Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC

[Eaglelord17]

IF we started making our own arms, what do y’all think we’d start with?

Ammo is a great place to start, everyone always needs ammo. Weapons systems may or may not be adopted by many, making it a limited market, but say 155 arty shells never go out of popularity. Plus strategically having our own supply is critical as if everyone else needs some and we lack it, odds are we would be bottom of the list to get it.

Barrels are another product which is needed but doesn’t have to be the whole weapons system.

 

[Remius]

I think those things called NORAD and NATO would say otherwise.

Agreed however I suspect that those are still functioning because of the interpersonal relationships that exist at the military level. Created of decades of shared blood, toil and cooperation.

At the political and diplomatic level is the issue.

They are working for now despite attempts from the current administration to undermine them.

 

[PrairieFella]

Why not a Unimog made under license by General Dynamics, like the LVM program?

Because its a GWagon replacement program. Not an LS/ML replacement.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The USA is not a friend. It is not an ally. It is not to be trusted. As soon as CAF GOFOs get that through their skulls we can progress.

As soon as Canadians stop drinking their own anti-Trump bathwater, they can think rationally about the difference between "Trump administration" and "US".

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The USA is not a friend. It is not an ally. It is not to be trusted. As soon as CAF GOFOs get that through their skulls we can progress.

I think those things called NORAD and NATO would say otherwise.

I've been thinking a lot about that type of problem lately. The facts remain that geography and Geo-politics haven't changed since WWII. The physical threats faced by Canada have to come by sea or by air, with the exception of the US. The same goes for them, with the exception of Canada and Mexico. They are not worried about us or Mexico, but they worry about other nations coming at them from Canada or Mexico and will defend themselves from that no matter what.

Therefore, as a first step in keeping the US from acting as they wish in our territory, we have to work with them on joint maritime and air defense, and as those are highly technical forces, it has to be regular forces heavy. Any incursion in our territory by a nation other than the US would necessarily start small, and even then, making it big quickly enough would be incredibly difficult unless that invader had mastery of the sky or oceans around Canada. The most likely scenario for such incursion is obviously the Arctic. Deterrence and repelling of such incursion needs small but highly professional soldiers equipped with high end, highly deployable weapons systems. Again here, it has to be regular forces heavy.

One of the results of the above, as we all know, is that there are a lot of American military personnel serving in our headquarters and bases, just like we have Canadians embedded in US forces, so when it comes to the last potential threat to Canada - a land invasion by the US - we are at a disadvantage in being able to plan and surprise them with our potential defenses.

That's is where I've been thinking that perhaps, on top of DND/CAF we need something that would be akin to a cross of the Swedish Home Guard and Swiss Army dispersed system. A force of say, 300,000 to 400,000 part time soldiers members of battalions dispersed throughout Canada, fully equipped with up-to-date mobile weapons systems, having their own separate minister and administration - away from DND/CAF - but getting their marching orders from CDS through a separate channel. That would equate the Swedish Home Guard part. The Swiss part would be that these battalions and their equipment would be pre-located in various places known only to the Battalion and organized in such way that few if any person in the "Home Guard" would know where they all are, who is in which battalion, and what equipment or specific task each battalion has.

To me, such a Canadian Home Guard, would be credible deterrent to the US, as it would be near impossible for them to know what they face and where in case of invasion.

Anyway, that's just an idea.

 

[Brad Sallows]

"Made in Canada" is just as much an economic mistake as tariffs and "Made in America" (because it tends to increase costs). The mitigating factor is one of the two usual exceptions to protectionism - security - but that is mostly relevant either when you think you're going to end up fighting your supplier, or that your supplier will cut you off, particularly if they need their own output. The latter problem exists for any partnership.

Congress is historically where most of the Canada-US friction originates, just as for them it is our Parliament. Congress is separate from the administration.

A bunch of people provoked by Trump are having their way with Canadian industrial policy; they are in a hurry; they will not rule the roost forever; the "threat" will diminish; everything will cost more (in some cases, much more) than originally budgeted; old interests like the '90s "pro-China" people will crawl back out from under their rocks. A huge risk to Canada is that in a few years we will have sunk a lot of borrowed money into a few things that don't prove out the way they were sold. (When I think of government infrastructure planning and spending, I remember fast ferries, the north shore wastewater treatment plant, long-delayed bridge and tunnel replacements.) In the case of the CAF, we probably will end up with a mix of equipment and capabilities decided not by a grand plan but simply by whoever had ducks in a row to get their spending out the door right now and for the next couple of years.

 

[FJAG]

Because its a GWagon replacement program. Not an LS/ML replacement.

I don't want another GWagon.

IMHO, we need a large fleet of Roshel Senator Pickups as our multipurpose runaround fleet. It's on-the-shelf, and ready to go. To add to that build light, open ISV-like troop carriers on the same chassis for the light infantry.

Let's stay with a keep it simple concept.

 

[Czech_pivo]

I don't want another GWagon.

IMHO, we need a large fleet of Roshel Senator Pickups as our multipurpose runaround fleet. It's on-the-shelf, and ready to go. To add to that build light, open ISV-like troop carriers on the same chassis for the light infantry.

Let's stay with a keep it simple concept.

And to that point, use them in large numbers to equip the 'Canadian Home Guard' that @Oldgateboatdriver is talking about.

 

[Maxman1]

Because its a GWagon replacement program. Not an LS/ML replacement.

Okay, I thought it was an LS replacement.

The Unimog 437 seems like a good LS replacement, since the Zetros 4x4 is closer to the ML in size and capacity.

 

[Halifax Tar]

IF we started making our own arms, what do y’all think we’d start with?

This

 

[Furniture]

"Made in Canada" is just as much an economic mistake as tariffs and "Made in America" (because it tends to increase costs).

Perhaps we need to accept that we need to pay more to ensure that people have jobs that actually exist, and aren't "information age" jobs that will cease to exist as AI progresses.

The mitigating factor is one of the two usual exceptions to protectionism - security - but that is mostly relevant either when you think you're going to end up fighting your supplier, or that your supplier will cut you off, particularly if they need their own output. The latter problem exists for any partnership.

The realistic scenario is that America cuts off supply of parts either as a weapon in the ongoing trade war, or they cut us off because their perceived need is greater than ours. Either way, it's a weakness that we can mitigate against by making things in Canada.

A bunch of people provoked by Trump are having their way with Canadian industrial policy; they are in a hurry; they will not rule the roost forever; the "threat" will diminish; everything will cost more (in some cases, much more) than originally budgeted; old interests like the '90s "pro-China" people will crawl back out from under their rocks.

That is a risk that can happen no matter what we do. By creating jobs, it makes it harder to cut spending in the future.

A huge risk to Canada is that in a few years we will have sunk a lot of borrowed money into a few things that don't prove out the way they were sold.

Like the Cyclone? That happens even when we buy things from others. It is part of the cost of doing business, and Canada needs to grow up and realize defense costs money.

In the case of the CAF, we probably will end up with a mix of equipment and capabilities decided not by a grand plan but simply by whoever had ducks in a row to get their spending out the door right now and for the next couple of years.

So... No different than now, and the last 30+ years.

 

[Grimey]

This

View attachment 98625

Just don’t drop it in the mud.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Just don’t drop it in the mud.

Next

 

[IKnowNothing]

Perhaps we need to accept that we need to pay more to ensure that people have jobs that actually exist, and aren't "information age" jobs that will cease to exist as AI progresses.

Not to mention the direct tax recovery and downstream multipliers that come with spending 10's of billions domestically.

 

[ytz]

IF we started making our own arms, what do y’all think we’d start with?

In the strategy, the government has identified specific strategic capabilities and technologies it wants to see done more at home.

Canada’s Key Sovereign Capabilities
Aerospace - Aerospace Platforms; Avionics; and Aircraft Communications
Ammunition - Common Ammunition; Battle-Decisive Munitions; Small Arms; Missiles and Bombs
Digital Systems - Secure Cloud; Artificial Intelligence; Quantum Computing and Communications; Integrated Command, Control and Communications; High- Assurance Communications Equipment
In-Service Support - Naval; Land; Air
Personnel Protection - Medical Counter Measures
Sensors - Marine Sensors; Quantum Sensors; Electronic Warfare
Space - Space-Based Intelligence; Surveillance and Reconnaissance; Space Domain Awareness; Satellite Communications; Space Launch
Specialized Manufacturing - Land Vehicles / Surface Ships, including Icebreakers and Marine Systems
Training and Simulation - Naval; Land; Air
Uncrewed and Autonomous Systems - Uncrewed and Autonomous Land, Aerial, Underwater and Surface Systems (including Uncrewed Collaborative Platforms)

Canada’s Defence Industrial Strategy - Canada.ca

As the Ministers responsible for Canada’s national defence; research, innovation and industrial development; and defence acquisitions, we are honoured to present Canada’s Defence Industrial Strategy.

www.canada.ca

 

[ytz]

As soon as Canadians stop drinking their own anti-Trump bathwater, they can think rationally about the difference between "Trump administration" and "US".

This is a distinction without a difference as far as procurement is concerned. We have projects they aren't getting calls and emails answered from the US. Or issues slow walked. You may not see that with your retiree hat on. But there are issues when we're dealing with political appointees in the US. I assume the Europeans, Koreans and Japanese have the same problems.

Like I said, this trend is going to be very hard to reverse. And every leader who comes in is going to get briefed about all the challenges.

 

[Remius]

As soon as Canadians stop drinking their own anti-Trump bathwater, they can think rationally about the difference between "Trump administration" and "US".

Stop picking fly shit out of pepper.

You know exactly what @dapaterson was saying.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

If only Canada could pull its head out of its ass and do the same.

What do you mean? That Canada should become an exporter?

What policies (above and beyond those already in place) should we enact?

What specific element in the Defence Industrial Strategy do you think falls short of that goal?

As an aside, Canada is already an exporter, and many more opportunities are opening up. I say this as someone involved in 4 different companies (either mil first or dual-use) that are doing or planning on doing exactly that with, collectively, customers in US, Canada, India, Ukraine, Estonia, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, UK, France, Korea, Singapore, etc to name a few.

So I'm not sure what your point is....