The stated foreign policy of Canada seems to disagree with you lol. You happen to see no value in European involvement haha. Ships and planes cant hold ground, no matter how many times we try to rehash that fallacy.
So the Canadian Marine Regiment then? copied off the Dutch Marines perhaps?
And if you cannot control the sea lines of communication then your army languishes without supplies.
110%. Almost like all three services complement each other
It isn't an either/or debate. The last time Canada considered seaborne operations was the CAST combat group and that basically soured DND on the concept. Afghanistan was supplied by an air bridge and IMHO you can't rely on that for MCO in Europe. So yeah. You need sea lanes and a system to make use of them. Canada doesn't have a system because logistics is left as an afterthought until the point where it becomes a problem. Neither the army nor the navy is putting any effort into developing a seal lane logistics system.
Re: Astan, I`d like to see how much of the air supplied logistics were prepositioned to a middle east port?It isn't an either/or debate. The last time Canada considered seaborne operations was the CAST combat group and that basically soured DND on the concept. Afghanistan was supplied by an air bridge and IMHO you can't rely on that for MCO in Europe. So yeah. You need sea lanes and a system to make use of them. Canada doesn't have a system because logistics is left as an afterthought until the point where it becomes a problem. Neither the army nor the navy is putting any effort into developing a seal lane logistics system.
I'm not so sure that was a lesson for those three. It was an issue to an extent but the real lessons were all land and air related.
Gen Rouleau put it best in committee back in late Oct - 75% of all future capital spending into the 2030s is earmarked for the Navy and that that 25% for the Army and Air Force combined is completely unsustainable and will not enable a balanced force.
The "corvette" will take longer, unless we build offshore and minimize Canadiizing it.
But do we need a balanced force? This is not a bullshit question either.
That is something neither of us are qualified to answer. Id suggest yes, you seem to suggest no. All I know is you still need armies to win wars and that our foreign policy is to be able to defend our NATO allies. At the end of the day, that means dudes killing people. We'll see what comes out in the next defence policy. Maybe that changes.
Chatter of a 'GPF' sounds alot like prepping the table for a reduction in the # of Rivers the RCN will get.
