• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have long said that you could fund the CAF to 4 percent of GDP, but we would still lag behind in NATO and be much the same where we are.

It's never the money, it's politics. It's procedures. It's the pork-barreling in our defence spending that makes us a paper tiger in NATO.

My only hope in all of this for the CAF and the GoC, whatever the political stripe that may be, is that it will rouse them out of the "Peace Dividend" slumber. The world has been unstable since 1945. We have used geography, proximity, and association as a Defence Policy ever since. ICBMs don't care how close to the U.S. or how far from Russia/China we are.

Don't give us a dime more, but let us spend money on defence like it matters. The fact we follow the same rules for purchasing a fighter aircraft as we do for buying office furniture for a Service Canada office is disgraceful. Don't treat defense procurement as a stimulus package for Canadian Industry. There I said it.

We spend so much money, time, and effort trying to get that money to stay in Canada; be it by awarding contracts to companies with no capability to produce items without first "retooling" and"developing the production lines", or by hamstringing perfectly competent and competitive bidders by forcing the project to be made in St. Margaret de Poutain de Champignon, QC because the ruling government either lost the seat in the election, or won it with promises.

We spend so much money and staff hours jumping through TBS regulations that are great for other departments, but are terrible for defence procurement. Some items you have to sole source, because there are technologies and capabilities no one else makes. By doing the bid process, you get companies clamoring for a project they can't deliver on, but because they tick the bright boxes on the score sheet....

I truly and honestly belief we need to split from PSPC and legislate that its not beholden to TBS, only to the PBO/PCO. The guiding principles of this new Defence Procurement department should be "Off the shelf, from somewhere else" if there isn't an industry in Canada.

BOOTFORGEN has demonstrated how well we do when we are able to actually get what we need, instead of lining the pockets of a Canadian company that got lucky.

That, but with tanks, fighters, ships, weapons systems....
 
Her statement and Anand saying that maybe we need to aggressively start increasing our defence spending and commitments is a sign that maybe a new narrative on defence spending is coming.
Anand's statement is a used car sales pitch.

We already agreed to model of car, 2% GDP.

We've had years to provide that but we didn't. Now the dealership is offering "options" to provide the car they were already supposed to provide. On top of that there's new options to provide something less than promised, and options to provide "an even better model" i.e exceeding what we promised.
 
we need a serious increase in spending to just replaced what we sent to the Ukraine. Ammo, Carls, vests, nvgs, rations, helmets, machine guns, sniper rifles , plus jet fuel to get it there. Our transport fleet will have decades cut off their service life with the amount of service they are flying right now.

Plus new equipment incase we get into a shooting war again. The freezer has thawed everything out and we are getting back to the post war 2 worries. The wall came down but it is being rebuilt with the blood of innocent people over there.
 
On a related, but completely different note, how does one make it so the original article stays at the top like this one? Can it be the norm for all threads that have articles?
 
Our transport fleet will have decades cut off their service life with the amount of service they are flying right now.

No it won’t. It is taken from an already allocated yearly flying rate. Our Air Mobility fleets are used to high tempos (it is pretty much their routine).
 
Anand's statement is a used car sales pitch.

We already agreed to model of car, 2% GDP.

We've had years to provide that but we didn't. Now the dealership is offering "options" to provide the car they were already supposed to provide. On top of that there's new options to provide something less than promised, and options to provide "an even better model" i.e exceeding what we promised.

As along as there are some FNC1s left, I'll be good if they drag me back ;)
 
Canada, as a generally rational nation, measures its military involvement well. When Canada participates militarily, it sends a message to the World and gives legitimacy to a military operation. When we do not, that also sends a powerful message. When we are asked to participate militarily to an operation, it is not because of our military might: it’s because it gives legitimacy.
What would you say the reason is that Canada being involved gives something legitimacy?

You mention we measure our military involvement well. Isn't that due to our military being is in such a shit state, not for more lofty, philosophical reasons?
 
Ultimately though you are talking about the past. We aren’t a military power anymore and haven’t been for a while . It’s an honest statement. As much as I think her words are a bit misplaced she isn’t wrong in this case.

That doesn’t mean we can’t contribute. But let’s be honest about what we can actually do with what we have. And it isn’t that much in the grand scheme.

We lament that we are under equipped, under manned and lack capabilities and that the cupboard is worse than bare and yet when someone points it out we get offended.

I take her comments as a good sign that maybe, finally the gvt is actually admitting that we can’t do as much on the military side of things instead of saying a bunch of BS about how we are more than capable and that we contribute our share blah blah. The first step is admitting we have a problem and fix it.

Her statement and Anand saying that maybe we need to aggressively start increasing our defence spending and commitments is a sign that maybe a new narrative on defence spending is coming.

Like most, I’ll believe it when I see it but at least the gvt isn’t living in denial or trying to convince Canadians that everything in defence is all fine and dandy.
I agree with your assessment, but I don't see how it follows from her statement.

Saying "Canada is not a military power and that's that" is a fatalistic argument against increased military spending, not a call to action, far from it.

And those examples of military deployments I provided... Of course they're in "the past"!

The military is an insurance policy. You don't call up your insurance broker when you're about to crash your car! Just like you don't cancel your insurance after the crash.

It takes years, decades to build a strong military, ready to respond to threats.

We are a degraded military power only because she and her friends have let it degrade.
 
Canada was a second if not third rate military power prior to WW1 and WW2, yet look what we accomplished in both of those wars. Maybe I’m wrong but I think Ministers Freeland and Anand are strong Believers in having a strong military.
 
The state of Canada's military capability doesn't just happen. It is a consequence of what federal governments did or left undone. If it is unsatisfactory, it can be made satisfactory. All that lacks is political will and some clear thinking.
 
The military is an insurance policy. You don't call up your insurance broker when you're about to crash your car! Just like you don't cancel your insurance after the crash.

It takes years, decades to build a strong military, ready to respond to threats.
I broadly agree with the idea but I find the "insurance" analogy too simplistic. Our issues aren't just limited to funding DND/CAF, but what we do with the money already given.

Canada was a second if not third rate military power prior to WW1 and WW2, yet look what we accomplished in both of those wars.
Yes, but the tech level was very different. Today's combat systems are so advanced that we can't roll out aircraft, ships, and tanks at the same rates as we did in WWII.
 
As I stated earlier, unfortunately the Russo-Ukranian has to be the event that is finally rousing the Great Reset crew from their slumber.

We have reaped the harvest of over 30 years of relative peace and security; but now it's time to beat the ploughshares into swords. At least some of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ueo
The state of Canada's military capability doesn't just happen. It is a consequence of what federal governments did or left undone. If it is unsatisfactory, it can be made satisfactory. All that lacks is political will and some clear thinking.
It seems to me that the invasion of Ukraine has made Canadians increasingly aware of the importance of having a strong and capable military. Hopefully our politicians will stop dithering.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top