Canada doesn’t matter to the rest of the world - and it’s our own fault

[dimsum]

It won’t be spent on any actual operational capability…

Fingers crossed that all CAF members get a doubling of their salaries

 

[Brad Sallows]

Talking about problems is what they do. The "talk" in their minds constitutes a kind of planning, so they claim they have a "plan". The faithful eat it up, and never learn the difference between dreams and deliverables.

 

[CountDC]

It is a tough problem.

For some of the problem set, it doesn’t matter how many people we assign to it. If an applicant is from country “X” and we ask the security service of Country “X” to verify that the applicant is who they say they are, and they don’t respond in a timely fashion (or at all), what is Canada supposed to do?

There are very few places in the CAF where someone can serve for very long with only an Enhanced Reliability Check.

The only way that you get less capability by cutting full-time strength is if you only count and structure full-time strength as the one and only measure of capability.

True enough, the way that DND/CAF is currently structured that is e xactly the way that it works. Full-time strength is all that matters.

IMHO that is the great mistake of how DND/CAF does business. We need to break that paradigm.

Decrease full-time strength and exchange the funding for part-time strength, equipment and training and you increase your capabilities several fold over. In the above SBCT example, converting a brigade from active army to ARNG still leaves you a fully equipped brigade. It is just on a lower level of readiness but has a significantly lower per annum cost. Saved money that can be put towards more equipment to equip another brigade in due course. It's basic math. And I think this math is exactly why the full-time force keeps the part-time force ineffective - in order to justify it's own numbers.

DND/CAF needs to be better at managing that full-time capability that is used routinely in peacetime and balance it against that part-time capability which is available on stand-by. Each has a purpose. The two work together to increase overall defence outputs and capabilities.

Do you really believe any savings from cutting the Reg F would be used for equipment and training? We are short by a large amount so are saving a good amount on wages, don't see it getting us any equipment or training increase. I don't believe for a second that any savings will be adjusted to such things. It will only result in an overall budget cut that will probably snowball. Don't have X numbers to support, need less support staff (CAF and PSAC), less equipment, less bases, etc etc.

Supporting Ukraine is not a reason to give up our own sovereignty.

I'm all about pragmatic solutions, but I suspect the cost of giving up our own defence is far greater than actually pulling our weight.

Do we have our own defence?? I don't think we have had our own defence or pulled our own weight in a very long time. Instead, we have counted on the USA to be there to defend us. It took us until the mid 80s to get a new rifle and we are still using it with some updates (the USA had it in 64). It was nice to be able to fire full auto for a blast (without using a cigarette pack on the C1). With my eyes it was a joy to see scopes added.

Everyone will be happy to know that next year we will become even shorter as all those on medical that would have been retained in the past will now be released. Can't have all these people doing our support work for us while we are understrength. Need to free up those positions for um no one.

 

[Kirkhill]

If all we have are couch potatoes, what can we do with couch potatoes?

 

[MilEME09]

If all we have are couch potatoes, what can we do with couch potatoes?

make couch fries and vodka?

 

[Brad Sallows]

If all we have are couch potatoes, what can we do with couch potatoes?

Train drone operators for air- and land-based drones.

 

[dimsum]

make couch fries and vodka?

 

[FJAG]

Do you really believe any savings from cutting the Reg F would be used for equipment and training? We are short by a large amount so are saving a good amount on wages, don't see it getting us any equipment or training increase. I don't believe for a second that any savings will be adjusted to such things. It will only result in an overall budget cut that will probably snowball. Don't have X numbers to support, need less support staff (CAF and PSAC), less equipment, less bases, etc etc.

You're throwing an absolute on the ground based on what you believe a government will or will not do. Neither you nor I have any actual evidence as to what a future government will do if presented with a specific action plan.

The only thing that your belief leads to is a continuously more expensive full-time pay budget and an ever decreasing capability. That's been the DND/CAF model now for decades with the current results. As they say, "insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." DND/CAF has been doing the same thing over and over while arguing that only more money will make a difference. Let's be clear. The defence budget has increased by $10 billion since 2016 but capabilities have not increased. Maybe once the F-35 and CSC start coming on line but for the army - nada and very little is on the horizon. The army is the problem child that needs fixing.

IMHO it is up to DND/CAF to present better options to government in order to grow army capabilities.

 

[PuckChaser]

They could get to 2% by just replacing our dilapidated infrastructure. As a plus, all those construction contracts can be managed by SNC Lavalin.

 

[MilEME09]

They could get to 2% by just replacing our dilapidated infrastructure. As a plus, all those construction contracts can be managed by SNC Lavalin

Probably take a about ten billion nationally

 

[Aper]

They could get to 2% by just replacing our dilapidated infrastructure. As a plus, all those construction contracts can be managed by SNC Lavalin.

I know a company that could do that. They're efficient as one can expect, even being only 5 in the said company

 

[Halifax Tar]

You're throwing an absolute on the ground based on what you believe a government will or will not do. Neither you nor I have any actual evidence as to what a future government will do if presented with a specific action plan.

The only thing that your belief leads to is a continuously more expensive full-time pay budget and an ever decreasing capability. That's been the DND/CAF model now for decades with the current results. As they say, "insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." DND/CAF has been doing the same thing over and over while arguing that only more money will make a difference. Let's be clear. The defence budget has increased by $10 billion since 2016 but capabilities have not increased. Maybe once the F-35 and CSC start coming on line but for the army - nada and very little is on the horizon. The army is the problem child that needs fixing.

IMHO it is up to DND/CAF to present better options to government in order to grow army capabilities.

First off we dont need another Reserve V Reg Force or Reserve Restructure thread. Having said that now, lets dive in

I think your bias of favoring the Army and Reserve world is showing.

 

[Remius]

First off we dont need another Reserve V Reg Force or Reserve Restructure thread. Having said that now, lets dive in

I think your bias of favoring the Army and Reserve world is showing.

It’s not a bias. He’s merely pointing out the thing that needs the most restructuring and revamping.

 

[KevinB]

First off we dont need another Reserve V Reg Force or Reserve Restructure thread. Having said that now, lets dive in

I think your bias of favoring the Army and Reserve world is showing.

Very few Western Militaries are skewed heavily like the CAF towards Regular Forces as opposed to Reserves.

Reading the Congressional Budgetary Office reports down here on the costing of various units is a little eye opening when it comes to ‘value’ of units.

 

[daftandbarmy]

You're throwing an absolute on the ground based on what you believe a government will or will not do. Neither you nor I have any actual evidence as to what a future government will do if presented with a specific action plan.

The only thing that your belief leads to is a continuously more expensive full-time pay budget and an ever decreasing capability. That's been the DND/CAF model now for decades with the current results. As they say, "insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." DND/CAF has been doing the same thing over and over while arguing that only more money will make a difference. Let's be clear. The defence budget has increased by $10 billion since 2016 but capabilities have not increased. Maybe once the F-35 and CSC start coming on line but for the army - nada and very little is on the horizon. The army is the problem child that needs fixing.

IMHO it is up to DND/CAF to present better options to government in order to grow army capabilities.

We need to spend at least another extra $18B annually to reach our 2% NATO goal, apparently, so that might be a good option to present to a 'Gun Shy' government

 

[Quirky]

$18B can get you a lot of base housing in areas of high COL. That's just for one year. You could probably replace each PMQ over 50 years old plus build another.

 

[Rifleman62]

Another lie. Says one thing in Europe, forgets what he said on his trip back.

Really embarrassing Trudeau saying "Russia must win this war". Smirk, correction

Trudeau says Canada pledges to ‘do more’ on NATO spending | Power Play with Vassy Kapelos​

 

[Halifax Tar]

It’s not a bias. He’s merely pointing out the thing that needs the most restructuring and revamping.

To him, which is an opinion. The case could be made by all of the services that they have higher needs. And our biases cloud our ability to recognize that.

Very few Western Militaries are skewed heavily like the CAF towards Regular Forces as opposed to Reserves.

Reading the Congressional Budgetary Office reports down here on the costing of various units is a little eye opening when it comes to ‘value’ of units.

Armies perhaps, now do that for Navies and Air Forces. I have to believe the technical requirements, required proficiencies and peacetime tasks preclude them from meeting the same balances.

 

[KevinB]

To him, which is an opinion. The case could be made by all of the services that they have higher needs. And our biases cloud our ability to recognize that.




Armies perhaps, now do that for Navies and Air Forces. I have to believe the technical requirements, required proficiencies and peacetime tasks preclude them from meeting the same balances.

The USAF Res and Air Guard beg to differ, I am zero familiarity with the Naval Reserve down here.

 

[dimsum]

The USAF Res and Air Guard beg to differ, I am zero familiarity with the Naval Reserve down here.

I would like to know what percentage of the USAFR and ANG are “full time reservists” vice part-timers.