with no overlap, nor true experience and commonality with our NATO Partners should the call come to deploy 'rapidly'.  It could be a great way to increase our forces to a fourth Bde and also a great recruiting incentive.  I know I really enjoyed my time on the Rhine.    

D Sqn RCD had that task last year as a NATO RRU and it just seemed to fade out of existence by the time Fall arrived.   How serious is this current Government going to take this commitment?   



GW


----------



## Kirkhill (3 Jan 2005)

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/2005/01/02/pf-804686.html

I guess they must have figured out how to unstick the recruiting and training systems.


----------



## 48Highlander (3 Jan 2005)

This could get emberasing if we actually have to deploy them.


----------



## McG (3 Jan 2005)

I think this is a poorly written article.  We are not committing 5,000 ground troops to a NATO rapid reaction force.  We will commit a BG to a NATO rapid reaction brigade (the entire Bde may be around 5,000 but it will be mostly other members of NATO).

In addition to being able to indefinitely sustain two deployed BGs/TFs, the new managed readiness system will keep a BG in high readiness as a strategic reserve.  Unlike deployments (which rotate after 6 months) this will rotate annually.  This BG will be held to meet our commitment to the brigade, and may (if not deployed operationally during that year) deploy to Europe to participate in an annual NATO brigade exercise.


----------



## X Royal (3 Jan 2005)

Sounds a lot like the AMF of the late 70's early  80's. Only difference is back then the role did not rotate yearly but generally stayed with the same unit and also (although not limited to) an area of responsibility. The Canadian AMF role was the defence of northern Noraway, thus a major NATO EX every second year in Noraway. Prepositioned equipment was also left in Noraway.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (3 Jan 2005)

MCG has it bang on - and this is what I remember as well.  I've been out of the NRF loop for a while now (about six months), but we already know who the BG will be, etc..  All the rolling of eyes at this commitment need to stop - it is more than do-able - with what we have now.

As for "managed readiness" - as an ATOF "survivor", I'll keep my comments to myself!  Wait and see... LOL


----------



## bossi (3 Jan 2005)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> ... As for "managed readiness" - as an ATOF "survivor", I'll keep my comments to myself!   Wait and see ...



ROTFLMAO - thanks for my morning chuckle!  I love the trend to jump on bandwagons such as ASD or "train to need" ... and then watch the wheels fall off the wagon when the light of day reveals "bold, 'new' innovations" to be ... brainfarts ... (but by then, of course, people who got glowing PERs for their masterful strokes have been posted ... and somebody else is left holding the bag ... sigh ...)


----------



## ghazise (3 Jan 2005)

Where is the NRF going to be stationed?


----------



## pbi (3 Jan 2005)

The units tasked to source NRF stay in their home garrisons with all their gear. Eventually the Army will have a suite of kit for a battlegroup pre-positioned at Longue Pointe depot in Montreal, our primary SPOE (Sea Port of Embarkation), but I cannot ever forsee relocating units just to do a short-term task like NRF. Cheers.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (4 Jan 2005)

Our BN was slated for this but last I heard it was canned.  We were suppossed to provide a LAV battalion which would fall under the British.


----------



## McG (4 Jan 2005)

I think 3 VP was to take up the roll by this summer (with the expectation that it could then be launched on the PRT task once decided on by the government).  1 VP would take the reins Feb 06 (same time 2 VP and 2 R22eR will stand up BGs for Afghanistan or wherever).

 . . . at least, that was the managed readiness plan back in Sept.


----------



## Art Johnson (4 Jan 2005)

I hope Acorn has returned from leave and is reading these comments. There is no way that the present government will do the sensible thing. It is not that long ago that PM Chretin sent the Van Doos from Quebec City to the west coast to form a Guard of Honour for a visiting dignitary because the western regiments *were not Canadian enough*.


----------



## ArmyRick (4 Jan 2005)

Art,
We all know what Chretein really thought of the Military and his views in general, 'nuff said on that. He was the 2nd worst PM for our country IMO with Trudeau being the champ, again IMO.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (5 Jan 2005)

Last word I got was that the 1st VP was on standby for 06 with 2 Vandoo and 2VP was in reserve going to the top of the deck in 08.


----------



## Acorn (6 Jan 2005)

I'm back Art, though at the moment I'm not sure about the reference to this thread. 

Anyway, ArmyRick, I have to disagree: Cretien was worse than Trudeau. The latter at least listened to reason when he suggested pulling out of NATO back in the late '60s/early '70s.

Acorn


----------

