# CAF international bases, staging areas, and fighting formations



## R031button (2 Jun 2011)

From the CBC today

Canada considering international bases: MacKay

By Laura Payton, CBC News

Canada is looking at setting up bases around the world to better position the military to participate in international missions, Defence Minister Peter MacKay confirmed Thursday.

The Canadian Forces does "prudent planning," MacKay told reporters, taking into account the ability to participate in international missions.

"As we look out into the future what we obviously try to do is anticipate where and when we will be needed, but it's difficult with any certainty to make those plans, without talking to other countries, without doing internal examinations," he said.

"The focus of the planning, let's be clear, is our capability for expeditionary participation in international missions.... We are big players in NATO. We're a country that has become a go-to nation in response to situations like what we're seeing in Libya, what we saw in Haiti...

"We are constantly working within that paradigm of countries, to see where we can bring that niche capability to bear. It's part of planning and preparation, in conjunction with our equipment needs."

A report in Montreal newspaper Le Devoir said the Canadian Forces is negotiating to set up bases under a program known as the Operational Support Hubs Network. They've reportedly already completed negotiations with Germany and Jamaica, and are in talks with Kuwait, Senegal, Kenya or Tanzania, Singapore and South Korea.

Canada did have a base in the United Arab Emirates, known as Camp Mirage, to ease access to Afghanistan, but was kicked out after a dispute over commercial landing rights in Canada.

The Canadian Forces had to scramble to set up an alternative base in Cyprus.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/06/02/pol-military-bases.html

I'll take a posting to Jamaica...


----------



## Infanteer (2 Jun 2011)

Here is a useful international base:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/HMS_Bulwark.jpg


----------



## helpup (2 Jun 2011)

Heck we are still waiting for our Roll on Roll off ships


----------



## helpup (2 Jun 2011)

I can see the need for foreign bases but I do not see it happening any time soon, unless it is another "temp" one in the UAE


----------



## dapaterson (2 Jun 2011)

"Operational Support Hub" suggests pre-positioned stores and equipment, not a NATO HR brigade - probaly a handful of Canadian staff, and locals to do much of the work.

So this is not a return to CFE but any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## R031button (2 Jun 2011)

Agreed, an network airstrips and ports located close to a potential area of operations. Small staff and potentially a small security detachment, capable of pushing out equipment and otherwise supporting Ops.


----------



## helpup (2 Jun 2011)

Agreed I don't see it being more then a corner of a Airbase somewhere that has LO's and some staff.  I don't even see major  deployment of equipment unless needed.  But I still don't see it happening any time soon.


----------



## dimsum (2 Jun 2011)

Germany, Singapore or SK for me please.  Thanks.    ;D


----------



## HavokFour (2 Jun 2011)

Wouldn't it be easier to ask the US to share a few of their overseas bases?


----------



## dapaterson (2 Jun 2011)

HavokFour said:
			
		

> Wouldn't it be easier to ask the US to share a few of their overseas bases?



Even if we rent a shed on a US base, we still require status-of-forces and other agreements with the country that US base is in.


----------



## R031button (2 Jun 2011)

And they can say no.


----------



## Kirkhill (2 Jun 2011)

Stop me if you have heard this one.....Floating warehouses......

Flat top built to civvy standards and parked at a "friendly" dock (A Shearwater type location).   In the event of crisis they can move closer to the crisis.   In the event the "friendly" dock becomes "unfriendly" they can get out of Dodge.


----------



## jollyjacktar (2 Jun 2011)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Here is a useful international base:
> 
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/HMS_Bulwark.jpg



Now you're talking.   :nod:


----------



## medicineman (2 Jun 2011)

Doesn't that go back to that " I think we should have Marines" petition though?

MM


----------



## aesop081 (2 Jun 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Doesn't that go back to that " I think we should have Marines" petition though?
> 
> MM



I dont know about that, with the threat of a US invasion of Canada, who needs international bases ?


----------



## medicineman (2 Jun 2011)

We could preposition things in the US and counterstrike from the rear?  Or would that be more like a Trojan Rabbit a la Search for the Holy Grail?

MM


----------



## Journeyman (2 Jun 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Or would that be more like a Trojan Rabbit Beaver  a la Search for the Holy Grail?


----------



## McG (2 Jun 2011)

Would this be any different than the NAMSA stuff that we had in Italy until recently?


----------



## helpup (2 Jun 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Doesn't that go back to that " I think we should have Marines" petition though?
> 
> MM




 :rofl:

But along the lines of flat tops.............. Dirgables are the way of the future.  But what would we call those who deployed from them.  "Aeromarines"   Lets start a petition for half of what we need.  75 000 Aereomarines.  ;D


----------



## GAP (2 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I dont know about that, with the threat of a US invasion of Canada, who needs international bases ?



Pfft....all we need is a base in the US.....that'll confuse them...... :nod:


----------



## captloadie (3 Jun 2011)

The Hub idea has been around for 5 years now, with work being done on and off as there were staff officers available to do it. Many of the locations would actually have no personnel, just space and services contracted that we could call up/move in to when required.

At least that was the plan 2 years ago.


----------



## helpup (3 Jun 2011)

I dont have time to cut and paste it but there was a follow on article where DND clarified the orriginal story.  We are not looking for new base but as some on here hinted at.  We are looking for agreements with other governments on use of facilities in thier country.  The proper name for it escapes me.

I still think we need Blimps


----------



## vonGarvin (3 Jun 2011)

You all have it wrong.  This is what we need:


----------



## helpup (3 Jun 2011)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> You all have it wrong.  This is what we need:



hmm, well it is not SHIELD's Command Carrier,  I don't think it is Bond's SPECTRE, Is it the Black Spectre's airship?

I wonder how many Aereonaughts and Aeromarines will it hold?   ;D


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (3 Jun 2011)

Of course not: It's SPECTRUM's base- saving us from the Mysterons.

Can we all get Captain Scarlet's powers so we too can continually come back from the dead to fight another day? 

All joking aside, the bases do exist: They are called Amphibious Assault Ships. Many types and sizes are available in any colour you want ... as long as its grey.


----------



## Privateer (3 Jun 2011)

I think (hope?) that the Government is just laying the foundation for a new HMC Dockyard in a new, 11th province... The Province of Turks and Caicos!

Random link to (old) article on topic: http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showthread.php/273-Turks-and-Caicos-Islands-to-join-Canada


----------



## helpup (3 Jun 2011)

Ahhh ok it is a concept carrier for the Company Spectrum.  I couldnt make out the U


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (3 Jun 2011)

No, No, No!  Not a concept. That thing actually flew in the 60's: I saw it on TV


----------



## aesop081 (3 Jun 2011)

Privateer said:
			
		

> I think (hope?) that the Government is just laying the foundation for a new HMC Dockyard in a new, 11th province... The Province of Turks and Caicos!
> 
> Random link to (old) article on topic: http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showthread.php/273-Turks-and-Caicos-Islands-to-join-Canada



I dont know about that but you can bet there will be an air station with an Aurora regularly flying from it.


----------



## dimsum (3 Jun 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I dont know about that but you can bet there will be an air station with an Aurora regularly flying from it.



...and all of a sudden 405 LRP Sqn will be a popular posting!


----------



## aesop081 (3 Jun 2011)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> ...and all of a sudden 405 LRP Sqn will be a popular posting!



Rotating detachment from both East and West LRP squadrons.


----------



## Sub_Guy (3 Jun 2011)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> ...and all of a sudden 405 LRP Sqn will be a popular posting!



It would take much more than that for 405 to become a popular spot.  At least here in YQQ everyday is a day in paradise, and I don't have to rely on TD's for it.


----------



## Privateer (3 Jun 2011)

And Pusser could wear those No. 5D's I know he must have in his closet somewhere...


----------



## The Bread Guy (14 Feb 2012)

One in Germany...


> Today, the Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence, was joined by his counterpart, the Minister of Defence from the Federal Republic of Germany, Dr. Thomas de Maizière, to announce the location of the new Canadian Forces’ European Operational Support Hub at Germany’s Köln-Bonn airport.
> 
> (....)
> 
> In 2009, with the consent of the German government, the Canadian Forces operated European Operational Support Hub at the United States Air Force base at Spangdahlem, Germany. This small logistics hub was instrumental in ensuring the Canadian Forces could move vital supplies and personnel in support of operations in Afghanistan. This previous arrangement serves as the basis for the more permanent European Operational Support Hub that will be established at Köln-Bonn ....


CF news release, 14 Feb 12


----------



## TN2IC (14 Feb 2012)

POSTING MESSAGE SOLD!!!!! Where do I sign up?


----------



## Wookilar (14 Feb 2012)

lol no doubt.

I wonder if this will come with an increase in postings or if this is one of those smoke and mirror type announcements that say something "new" but things stay the same.

Wook


----------



## TN2IC (14 Feb 2012)

99 Red Luft Balloons... here I come!


----------



## George Wallace (14 Feb 2012)

Bonn is such a boring town.......even more so now that everthing has  moved to Berlin.......Now...... Berlin is a happening place to be.


----------



## vonGarvin (14 Feb 2012)

Ich kann Deutsch!  Ich will dahin!


(Braucht man einen Infanterieoffizier bei deisem Hauptquartier?)   ;D


----------



## TN2IC (14 Feb 2012)

Ich will auch gehen. Müssen sie Treiber?


----------



## armyvern (14 Feb 2012)

Back of the bus gentlemen.


----------



## vonGarvin (14 Feb 2012)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Back of the bus gentlemen.


Ich habe überhaupt nichts verstanden.  Noch mal, bitte?  


 ;D


----------



## armyvern (14 Feb 2012)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Ich habe überhaupt nichts verstanden.  Noch mal, bitte?
> 
> 
> ;D



Oh, you get it!! It's Valentine's Day, you should treat me!!

Ein großes bier und eine frites mit mayo ... schnell!!


----------



## Old Sweat (14 Feb 2012)

Yeah, and I understood what you both typed. Just admit you are over the hill and the excitement of Europe is for those with a full career to enjoy.

Holy Crap, I'm fracked now!!


----------



## armyvern (14 Feb 2012)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Yeah, and I understood what you both typed. Just admit you are over the hill and the excitement of Europe is for those with a full career to enjoy.
> 
> Holy Crap, I'm fracked now!!



I'm gonna go all ginja ninja on you!!


----------



## vonGarvin (14 Feb 2012)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Ein großes bier und eine frites mit mayo ... schnell!!


Jawohl!


----------



## armyvern (14 Feb 2012)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Jawohl!



Mmmmmmmmmmm,

Zu langsam; aus dem bus !!  >


----------



## vonGarvin (14 Feb 2012)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Mmmmmmmmmmm,
> 
> Zu langsam; aus dem bus !!  >



/steigt aus, bringt den Bier und Pommes mit!


----------



## armyvern (14 Feb 2012)

Beißen mir !!  :nana:


----------



## vonGarvin (14 Feb 2012)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Beißen mir !!  :nana:


GERN!  ;D



Jetzt wird was los, oder?   :nod:


----------



## armyvern (14 Feb 2012)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> GERN!  ;D
> 
> 
> 
> Jetzt wird was los, oder?   :nod:



Just a normal conversation between friends!! That's all; they'll move along.  8)


----------



## TN2IC (14 Feb 2012)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Back of the bus gentlemen.



Nein... I drive the BUS!!!!! You get off, haha.


I WIN..


----------



## captloadie (15 Feb 2012)

I hate to burst any of those 99 Red Balloons, but from what I have heard, they are basically picking up the 4 or 5 positions that were in Spangdhelam and moving them to Koln-Bonn. Even the outcan positions that were advertised this year said "position location TBD". Other developments and closures are happening, which will lead to even fewer Outcan positions   :'(


----------



## q_1966 (20 Feb 2012)

Move us to Australia and tell the Americans to stay in Guam 8)


----------



## The Bread Guy (22 Feb 2012)

Some details yet to be worked out, apparently....


> Canadian plans to create a defense logistics hub in Germany are in doubt after complications arising from German objections over potential noise pollution.
> 
> Canada announced plans for opening the hub as it unveiled a long-term strategy to better prepare for overseas military operations.
> 
> ...


UPI, 22 Feb 12


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 Feb 2012)

Mod edit to remove article IAW site owner 3 Feb 11 direction.

*Milnet.ca Staff*


----------



## Kirkhill (23 Feb 2012)

> *Garvens*, with the airport management, said allowing additional military flights from the Canadians "does not fit into our efforts, to keep the noise exposure of the residents as low as possible."



There's the troublemaker.....bloody typical.


----------



## armyvern (23 Feb 2012)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> There's the troublemaker.....bloody typical.



Nice catch!! +300 !!


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Feb 2012)




----------



## armyvern (23 Feb 2012)

Technoviking said:
			
		

>



+300 for you too!! New keyboard!!


----------



## TN2IC (23 Feb 2012)

99 Luftballons
Auf ihrem Weg zum Horizont
Hielt man für Ufos aus dem All
Darum schickte ein General
'ne Fliegerstaffel hinterher
Alarm zu geben, wenn es so wär
Dabei war'n da am Horizont
Nur 99 Luftballons


----------



## armyvern (23 Feb 2012)

Hey Nina, apparently you can`t count!!


----------



## TN2IC (23 Feb 2012)

That's why I'm not supply...


----------



## 6V666 (23 Feb 2012)

If you are not supply what are you? A trucker has to know to count.


----------



## aesop081 (23 Feb 2012)

6V666 said:
			
		

> If you are not supply what are you? A trucker has to know to count.



I am willing to bet that someone in your trade should probably know how to write properly.


----------



## Tom Billesley (25 Feb 2012)

For land bases near current trouble spots there's the British Overseas Territories -sovereign base areas of Dhekelia and Akrotiri on Cyprus and the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean (currently leased to the United States and used as an anchorage for Military Sealift Command MPS). There's also the French islands of Reunion and Mayotte in the Indian Ocean but Mayotte is small and Reunion has occasional volcanic eruptions.  There's French and US military bases at Djibouti on the Red Sea.


----------



## q_1966 (26 Feb 2012)

Tom Billesley said:
			
		

> For land bases near current trouble spots there's the British Overseas Territories -sovereign base areas of Dhekelia and Akrotiri on Cyprus and the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean (currently leased to the United States and used as an anchorage for Military Sealift Command MPS). There's also the French islands of Reunion and Mayotte in the Indian Ocean but Mayotte is small and Reunion has occasional volcanic eruptions.  There's French and US military bases at Djibouti on the Red Sea.



Its probably not good to be on an island, 2012 is coming...now where did I put my tinfoil hat...there it is  :Tin-Foil-Hat:

If we built an aircraft carrier, wouldn't that provide the much needed capability.
Edit: Or a hybrid of the Aircraft Carrier and Helicopter Carrier.


----------



## Gramps (26 Feb 2012)

captloadie said:
			
		

> I hate to burst any of those 99 Red Balloons, but from what I have heard, they are basically picking up the 4 or 5 positions that were in Spangdhelam and moving them to Koln-Bonn. Even the outcan positions that were advertised this year said "position location TBD". Other developments and closures are happening, which will lead to even fewer Outcan positions   :'(



I believe you are correct. Spangdahlem is a great place geographically but it is not the best logistically for many reasons, still I would have loved to have had more than six months there. From what I know it is being moved.


----------



## m2austin (5 Jun 2012)

Article from thestar.com - 5 Jun 2012 - Link <a href="http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1205776--canada-s-military-hunting-for-seven-new-foreign-bases?bn=1">Here</a>



> *Canada’s military hunting for seven new foreign bases*
> Allan Woods
> Ottawa Bureau
> 5 June 2012
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (21 Nov 2012)

Bump with the (related) latest from MERX:


> .... On behalf of the Department of National Defence, a Request For Standing Offers has been issued for the provision of logistics support services to support deployed naval vessels assigned to the Royal Canadian Navy, and any deployed support staffs, or other Canadian Forces elements deployed on an "if and when requested" basis within the following geographical areas:
> 
> - Zone 1: United States West Coast
> - Zone 2: Mexican and Central American West Coast
> ...


----------



## q_1966 (24 Nov 2012)

Fielding a guess for S. America - Pacific Coast: Chile
http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/chile-chili/bilateral_relations_bilaterales/DefenceRelationDefense.aspx?view=d

It was also home to Pacific Station for the Royal Navy in Valparaiso
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Station


----------



## GAP (24 Nov 2012)

ok....that's that 1/2 of the world.....what about the rest of it?


----------



## Journeyman (24 Nov 2012)

GAP said:
			
		

> ok....that's that 1/2 of the world.....what about the rest of it?


The US is "pivoting" towards the Pacific (while now renouncing the term "pivoting" [See Small Wars' Journal,  Rebalancing the US Military for 21st Century Threats] ), so _we're_ focusing on Asia. Keep it simple; no need to drag in strategic forecasts on future threats, because they tend to focus on the Middle East and/or Africa.....and those are just too messy.


----------



## ArmyRick (24 Nov 2012)

Well it will be interesting to see how this unfolds. Will it be like our Joint Support ships and Maritime special ops unit, neither of which seemed to launch?


----------



## Sporadic E (10 Dec 2012)

Bring back CFS Bermuda!


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Sep 2013)

Bumped w/the latest - Japan's in for a base, according to the PM ....


> Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Shinzo Abe, Prime Minister of Japan, today announced that they have reached an agreement in principle on a treaty that will provide a framework for logistics support between the Canadian Armed Forces and Japan’s Self-Defence Force.
> 
> “Canada and Japan enjoy excellent bilateral relations, underpinned by strong cooperation in the areas of commerce and security,” said the Prime Minister.  “Our countries took an important step today towards strengthening bilateral defence relations. We reached an agreement in principle on a mutual logistics treaty that will facilitate the sharing of basic goods and services between Canadian and Japanese Forces, wherever they are working together in the world.”
> 
> The treaty - which will be known as the Canada-Japan Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement - will facilitate future defence cooperation between the two countries. It will allow the Canadian Armed Forces and Japan’s Self-Defence Force to exchange basic goods and services such as fuel, water and facilities wherever both forces are cooperating, including during common training exercises, peacekeeping missions, and humanitarian assistance operations ....


A bit more in the backgrounder here.


----------



## Old EO Tech (25 Sep 2013)

Not quite as nice as a posting to Jamaica, but not to shabby either...

Jon


----------



## GAP (25 Sep 2013)

Are the bases actually minimally staffed/static storage....what's to stop pilfering?


----------



## McG (25 Sep 2013)

The Japan agreement is in the wrong thread.  It is only an agreement for cooperation should we find ourselves working together in a common theatre of operations.  From the backgrounder:



> While the treaty would serve to shape and add momentum to bilateral defence relations, it does not involve the stationing of troops in either country.



Don't be expecting too many Japanese postings from this.


----------



## MilEME09 (25 Sep 2013)

MCG said:
			
		

> The Japan agreement is in the wrong thread.  It is only an agreement for cooperation should we find ourselves working together in a common theatre of operations.  From the backgrounder:
> 
> Don't be expecting too many Japanese postings from this.



True but it could be a stepping stone for something down the road, get the foot in the door and opportunity will create it self.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Sep 2013)

MCG said:
			
		

> The Japan agreement is in the wrong thread.  It is only an agreement for cooperation should we find ourselves working together in a common theatre of operations.


This is based on this:


> Canada and Japan have reached an agreement in principle that would see a Canadian military logistics base established in Japan.
> 
> Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe made an appearance with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Tuesday, before both travel to New York to participate in United Nations discussions.
> 
> ...





			
				MCG said:
			
		

> Don't be expecting too many Japanese postings from this.


You knew what folks were looking for in this, no?   ;D


----------



## Infantryman2b (25 Mar 2014)

With the growing tensions in Europe, would it be smart to reopen a military base in Lahr or elsewhere in Germany? Something like a brigade to bolster NATOs forces and Deter more Russian expansion. Obviously the rest of the west would have to be contributing to an overall reinforcement of the region. What would be the pros and cons of such a move?


----------



## dapaterson (25 Mar 2014)

Cons: Cost.  Lack of personnel.  Lack of equipment.  Lack of well defined role.


Pro: More German beer.


----------



## my72jeep (25 Mar 2014)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Cons: Cost.  Lack of personnel.  Lack of equipment.  Lack of well defined role.
> 
> 
> Pro: More German beer.


Pro: German Women
       Pretzels
       BMW's at cost


----------



## Happy Guy (25 Mar 2014)

Ref: http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/101118.25

As per the above link this topic has already been discussed.  There is an operational support hub (OSB) in Germany but this is not a Canadian garrison like in days past with a CMBG and a CAD.

Cheers


----------



## Infantryman2b (25 Mar 2014)

Yeah I seen the article on the support hub, I'm talking full brigade for the reopen.


----------



## Bluebulldog (25 Mar 2014)

Infantryman2b said:
			
		

> Yeah I seen  saw the article on the support hub, I'm talking full brigade for the reopen.



There FTFY


----------



## medicineman (25 Mar 2014)

I doubt you'd be able to convince the government, much less the Canadian tax payers, that this would be dollars well spent at this point in time.

MM


----------



## Transporter (25 Mar 2014)

medicineman said:
			
		

> I doubt you'd be able to convince the government, much less the Canadian tax payers, that this would be dollars well spent at this point in time.
> 
> MM



And I'm thinking the German government might have a vote also


----------



## Journeyman (25 Mar 2014)

But if it was a _Reserve_ Brigade...you know, 6-7 Regiments with an all-up strength of maybe 400 troops.  It would keep the cost down -- well, except for all the LCols and CWOs.   >


----------



## medicineman (25 Mar 2014)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> But if it was a _Reserve_ Brigade...you know, 6-7 Regiments with an all-up strength of maybe 400 troops.  It would keep the cost down -- well, except for all the LCols and CWOs.   >



400 would likely be the count of all the LCols and CWO's...all had served there in the 60's and 70's and hoping that would count towards their Foreign Service Pay...even more money then.


----------



## OldSolduer (25 Mar 2014)

medicineman said:
			
		

> 400 would likely be the count of all the LCols and CWO's...all had served there in the 60's and 70's and hoping that would count towards their Foreign Service Pay...even more money then.


I never had the opprtunity to serve in Germany. 

I call dibs on the Leave Centre!!!


----------



## Eye In The Sky (25 Mar 2014)

Sounds like there is a need for a Visits and Leave JNCO.  I would be willing to make a sacrifice and go OUTCAN for.  Well heck lets just make it to my CRA.


----------



## dapaterson (25 Mar 2014)

my72jeep said:
			
		

> Pro: German Women
> Pretzels
> BMW's at cost



Are you sure that (East) German women are necessarily a pro?


----------



## George Wallace (25 Mar 2014)

Are you suggesting we rebuild the Wall?    >


----------



## Infantryman2b (25 Mar 2014)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Are you sure that (East) German women are necessarily a pro?



 :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


----------



## OldSolduer (25 Mar 2014)

Katarina Witt was OK, yes? ;D


----------



## CombatDoc (25 Mar 2014)

Infantryman2b said:
			
		

> With the growing tensions in Europe, would it be smart to reopen a military base in Lahr or elsewhere in Germany? Something like a brigade to bolster NATOs forces and Deter more Russian expansion.


Given that the Europeans and the US lack the will to make even the smallest useful gesture to deter Russian expansion, there is no way that Canada is going to "bolster" them with "in situ" forces.  Never mind a war weary and financially fragile US against the backdrop of global financial weakness.  At this point, for example, it is still not clear if France is going to go ahead with their sale of their two "unarmed civilian ships" to Poutin. The EU needs to show that it is a vertebrate.

Canada has been there, done that for forty years of the Cold War, and we are unlikely to redeploy any time soon to Europe.


----------



## MilEME09 (26 Mar 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Are you suggesting we rebuild the Wall?    >



Just moving it east more to poland >


----------



## RADOPSIGOPACCISOP (4 Apr 2014)

Likely these OS Hubs will all be situated inside of existing US or coalition bases. This covers the need for force protection, utility services and access to air or sea ports.

If you want to see where they could or will go, check out major US bases in these areas. We will most likely piggyback off them. No doubt they will open on an as-needed basis during medium to large operations and remain open following the end of the operation on a minimal caretaker status. This way the cost of setting up the base can be rolled into the operational budgets that are often specially assigned outside of the general DND budget.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Apr 2014)

A combined exercise with Poland, flying some of our tanks and LAV's across and deploying there might make for some interesting looks on the world stage. It's not the first time Poles and Canadians worked together either. It might also embarrass NATO into action, because if Canada can step up to the plate, why can't they?


----------



## Transporter (4 Apr 2014)

RADOPSIGOPACISSOP said:
			
		

> Likely these OS Hubs will all be situated inside of existing US or coalition bases. This covers the need for force protection, utility services and access to air or sea ports.
> 
> If you want to see where they could or will go, check out major US bases in these areas. We will most likely piggyback off them. No doubt they will open on an as-needed basis during medium to large operations and remain open following the end of the operation on a minimal caretaker status. This way the cost of setting up the base can be rolled into the operational budgets that are often specially assigned outside of the general DND budget.



Not necessarily. In fact, the first proof-of-concept Hub which was initially established at a USAF base in Germany, has since been moved to the commercial airport at Koln-Bonn for various reasons.


----------



## Gramps (4 Apr 2014)

Transporter said:
			
		

> Not necessarily. In fact, the first proof-of-concept Hub which was initially established at a USAF base in Germany, has since been moved to the commercial airport at Koln-Bonn for various reasons.


With a greatly reduced airflow when compared to that of Spangdahlem when it was up and running at full tempo of course.


----------



## Transporter (4 Apr 2014)

Gramps said:
			
		

> With a greatly reduced airflow when compared to that of Spangdahlem when it was up and running at full tempo of course.



Decision to move had nothing to do with "airflow" or "tempo" so not sure I follow your point... unless you're just simply adding commentary.


----------



## Gramps (4 Apr 2014)

Transporter said:
			
		

> Decision to move had nothing to do with "airflow" or "tempo" so not sure I follow your point... unless you're just simply adding commentary.


Just adding, in Spangdahlem (for six months anyway due to the closure of Camp Mirage) we had a full MAMS team, an ALCE, and loads of work too but also a bit of a different purpose when compared to the OS Hub in Koln-Bonn. Prior to that, Spangdahlem was manned in a similar way that Koln is now.


----------



## Transporter (4 Apr 2014)

Gramps said:
			
		

> Just adding, in Spangdahlem (for six months anyway due to the closure of Camp Mirage) we had a full MAMS team, an ALCE, and loads of work too but also a bit of a different purpose when compared to the OS Hub in Koln-Bonn. Prior to that, Spangdahlem was manned in a similar way that Koln is now.



Now I'm trackin'.


----------



## prairefire (6 May 2014)

Mods please move as required.

Just hypothetically with the recent comments of the military commander of NATO about the need to permanently station troops in Eastern Europe; combined with the sudden European strategic need for Canadian Oil (see the National Post online) is there are a geopolitical, strategic or other reason for the Canadian Government to reestablish 4 CMBG somewhere in Poland or perhaps Romania?

DO we have the military assets and will any government expend the political capital to do so?

Knowing that the limited size of a new 4 CMBG  would be either a Commanders Operational Reserve or a first contact tripwire brigade.

Somehow the world seems to have come full circle to the Cold War NATO scenario several hundred kilometers to the east.............


----------



## Tibbson (7 May 2014)

I dont believe there is the political will and that unless there is a major shift in thinking future governments will be content to take a wait and see approach to spending, doing so only as required and at the last moment.


----------



## MilEME09 (7 May 2014)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> I dont believe there is the political will and that unless there is a major shift in thinking future governments will be content to take a wait and see approach to spending, doing so only as required and at the last moment.



Another Issue would be that NATO members (and not Russia since it pulled out) still adhere to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, signed near the end of the cold war. 



> The CFE Treaty sets equal ceilings for each bloc (NATO and the Warsaw Treaty), from the Atlantic to the Urals, on key armaments essential for conducting surprise attacks and initiating large-scale offensive operations. Collectively, the treaty participants have agreed that neither side may have more than
> 
> 20,000 tanks;
> 20,000 artillery pieces;
> ...




These limits apply to NATO as a whole including the absorbed warsaw pact countries, meaning until NATO kills the treaty the question becomes, after we count everything up how much can Canada legally move into Europe while keeping NATO on the moral high ground?


----------



## pbi (7 May 2014)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> I dont believe there is the political will and that unless there is a major shift in thinking future governments will be content to take a wait and see approach to spending, doing so only as required and at the last moment.



Interesting line of thought. How would this balance, I wonder, against the current (or at least, recently current...) belief that our focus for engagement (political, economic, military) should really be on the Pacific? Is the Ukrainine situation a blip, or is it a return to the status quo of 30 years ago?


----------



## Kirkhill (7 May 2014)

pbi said:
			
		

> Interesting line of thought. How would this balance, I wonder, against the current (or at least, recently current...) belief that our focus for engagement (political, economic, military) should really be on the Pacific? Is the Ukrainine situation a blip, or is it a return to the status quo of 30 years ago?



Do we have the luxury of "focusing"?  Perhaps we need to maintain 360 Situational Awareness and then develop a force capability that is light on its feet and reactive.  Not one that is entrenched and tied down.

CAST/ACE Mobile and not CMBG.


----------



## George Wallace (7 May 2014)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> CAST/ACE Mobile and not CMBG.



One advantage of CMBG is that it is self-sustainable for longer periods when deployed.  CAST/ACE requires more and longer tail to keep it supplied, as it carries much less to keep in Field.

Both would be "Throw away", but the CMBG would have more integral logistic support and capabilities to fight for longer durations without resupply.


----------



## Kirkhill (7 May 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> One advantage of CMBG is that it is sustainable for longer periods when deployed.  CAST/ACE requires more and longer tail to keep it supplied, as it carries much less to keep in Field.
> 
> Both would be "Throw away", but the CMBG would have more integral logistic support and capabilities to fight for longer durations without resupply.



Agreed on all points.  But how long could a CMBG sustain a fight, even with integral logistics?  The piece of the puzzle we never quite got right was being able to sustain either commitment once we started burning through the beans, bullets and bandages and the bodies started coming back.

That tail is a cost I think we will have to absorb no matter which mission we decide to orient around - assuming that we are serious and not just making gestures.

I believe though that that tail is also the most domestically useful portion of the DND budget (for a variety of political, economic and actually useful reasons).  It is also the portion of the operations that are capable of being managed by Civilians, Militia, NavRes, AirRes and Public Private Partnerships.  It doesn't have to eat up the available uniformed manpower.


----------



## George Wallace (7 May 2014)

The CAST/ACE is basically a BG with only a couple of days supplies to fight with.

A CMBG is a Bde Plus, with more firepower and a Svc Bn to keep them in a fight for over a week.






If either one is overrun in 'day one', those are moot points.   :-\


----------



## McG (7 May 2014)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> These limits apply to NATO as a whole including the absorbed warsaw pact countries, meaning until NATO kills the treaty the question becomes, after we count everything up how much can Canada legally move into Europe while keeping NATO on the moral high ground?


So, you are saying we should put an amphibious brigade on Russia's back door, with the US forces in Alaska?


----------



## MilEME09 (7 May 2014)

Perhaps if we were serious we would have both a CMBG and a CAST like element as a rapid reaction force to quickly get reinforcements to the hot spot. Do we have the personal for this? definitely not but it is strategic goals that guide policy towards a end result.



> So, you are saying we should put an amphibious brigade on Russia's back door, with the US forces in Alaska?


Not exactly, though that would be an option, I am more just pointing out we could be at a numbers disadvantage with Russia pulled out, and NATO seems to want to hold onto this treaty


----------



## pbi (7 May 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> One advantage of CMBG is that it is self-sustainable for longer periods when deployed.  CAST/ACE requires more and longer tail to keep it supplied, as it carries much less to keep in Field.
> 
> Both would be "Throw away", but the CMBG would have more integral logistic support and capabilities to fight for longer durations without resupply.



I did AMF(L)/NATo Composite Force deployments a couple of times. The Battalion Group was more sustainable than a simple battalion because it had an NSE that was roughly equivalent in size to a second Admin Company: like having a mini-Svc Bn under command. But, even with that, the AMF(L) Bn Gp wasn't going to last very long in a knock-down, drag-out fight with the Soviets.

The  CAST Bde only deployed once, IIRC, on BRAVE LION. One of the lessons learned was that while we might have been able to drag it to Norway, sustaining it was a totally different story. I think it was from that the nasty nickname "Hong Kong Brigade" arose.  We could probably ship a CMBG to Europe again, and maybe even base it there, but we'd still be faced with how to sustain it once the Svc Bn burnt off its maintenance load. Canada just doesn't have the logistics capacity to sustain mechanized formations in high-intensity combat over such long LOC/SLOC. And saying that "the Americans would do it for us" sort of ignores the serious problems they had themselves  in the Gulf in trying to get everything there in a hurry.


----------



## Happy Guy (7 May 2014)

Sustaining a deployed CMBG requires strategic and operational level logistics / medical / administrative / ADP framework with units and skilled manpower.  A Svc Bn can only support the CMBG but who supports the Svc Bn?  A Joint Task Force Support Group (JTFSG) is required but this would require a significantly high level of national effort in order to get this done.  In this scenario we are talking about a long line of communication, Allies, who face the same constraints as we, so they may not be able to logistically support us with supplies and the need to coordinate contract support with all participating nations.  Back home we would need time to arrange contracts to build up sufficient stocks, ensure an assured source of supply, transport it over there, delivery it to the Svc Bn or forward deployed air field and protect the line of communications.


----------



## Kirkhill (8 May 2014)

Happy Guy said:
			
		

> Sustaining a deployed CMBG requires strategic and operational level logistics / medical / administrative / ADP framework with units and skilled manpower.  A Svc Bn can only support the CMBG but who supports the Svc Bn?  A Joint Task Force Support Group (JTFSG) is required but this would require a significantly high level of national effort in order to get this done.  In this scenario we are talking about a long line of communication, Allies, who face the same constraints as we, so they may not be able to logistically support us with supplies and the need to coordinate contract support with all participating nations.  Back home we would need time to arrange contracts to build up sufficient stocks, ensure an assured source of supply, transport it over there, delivery it to the Svc Bn or forward deployed air field and protect the line of communications.



Happy Guy - have you just described Canada's role in WW2?

Long line of communication - check
Allies constrained - check
Logistic support unavailable - check
(I'll skip contracts - CD Howe will appear)
Stocks to be built and renewed - check
We assure supply - check
We transport it - check
We protect the LoC - check.

If the rest of the world is within range of the guns its factories are non-productive.  Somebody has to "pass the ammunition".  

And somebody has to supply the transport ships and aircraft as well as the escorts.  

How much of that has to be military, how much civvy, how much reg and how much reservist?

We're not talking of revisiting the same scale as WW2 but we are certainly talking the same scope of supply.


----------



## Old Sweat (8 May 2014)

And then there was Operation Broadsword, which really was a staff exercise to study the deployment of 4 CMBG to the Gulf in 1990-1991. The whole thing turned into a contest to see who could think up the most worst case scenarios in order to get the whole thing cancelled. At one stage the casualty estimate for the force was something like 13000 in 30 days combat. I wrote on the estimate something like this was ludicrous - the planners had a brigade suffering more casualties that we suffered at Passchendaele or in Normandy.


----------



## The Bread Guy (15 May 2014)

> Canada and Kuwait have signed a memorandum of understanding to establish an operational support hub in the country for Canadian military forces.
> 
> An operational support hub agreement with countries and local service providers facilitates the movement of Canadian personnel, materiel, equipment and supplies.
> 
> ...


United Press International, 15 May 14

More from Kuwait's info machine here:


> Chief General Staff of the Kuwaiti Army Lt.-Gen. Staff Abdulrahman Mohammad Al-Othman met on Monday with Chief of the Canadian Commander of Maritime Forces Pacific Rear-Admiral Bill Truelove along with his accompanying delegation, during which they discussed a number of issues of common interest.
> During the meeting, the two sides also addressed most important issues concerning bilateral military cooperation and ways to improve them between the two countries, Directorate of Moral Guidance and Public Relations Department at the Defense Ministry said in a press statement.
> The meeting was attended by Deputy Chief of Staff of Kuwait's Army Lieutenant-General Mohammad Khaled Al-Khodr and Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans Major General Bader Hajji Al-Muzain.
> Furthermore, Lieutenant-General Al-Khodr signed with Rear-Admiral Truelove today an agreement on construction of a base for support and logistic operations between Kuwait and Canada, said the statement.
> The signing ceremony was attended by Kuwaiti foreign ministry's Counselor Mohsen Al-Ajmi and Attache Abdulaziz Al-Ibrahim.


----------



## PMedMoe (16 May 2014)

So, we'll leave the 20-odd positions in Kuwait as is?  There's going to be some bored people there....  

I'm unsure as to whether the wording is media interpretation or not.  As far as I know, it was always a hub and not a detachment.  It was a hub when I was there in 2012.   :dunno:


----------



## McG (16 May 2014)

Did we previously have infrastructure or were we squaring in USAF buildings?


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 May 2014)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> I'm unsure as to whether the wording is media interpretation or not.  As far as I know, it was always a hub and not a detachment.  It was a hub when I was there in 2012.   :dunno:


Sounds like it's been a bit of both -- here's the Info-machine's version (highlights mine):


> A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed yesterday in Kuwait City, Kuwait on the establishment of an Operational Support Hub in that country for the Government of Canada. It was signed) by Rear-Admiral W.S. Truelove, Commander Maritime Forces Pacific and Joint Task Force (Pacific), on behalf of Lieutenant-General Stu Beare, Commander, Canadian Joint Operations Command.  Signing on behalf of Kuwait was Lieutenant General Mohammad Khaled Al-Khedher, Deputy Chief of Staff of the Kuwaiti Armed Forces.
> 
> The MOU will allows Canada to establish and maintain an *Operational Support Hub (OSH)* for Canadian Armed Forces personnel, materiel and equipment to transit through Kuwait to and from areas of operation outside of Kuwait, or who may be present in Kuwait.
> 
> ...


----------



## PMedMoe (16 May 2014)

MCG said:
			
		

> Did we previously have infrastructure or were we squaring in USAF buildings?



They're mostly in buildings the Aussies were using (accommodations, ablutions, etc) and much of the work area is a few small buildings near the airfield.  They eat at the DFAC.


----------



## The Bread Guy (12 Mar 2019)

R031button said:
			
		

> ... I'll take a posting to Jamaica...


Took a while, but here you go (via Jamaican media)  ;D


> A Canadian operational support hub (OSH) being mobilised in Jamaica to support Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), will facilitate the provision of logistical support, peacekeeping, development, humanitarian and disaster relief, as well as any other operation that might arise in the region.
> 
> The hub was established in March 2016 in a memorandum of understanding between the governments of Jamaica and Canada to directly support regional disaster mitigation and climate-resilience efforts.
> 
> ...


More @ link


----------



## OceanBonfire (27 Mar 2022)

The Bread Guy said:


> Took a while, but here you go (via Jamaican media)  ;D
> 
> More @ link



An update:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1507362770982998018


----------



## Eye In The Sky (27 Mar 2022)

PMedMoe said:


> So, we'll leave the 20-odd positions in Kuwait as is?  There's going to be some bored people there....


 Hindsight - I guess they ended up not being bored but likely wishing they were?  😁


----------

