Multi Domain Task Force - Canada

[KevinB]

@KevinB

You asked if I was sure that you would want us.

Canada Joining Iron Dome Missile Defense Plan Would Be Welcome: NORAD Boss

Cooperation on new space-based sensors might be a starting place for the U.S. and Canada on joint missile defense, but major hurdles remain.

www.twz.com

Are you sure we want you?

I mean I wouldn’t have us at this point.

 

[OldSolduer]

It used to be closing with and 'destroying' the enemy.

Did we just get 'woked' into engaging the enemy now? I'll just assume 'convening with' will be added at some point

Well the language started changing a number of years ago. We don't kill people we "neutralize" them. Want to
"neutralize" the enemy? Kill lots of them.

The Role of the Infantry is to close with and destroy the enemy in all types of weather and terrain IIRC.

 

[Kirkhill]

I mean I wouldn’t have us at this point.

Hang tough mate. The future has yet to be seen.

 

[FJAG]

They have legal obstacles, but they assume they can jump over them.

Ah! The old "we want to do this but our lawyers won't let us," stall tactic.

 

[Kirkhill]

Ah! The old "we want to do this but our lawyers won't let us," stall tactic.

What was the opinion of Hitler's lawyers on Belgian neutrality?

 

[Blackadder1916]

What was the opinion of Hitler's lawyers on Belgian neutrality?

It would be more Hitler's opinion of lawyers that shapes his acceptance of legal advice.

“. . . make every German realize that it is a disgrace to be a lawyer.”

“. . . every lawyer must be regarded as a man deficient by nature or else deformed by usage.”

"The lawyer’s profession is essentially unclean, for the lawyer is entitled to lie to the court . . . The lawyer looks after the underworld with as much love as owners of shoots taking care of their game during the closed season. There will always be some lawyer who will jiggle with the facts until the moment comes when he will find extenuating circumstances . . ."

 

[FJAG]

Ah! The @dapaterson school of opinions about lawyers.

 

[dapaterson]

Ah! The @dapaterson school of opinions about lawyers.

Corrupt lawyers make the other 5% look bad

 

[FJAG]

Corrupt lawyers make the other 5% look bad

I have to hand it to you. That was a good one.

 

[daftandbarmy]

TLDR and I assume it hasn't been shared somewhere else yet... brace yourself for those 'agile' graphs

The Agile U.S. Army Division in a Multidomain Environment​

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-Edition-Archives/SO-24/SO-24-Army-Division/

 

[Kirkhill]

Interesting excerpt from an article in the National Post.

Boivin is concerned with the increased friction playing out over the Arctic between Russian and American aircraft, as well as our own. “This is why we’re completely revamping how we approach Operation Nanook,” he said, referring to a defence exercise the Canadian military carries out as often as five times a year to develop more expertise in the challenging environment.

The CAF is “taking it from a sovereignty operation to an all-domain operation where we’re going to bring in land, aerospace, maritime, cyber and space capabilities on a near-permanent basis,” Boivin said.

The idea is “to detect, deter and, if required, defend,” he said, noting the U.S. and other allies have expressed an interest in participating in the Nanook operation.

Canada's boutique military: 'Should we not be able to defend ourselves?'

Canada's armed forces are facing decades of neglect, insiders say. From ships to soldiers, here's what it will take to be prepared.

nationalpost.com

That sounds an awful lot like a Multi-Domain Task Force. Does it mean a revamp of Joint Task Force - North as an MDTF within NORAD? Or does it mean changing the focus of 6 CCSB from a provider of support to the Army to being the lead element of the Army?

 

[Kirkhill]

Interesting excerpt from an article in the National Post.

Canada's boutique military: 'Should we not be able to defend ourselves?'

Canada's armed forces are facing decades of neglect, insiders say. From ships to soldiers, here's what it will take to be prepared.

nationalpost.com

That sounds an awful lot like a Multi-Domain Task Force. Does it mean a revamp of Joint Task Force - North as an MDTF within NORAD? Or does it mean changing the focus of 6 CCSB from a provider of support to the Army to being the lead element of the Army?

Or could it mean tasking 6 CCSB to JTF-N?

 

[Fabius]

I’m going to say that 6 CCSB is not related to the comments by Comd CJOC in any way.

The multi domain integration being discussed is between the various L1/2s; RCN, CA, RCAF, CAFCYBERCOM, and 3rd Cdn Space Division.

I suspect the actual integration point will be JTF-N and CJOC itself.

 

[ueo]

I’m going to say that 6 CCSB is not related to the comments by Comd CJOC in any way.

The multi domain integration being discussed is between the various L1/2s; RCN, CA, RCAF, CAFCYBERCOM, and 3rd Cdn Space Division.

I suspect the actual integration point will be JTF-N and CJOC itself.

I can Handel some Acros but WTF?

 

[GR66]

I can Handel some Acros but WTF?

I’m going to say that 6 CCSB (6 Canadian Combat Support Brigade) is not related to the comments by Comd CJOC (Canadian Joint Operations Command) in any way.

The multi domain integration being discussed is between the various L1/2s; RCN, CA, RCAF, CAFCYBERCOM, and 3rd Cdn Space Division.

I suspect the actual integration point will be JTF-N (Joint Task Force North) and CJOC itself.

A simple description of L1/L2/L3 that I found on Redit (so stand to be corrected)

A DM (and the Chief of the Defence Staff) is L0. An ADM (or in the CAF, a commander of a command) is L1. A DG (or a formation commander) is L2. A Director (or unit commander) is L3.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Or could it mean tasking 6 CCSB to JTF-N?

I think it is important to understand what 6 CCSB is, what an MDTF is and what JTFN is. The MDTF is a US Army organization with specific capabilities. I don't think it is helpful to simply port that term over to Canada and the Canadian Arctic.

Joint Task Force North (JTFN) is a Force Employer that reports to CJOC. The Op NANOOK series falls under it for planning and execution, assisted by the various L1s (CA, RCN, RCAF, Cyber, CANSOF etc) that contribute elements.

There is a maritime-focused NANOOK-TUUGAALIK, a multiagency/whole of government disaster response NANOOK-TAGIGIIT, a winter NANOOK-NUNALIVUT and a summer NANOOK-NUNAKPUT focused on the NW Passage and this year there will be a NANOOK-TAKUNIQ that will be Canadian Ranger-focused operation that includes integration of other elements. A given Op NANOOK activity (or any other activity) can have Space and Cyber aspects. I think that Op NANOOK will be drawn out longer to have a more sustained presence. It already has allied participation. There are limits on how many troops can be put into one place at one time, so spreading it out makes sense.

6 CCSB is a Canadian Army brigade that houses a number of capabilities that are not easy fits into the CMBGs. 6 CCSB is not about Space and Cyber. It always has people deployed and is always getting people ready to deploy. I am not sure that JTFN needs an entire Intelligence Regiment. The CA Int Regt has MI Coys that support the CMBGs and generates Int folks for deployments. While 4 Engineer Support Regt (4 ESR) has sent people up north (including helping with the water situation in Iqaluit in 2022) it has potential tasks around the world. 4 Regt (GS) has Btys to cycle through Latvia. 21 EW Regt also has a standing Latvia commitment. The IATF also has international tasks.

Could a situation arise where 6 CCSB elements are incorporated into a JTFN operation? Of course. To your question, could the Canadian Army contribution to an operation under JTFN be 6 CCSB-centric? Sure? That would be driven by the task/requirement. For example, if we needed to create or enhance a logistical hub in a hurry then 4 ESR could be part of that solution and might be the lead mounting unit for the CA's contribution.

 

[Kirkhill]

I think it is important to understand what 6 CCSB is, what an MDTF is and what JTFN is. The MDTF is a US Army organization with specific capabilities. I don't think it is helpful to simply port that term over to Canada and the Canadian Arctic.

Joint Task Force North (JTFN) is a Force Employer that reports to CJOC. The Op NANOOK series falls under it for planning and execution, assisted by the various L1s (CA, RCN, RCAF, Cyber, CANSOF etc) that contribute elements.

There is a maritime-focused NANOOK-TUUGAALIK, a multiagency/whole of government disaster response NANOOK-TAGIGIIT, a winter NANOOK-NUNALIVUT and a summer NANOOK-NUNAKPUT focused on the NW Passage and this year there will be a NANOOK-TAKUNIQ that will be Canadian Ranger-focused operation that includes integration of other elements. A given Op NANOOK activity (or any other activity) can have Space and Cyber aspects. I think that Op NANOOK will be drawn out longer to have a more sustained presence. It already has allied participation. There are limits on how many troops can be put into one place at one time, so spreading it out makes sense.

6 CCSB is a Canadian Army brigade that houses a number of capabilities that are not easy fits into the CMBGs. 6 CCSB is not about Space and Cyber. It always has people deployed and is always getting people ready to deploy. I am not sure that JTFN needs an entire Intelligence Regiment. The CA Int Regt has MI Coys that support the CMBGs and generates Int folks for deployments. While 4 Engineer Support Regt (4 ESR) has sent people up north (including helping with the water situation in Iqaluit in 2022) it has potential tasks around the world. 4 Regt (GS) has Btys to cycle through Latvia. 21 EW Regt also has a standing Latvia commitment. The IATF also has international tasks.

Could a situation arise where 6 CCSB elements are incorporated into a JTFN operation? Of course. To your question, could the Canadian Army contribution to an operation under JTFN be 6 CCSB-centric? Sure? That would be driven by the task/requirement. For example, if we needed to create or enhance a logistical hub in a hurry then 4 ESR could be part of that solution and might be the lead mounting unit for the CA's contribution.

Thanks for that.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I think it is important to understand what 6 CCSB is, what an MDTF is and what JTFN is. The MDTF is a US Army organization with specific capabilities. I don't think it is helpful to simply port that term over to Canada and the Canadian Arctic.

Joint Task Force North (JTFN) is a Force Employer that reports to CJOC. The Op NANOOK series falls under it for planning and execution, assisted by the various L1s (CA, RCN, RCAF, Cyber, CANSOF etc) that contribute elements.

There is a maritime-focused NANOOK-TUUGAALIK, a multiagency/whole of government disaster response NANOOK-TAGIGIIT, a winter NANOOK-NUNALIVUT and a summer NANOOK-NUNAKPUT focused on the NW Passage and this year there will be a NANOOK-TAKUNIQ that will be Canadian Ranger-focused operation that includes integration of other elements. A given Op NANOOK activity (or any other activity) can have Space and Cyber aspects. I think that Op NANOOK will be drawn out longer to have a more sustained presence. It already has allied participation. There are limits on how many troops can be put into one place at one time, so spreading it out makes sense.

6 CCSB is a Canadian Army brigade that houses a number of capabilities that are not easy fits into the CMBGs. 6 CCSB is not about Space and Cyber. It always has people deployed and is always getting people ready to deploy. I am not sure that JTFN needs an entire Intelligence Regiment. The CA Int Regt has MI Coys that support the CMBGs and generates Int folks for deployments. While 4 Engineer Support Regt (4 ESR) has sent people up north (including helping with the water situation in Iqaluit in 2022) it has potential tasks around the world. 4 Regt (GS) has Btys to cycle through Latvia. 21 EW Regt also has a standing Latvia commitment. The IATF also has international tasks.

Could a situation arise where 6 CCSB elements are incorporated into a JTFN operation? Of course. To your question, could the Canadian Army contribution to an operation under JTFN be 6 CCSB-centric? Sure? That would be driven by the task/requirement. For example, if we needed to create or enhance a logistical hub in a hurry then 4 ESR could be part of that solution and might be the lead mounting unit for the CA's contribution.

Beyond the pointy end that we could provide, it would seem the logistical needs and effort likley is double or triple of that to keep even one rifleman operational up there, than elsewhere?

It would seem that logistical hubs will be the centre of gravity in the Arctic, that need to be built, stocked, resupplied and protected, in order to project military power, in any particular portion of the Arctic.

 

[Kirkhill]

Northern Assessment


Nunavut - 36,858 (2,039,000 km2)
Northwest Territories - 41,070 (1,346,000 km2)
Yukon - 46,704 (482,443 km2)
-------------------------------------
124,632 Inhabitants
48,541 in Yellowknife and Whitehorse.
3,867,443 km2 (39% of Canada)


Labrador - 26,655 (294,330 km2)
Abitibi-Baie James-Nunavik-Eyou - 89,087 (854,754 km2)
Cote Nord - Kawawachikamach - Nitassinan - 92,518 (234,442 km2)
Kapuskasing-Timmins-Mushkegowuch - 93,948 (251,599 km2)
Thunder Bay - Superior North - 82,651 (87,965 km2)
Kenora - Kiiwetinoong - 61,962 (321,741 km2)
Churchill - Keewatinook Aski - 81,258 (494,701 km2)
Desnethe - Missinippi-Churchill River - 37,845 (342,903 km2)
Fort McMurray - Cold Lake - 110,163 (76,006 in the town of Fort McMurray, 15,661 in Cold Lake) - 19,000 (142,981 km2)
Peace River - Westlock - 113,907 (6619 in the town of Peace River, 4921 in Westlock) (105,095 km2)
Grande Prairie - 106,738 (70,385 in the town of Grande Prairie) (58,825 km2)
Prince George - Peace River - Northern Rockies - 116,962 (76,708 in the town of Prince George) (249,110 km2)
Skeena - Bulkley Valley - 89,689 (12,300 in the town of Prince Rupert) (327,275 km2)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,129,575 Total Inhabitants
264,251 in Prince George, Fort McMurray, Grande Prairie and Timmins.
3,593,796 km2 - (36% of Canada)


Greenland - 56,865
Alaska - 740,133

....

74% of Canada in inhabited by 1,254,207 people, majority First Nations and the majority of the 1,807,250 Canadians that self-identify as First Nations.

3 territories and 13 federal ridings within provincial boundaries.

....

Seems to me like a very small number of people to keep happy given the potential consequences of them fully realizing their aboriginal title.

 

[ueo]

A simple description of L1/L2/L3 that I found on Redit (so stand to be corrected)

Um OK, still a bit at sea but nearing land. Thanx