• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Good2Golf said:
We need to learn from our Aussie cousins…come up with a meaningful and affordable Defence White Paper….(not a fence-sitting uncosted wish list)

Click to expand...

Impossible to do with all the posturing on defence in Canada. For all the flack that Liberals get here, even the CPC uses the military for virtue signaling that runs far ahead of actual budget allocations. On the far left side, the Peacekeeping mythology has not died. Add all this up and we have a political culture that really lacks the maturity to make proper and complex policy decisions on defence.

I would add that a good part of that immaturity is reflective of a broader political immaturity in Canada. And the wider military community probably has some responsibility here for not helping educate Canadians.
 
ytz said:
Add all this up and we have a political culture that really lacks the maturity to make proper and complex policy decisions on defence.
Click to expand...
I think the biggest problem is that politicians, and I agree with you - it isn’t limited to just a single party, see defence spending primarily as a way to distribute government money to target groups/organizations/regions for which they believe they will receive the greatest amount of support in return for keeping them in power. Sometimes there are glimmers of hope that the operational capability and support requirements are being appreciated, but even then, they are likely at best a secondary consideration in and of themselves…there’s an underlaying reason (public perception/support, alliance status, flag count, etc.) why it’s being supported.
 
Good2Golf said:
I think the biggest problem is that politicians, and I agree with you - it isn’t limited to just a single party, see defence spending primarily as a way to distribute government money to target groups/organizations/regions for which they believe they will receive the greatest amount of support in return for keeping them in power. Sometimes there are glimmers of hope that the operational capability and support requirements are being appreciated, but even then, they are likely at best a secondary consideration in and of themselves…there’s an underlaying reason (public perception/support, alliance status, flag count, etc.) why it’s being supported.
Click to expand...
perhaps if they took their oaths of office in a veteran's cemetery or in a legion hall they might catch on to the importance of spending wisely
 
YZT580 said:
perhaps if they took their oaths of office in a veteran's cemetery or in a legion hall they might catch on to the importance of spending wisely
Click to expand...
I’m not sure that would have a formative influence on them, tbh. The game of power, influence and interests seems far more transactional than appreciative.
 
PuckChaser said:
How many people in your section, and unit are you willing to give up to create a RCNLRS and a new logistics school?

If RCN wants better training, create it and push CMP/CDA to add modules to current DP1. We're too damn small, too damn underfunded and too short of people to make good on people's dreams of pre-unification.
Click to expand...

You've already been replied to as good or better than I could have.

But I will add, its already happening. When an NCM reaches the PO1/WO and level and wants to enter the succession management stream they need to have a solid foundation and employment background in the service culture of the environmental uniform they wear. If not they are simply not competitive at all.

There was talk of purple succession management stream, but that died years ago.

We can keep common things like schools and systems just to name a couple, but the FE part should be based on service. Example: You join the CAF as an RCN HRA then your going to be posted to a coast and ships.

As long as we keep common schools and systems we can still serge people as augmentees for situations like Afg.
 
Last edited:
YZT580 said:
perhaps if they took their oaths of office in a veteran's cemetery or in a legion hall they might catch on to the importance of spending wisely
Click to expand...
If anything you could imagine them thinking "why are we doing this here? this guy died over a 100 years ago WTF?"
They have no sense of Canadian military history because it has been glossed over in many schools. Unless its "Peacekeeping"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Czech_pivo
    • Sad
High Speed Train Coming?-split from boosting Canada’s military spending"
14 15 16
Replies
300
Views
31K
ytz
Y
Edward Campbell
    • Like
    • Insightful
The Next Canadian Government
19 20 21
Replies
410
Views
58K
mariomike
mariomike
daftandbarmy
    • Like
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly—government budgets in 2024
Replies
0
Views
2K
daftandbarmy
daftandbarmy
S
The Hans Island Dispute (1973-2022) - aka the Whiskey War
Replies
2
Views
965
SPuitH
S
Maxman1
    • Like
    • Love it!
  • Article Article
MPs call for Ottawa to cancel military rent hike
2
Replies
34
Views
18K
Good2Golf
Good2Golf
Back
Top