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

[Castus]

Back in the 90’s I was on a full time ARes infantry QL2/3 for 12 straight weeks at the PPCLI Battle School in sunny Wainwright. Everyone else in my platoon was from Victoria to Thunder Bay. Although we were at the PPCLI’s school, almost all of our platoon’s instructor cadre, except for the platoon WO and swing NCO, were ARes. They were hard chargers that pushed us hard and trained us like we were all going back to their regiments (some of us were). Talking to troops from other platoons with all RegF instructors sounded like they were phoning it in.

I felt like we had the best of both worlds of doing our training full time at a RegF battle school but being trained by keen and hard charging reservists (and a hard charging RegF platoon WO) who didn’t want to send shitbags back to their units. It was probably one of the best experiences of my life.

I have no idea if this model is still used in ARes combat arms training, or if what I experienced was a one off when the stars align. But I think it worked.

I did all of my ARes training in the summer of 2008. The BMQ was 4 weeks, SQ was I believe 3 weeks, and the DP1 4 weeks, or thereabouts. (I don't have my MPRR in front of me, unfortunately.) Our staff were from a variety of English Montreal ARes infantry regiments, as were the candidates. I was thoroughly challenged and enjoyed the work, and put in my CT a month after coming back.

The following summer, I was in Shilo for PPCLI DP1. It was 14 weeks of very high intensity training, and we lost 60% of the course to a combination of injuries and training failures. Some of the RTUs made it through eventually, but many left. Almost all of our staff were from 2 PPCLI and were under the impression at the time that we were preparing for another Op Athena combat tour (which didn't end up materialising, so we had to settle for Attention a couple of years later).

The Reserve course was very good training. However, I would have required many months of extra training to be prepared for overseas. On the other hand, I truly believe that the PPCLI battle school experience would have made all of us suitable for near immediate deployment into combat.

My 2 pence.

 

[Cloud Cover]

A long hard look at continuing to have in our top 5 or top 10 list of countries that our immigrants come from be some of the very countries that we are in competition with today and may very well be on the other side of the front in a shooting war.

That’s a scary thought.

 

[MilEME09]

That’s a scary thought.

By % of population that isnt much different then say the German and Japanese population in 1939 in canada. In 1939 there was 418,000 German Canadians, another 23,000 Japanese canadians, and 112,625 Italian canadians. In a country of 11 million at the time thats a large amount as well.

I would caution of us falling into the mistakes of the past that lead to things like the japanese internment. While we need a strong counter intelligence apparatus against foreign agents and spies we cant paint entire populations in broad strokes either.

 

[quadrapiper]

Again all those major/MWO courses need to be Class A achievable which in short means modularization and DL as much as possible.

Which could be turned around and used to deliver that training to everyone, reducing the need for moves, longer-term quarters, etc.

A limited invasion of the Baltics doesn't require the CAF to contribute several divisions.

But it may require a division(s worth of people/kit), while floods/forest fires back home require several brigades, while a selection of dumpster fires elsewhere require some brigade+ deployments, plus something serious in the way of rotation/replacement capacity.

 

[ytz]

There are specific capability packages that Canada has committed to NATO. These include land, air, sea, and sustainment capability packages. Some of these packages cannot be sustainably supplied by the force Canada has today.

The specifics packages that we commit to are classified. That said, I have real doubts that they are anywhere close to the fantasies being discussed here. More likely something a long the lines of a full medium to heavy brigade with the ability to operate and resource a full division (ie provide all the enablers). NATO would be foolish to rely on a country thousands of miles away to provide combat power that makes a difference. We're going to be best used as follow on forces and for a sincere effort at keeping Atlantic SLOCs open.

Because if you can’t fight or deter the enemy conventionally, it leaves one little choice but to go nuclear.

Personally, I’d rather try to avoid that.

Secondly saying Division is somewhat like Army folks saying “planes” or “ships”.
Is it a Light Division, an Armoured Division or some typically Canadian shmedium setup that makes absolutely no fucking sense to anyone but it keeps the capbadges equally spread out.

No one expects the CC-130 to do everything for the RCAF, and no one expects the AOPS to do everything for the RCN, so perhaps consider that a formation will not be all singing or dancing for the Army either.

No. The equivalent of what some here are discussing is if the RCAF started campaigning to field an entire division of fighters so that whole fighter wings could be rotated through Europe. There's fighter pilots who dream of that. Most of us would say it's impractical today.

 

[WestIsle]

The specifics packages that we commit to are classified. That said, I have real doubts that they are anywhere close to the fantasies being discussed here. More likely something a long the lines of a full medium to heavy brigade with the ability to operate and resource a full division (ie provide all the enablers). NATO would be foolish to rely on a country thousands of miles away to provide combat power that makes a difference. We're going to be best used as follow on forces and for a sincere effort at keeping Atlantic SLOCs open.



No. The equivalent of what some here are discussing is if the RCAF started campaigning to field an entire division of fighters so that whole fighter wings could be rotated through Europe. There's fighter pilots who dream of that. Most of us would say it's impractical today.

I believe youre talking about the NATO remits that are actually pushed to us from NATO. From there we go on to convince them of how our LAVs are IFVs etc. I am sure they are being updated with the new talk of 3.5% but you can find talk on here about the previous Army remits for Canada.

 

[ueo]

Russia is a fascist and irredentist rogue state on our border to the North and on our alliance's eastern flank. Only one country globally is threatening to invade or nuke our NATO allies. It certainly isn't Cameroon.

Umm Dopey Donnie?

 

[Underway]

A limited invasion of the Baltics doesn't require the CAF to contribute several divisions.

It requires at least one division, and then a backup division of replacements.

Let's be honest here. There's a lot of wannabe generals who just want more GI Joes to play with.

No, this isn't anything close to the motivation for the reorganization and investment.

If we're talking about the defence of Canada itself, the priorities are abundantly clear.

The defence of continental Canada priorities are clearly Naval and Airforce. That's been stated many times on various channels/podcasts/media by the talking heads. No one is arguing that. However, the Canadian all encompassing defence strategy has always been "we fight over there so the fight doesn't come over here". And its worked. Its a Maritime geopolitical strategy (albet a rudimentary one). Similar to the British historical strategy. If we stop the threat far away it doesn't come to our shores (as much).

The re-org to a divisional model is because as we are looking towards near peer conflict again and move away from the Post Cold War small wars. Ukraine has shown that a division is the proper size for a square manouver element that has everything it needs to fight the full scale land conflict. Deep fires down to recce platoon.

As such re-org to the divisional model will allow Canada to mobilize, equip and train to the appropriate level needed to deploye a proper manouver element that remains entirely Canadian, under Canadian command with all the effectors, and no need to attach ourselves into some multinational division. This was the lesson from WW1, and re-enforced during WW2.

NATO's Eastern European countries know in their bones that Russia is coming for them next. Because they always do. And if Russia does come for them, we're gonna need a division to fight them properly.

 

[QV]

A long hard look at continuing to have in our top 5 or top 10 list of countries that our immigrants come from be some of the very countries that we are in competition with today and may very well be on the other side of the front in a shooting war.

Bingo. But they wouldn't be on the other side of the front, a good size of them might be behind our lines.

 

[MilEME09]

NATO's Eastern European countries know in their bones that Russia is coming for them next. Because they always do. And if Russia does come for them, we're gonna need a division to fight them properly.

Exactly, once this war is over, Russia will be able to rebuild at a very quick rate once not engaged in combat. A couple short years and they would be a threat to NATOs Eastern flank. Their economy is dependent on defense production now, and that cant be maintained without a demand for it, thus they need conflict.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Exactly, once this war is over, Russia will be able to rebuild at a very quick rate once not engaged in combat. A couple short years and they would be a threat to NATOs Eastern flank. Their economy is dependent on defense production now, and that cant be maintained without a demand for it, thus they need conflict.

I'd like to see what Russia's demographics look like in the 18-35yrs age range 5yrs out.
Compare that against the Baltics/Poland and understand what the numbers would be on either side of the fence. I'd throw in Finland/Norway/Sweden into that mix as well since an attack on the Baltics/Poland would now pull in Finland/Norway/Sweden by default.

EDIT:
I'm not convinced that the Russians will have the volume of warm bodies needed to move against the Baltics/Poland in 5-10yrs time. They will need to bring in the NK's in very large numbers to augment their forces. The Poles in 5yrs out will not be a force to take lightly. Plus, if the Ukrainians were to go under the Russian yoke, I have little doubt that Poland will open its doors to all the Ukrainians that they can to create a 'guerilla' force (think 'Free French' movement as an example) that will bolster their forces.

 

[markppcli]

Bingo. But they wouldn't be on the other side of the front, a good size of them might be behind our lines.

Yeah we should move them to camps.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Yeah we should move them to camps.

I am not suggesting any of that.

I believe that a discussion needs to occur within the country that if our own security services continue to identify actions being brought against Canada on a continuous basis by certain countries that a greater focus on ensuring that proper vetting is done on individuals moving to our country from those countries being identified.

 

[markppcli]

I am not suggesting any of that.

I believe that a discussion needs to occur within the country that if our own security services continue to identify actions being brought against Canada on a continuous basis by certain countries that a greater focus on ensuring that proper vetting is done on individuals moving to our country from those countries being identified.

I was responding to QV’s argument that they represent a fifth column. Given that recent polling actually suggests a) Canadians would fight for their country (Half say they’d go to war for Canada, but young people far less willing to enlist -)
and b) support for defence spending is at a high ( Hitting the Mark? Two-thirds support 2% defence spending pledge; almost as many say 5% ‘too much’ - )

Based on polling the demographic we should be concerned about from a defence perspective isn’t Chinese Canadians, it’s women aged 18-30.

 

[PrairieFella]

Yeah we should move them to camps.

Interestingly enough, that was the solution they used on my ancestors during the First World War. Didn't work out so hot.

 

[QV]

Yeah we should move them to camps.

I didn't go that far. A robust counter-intel effort certainly.

You'd be grossly naive to believe there are not threat actors operating in any country right now and if you go to war with a country that has a major diaspora in your country you should expect there will be a percentage of them operating against your interests.

 

[Czech_pivo]

An interesting read.

Puts Manitoba in the drivers seat. Removes Quebec from the equation. More icebreakers are needed.

Opinion: Manitoba holds the key to nation building in Canada

A new shipping route through Northern Manitoba to the Port of Churchill could offer an alternative to the West-East infrastructure issue

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[Quirky]

I didn't go that far. A robust counter-intel effort certainly.

You'd be grossly naive to believe there are not threat actors operating in any country right now and if you go to war with a country that has a major diaspora in your country you should expect there will be a percentage of them operating against your interests.

See Melanie Joly's riding of 7000 arabs which apparently dictate all of Canada's anti-Israel foreign policy.

 

[QV]

See Melanie Joly's riding of 7000 arabs which apparently dictate all of Canada's anti-Israel foreign policy.

Imagine a group that makes up 5% of your population (2M). 99% are probably not an issue, but even 1% is 20,000 strong.

 

[Quirky]

Imagine a group that makes up 5% of your population (2M). 99% are probably not an issue, but even 1% is 20,000 strong.

Canada is fucking around and it's eventually going to find out.