Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[lenaitch]

Firefighters are like the untouchable heroes of emergency services.

Police? Nobody wants the police around until something horrible happens, then the police can't get there fast enough.

(I personally love having the police around as a presence, It tells would be shitheads to go ply their craft somewhere else.)

EMS? It felt like we were the red headed stepchildren of the 3 services. People appreciated us, but not anywhere close to how much they loved the firefighters!


( I kept suggesting we should do a sexy calendar also, to boost our rep. I was blatantly told no, our job was to help people, not give them PTSD...)

You gotta start rescuing kittens from trees!

I understand what you are saying but I've never understood why that is. Cops piss off a percentage of the population, but fire and EMS generally only make people happy.

The calendar couldn't hurt. Charity organizations affiliated with my former Service do one of their dogs and it is a major fundraiser. Not sexy mind you (well, it might be for some people).

 

[mariomike]

The calendar couldn't hurt. Charity organizations affiliated with my former Service do one of their dogs and it is a major fundraiser. Not sexy mind you (well, it might be for some people).

Our Fire dept. put out their beefcake calender.
Our people wanted to put out a cheesecake calender. HR said no.

So they picked the best looking six guys, and six girls , from a recruit class, and put out their calender. I think they let them undo one button on their shirt collar. But , that was all.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Sounds like calendars I saw in the UBC gift shop c. 1982. "The Men of UBC" and "The Guys of UBC". Intended for different consumers, I suppose.

 

[FSTO]

So for shits and giggles yesterday I tried to go see the local recruiting det in Regina. They are located in a GoC building in the downtown. The building houses passport Canada and a few other social services. I could see the CAF dressed mannequins in the little recruiting office but I could not get in because each door to get into the building are plastered with do not enter signs, go to other door signs, covid restrictions signs. It was just after 5 so the doors were locked, a gentleman was coming out so I asked when the doors get locked and he told me 4pm.

I again question why the Recruiting Det is inside an office building downtown that is only opened from 10 til 4.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Because it is cheap and convenient…for the Government of Canada.

Recruits are a secondary consideration.

 

[MilEME09]

So for shits and giggles yesterday I tried to go see the local recruiting det in Regina. They are located in a GoC building in the downtown. The building houses passport Canada and a few other social services. I could see the CAF dressed mannequins in the little recruiting office but I could not get in because each door to get into the building are plastered with do not enter signs, go to other door signs, covid restrictions signs. It was just after 5 so the doors were locked, a gentleman was coming out so I asked when the doors get locked and he told me 4pm.

I again question why the Recruiting Det is inside an office building downtown that is only opened from 10 til 4.

I did my application in 2009 online, then recruiting center called me, but the process took 9 months. 7 months after my medical they called to say my vision was to poor for combat engineer pick another trade. Picked weapons tech and was sworn in a month later.

 

[MilEME09]

New French ambassador calls us out, seems our allies are getting tired of our sh*t

Navel-gazing Canada has neglected its military, new French ambassador says

The problem in part is that Canada has grown too reliant on the U.S. and its massive defence machine, the most costly in the world, he said

nationalpost.com

 

[rmc_wannabe]

New French ambassador calls us out, seems our allies are getting tired of our sh*t

Navel-gazing Canada has neglected its military, new French ambassador says

The problem in part is that Canada has grown too reliant on the U.S. and its massive defence machine, the most costly in the world, he said

nationalpost.com

That article was sobering to read. It's something we have been screaming about on this forum for a least 20 years.

Hopefully our Francophile PM heeds the advice; then again, he doesn't listen to his own cabinet and other advisors, so I hold out little hope.

 

[daftandbarmy]

That article was sobering to read. It's something we have been screaming about on this forum for a least 20 years.

Hopefully our Francophile PM heeds the advice; then again, he doesn't listen to his own cabinet and other advisors, so I hold out little hope.

Well, he's just reflecting the (lack of) will of the people


Canadians are in a sleepy state when it comes to their military according to a column earlier this summer by the CBC’s Murray Brewster, who reported on the results of a poll by the Earnscliffe Strategy Group.

The poll found that awareness of, and familiarity with, the Canadian Armed Forces was generally very low, and virtually non-existent among younger Canadians.

None of this should come as a surprise to those who study Canadian military history and civil-military relations in Canada.

About the only foreign war Canada has fought in the past 120 years that did not create significant political tensions for a Canadian government was the Korean War.

What is the main lesson the current government has learned from this history?

Hide the military as much as possible. That way there’s fewer political problems and national unity issues, no fierce debates about national apathy, no assertions of where Canadian interests lie or ought to lie. Instead, fall back on age-old slogans about protecting Canada and protecting North America, and helping out allies when called upon to do so — sometimes.

Fund just enough military to protect our sovereign borders, which are largely not threatened by anyone. That way we haven’t solved any military problems, but we have debated them away, which is just as good for most Canadians. And in the next election, there will be no military matters to worry about.

Why Canadians pay little attention to their military

Canadians’ indifference to their military isn’t so surprising. Almost every military conflict has raised serious questions, and spurred divisive debate, about Canadian unity and independence.

theconversation.com

 

[Kirkhill]

Well, he's just reflecting the (lack of) will of the people


Canadians are in a sleepy state when it comes to their military according to a column earlier this summer by the CBC’s Murray Brewster, who reported on the results of a poll by the Earnscliffe Strategy Group.

The poll found that awareness of, and familiarity with, the Canadian Armed Forces was generally very low, and virtually non-existent among younger Canadians.

None of this should come as a surprise to those who study Canadian military history and civil-military relations in Canada.

About the only foreign war Canada has fought in the past 120 years that did not create significant political tensions for a Canadian government was the Korean War.

What is the main lesson the current government has learned from this history?

Hide the military as much as possible. That way there’s fewer political problems and national unity issues, no fierce debates about national apathy, no assertions of where Canadian interests lie or ought to lie. Instead, fall back on age-old slogans about protecting Canada and protecting North America, and helping out allies when called upon to do so — sometimes.

Fund just enough military to protect our sovereign borders, which are largely not threatened by anyone. That way we haven’t solved any military problems, but we have debated them away, which is just as good for most Canadians. And in the next election, there will be no military matters to worry about.

Why Canadians pay little attention to their military

Canadians’ indifference to their military isn’t so surprising. Almost every military conflict has raised serious questions, and spurred divisive debate, about Canadian unity and independence.

theconversation.com

As Bercuson notes - this is no surprise.

So why does DND, the CAF and the Canadian Army act as if it is? The expression is "to cut one's suit to suit the cloth". Work with what you have and not what you wish to have.

The fact that Canada has so little available to offer the Ukrainians is as much the fault of the CAF and decisions taken at that level as it is the fault of the GOC.

In order to support requests for equipment we don't have and can't buy we deny ourselves equipment we don't have but could buy.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Honestly, I truly believe it's being told "No" or "Yes, but...." enough times by the GoC that has bred a culture of apathy in Projects and DevCap.

It's less that we are always shooting high and getting upset when we don't get all the bells and whistles; it's more that we only ask when we have exhausted all other options, and then it's a "it's going g to cost how much?!" Response after going without for so long.

It's a lose lose situation: get told no when you're being proactive, and then being told it'll cost too much once you've rusted out the capability by kicking the can down the road.

We reap what we sow

 

[FJAG]

Granatstein wrote "Who killed the Canadian Military" in 2004 and, while not a great book, accurately spelled out the failings of all the successive Canadian governments and the people in general for this issue. He also hinted that "Some of our generals also did their part in killing the Canadian Forces through bad judgement" but doesn't name names or incidents.

I'm not one of those who believes that Canada is purposefully hiding under the coat tails of the US and depending on them for continental defence. IMHO, Canadians simply don't believe that there are threats in the world that can harm us, period. We're simply too far away from where the problems are. Even worse, many believe that by being in defence alliances we're attracting unnecessary attention to ourselves and putting ourselves into adversarial positions with countries like Russia and China when they ordinarily wouldn't give a fig about us.

I think the Arctic, amongst other issues, will be a place of contention maybe ten or twenty years down the road with both those countries. Unfortunately that time frame is long past the next election cycle. Preparing for that should start now, but since a rearmament program would be a negative election issue, it will be left in abeyance.

We're a Pollyanna country and will remain that way until someone slaps us upside the head.

$0.02

 

[QV]

I worry we’ll be so unprepared that when we’re slapped we won’t recover.

 

[Ostrozac]

Possibly if they had followed Soviet doctrine. Overwhelming artillery - the norm was 1 gun per metre of frontage on the main effort. I don't know if that was achievable but even 25% of that would have been down right uncomfortable.

Overwhelming artillery requires overwhelming supplies of ammo. Since the Soviet rail network existed, but was less than impressive, and horses don’t exactly cut it — I sometimes wonder how much of the famed Soviet Operational Art 1943-1945 was entirely reliant on lend lease trucks from Detroit — trucks that Soviet/Russian industry still struggles to produce and maintain at scale.

Russia might be losing in Ukraine simply because what they really needed was a lend lease agreement with Sinotruck.

 

[YZT580]

Granatstein wrote "Who killed the Canadian Military" in 2004 and, while not a great book, accurately spelled out the failings of all the successive Canadian governments and the people in general for this issue. He also hinted that "Some of our generals also did their part in killing the Canadian Forces through bad judgement" but doesn't name names or incidents.

I'm not one of those who believes that Canada is purposefully hiding under the coat tails of the US and depending on them for continental defence. IMHO, Canadians simply don't believe that there are threats in the world that can harm us, period. We're simply too far away from where the problems are. Even worse, many believe that by being in defence alliances we're attracting unnecessary attention to ourselves and putting ourselves into adversarial positions with countries like Russia and China when they ordinarily wouldn't give a fig about us.

I think the Arctic, amongst other issues, will be a place of contention maybe ten or twenty years down the road with both those countries. Unfortunately that time frame is long past the next election cycle. Preparing for that should start now, but since a rearmament program would be a negative election issue, it will be left in abeyance.

We're a Pollyanna country and will remain that way until someone slaps us upside the head.

$0.02

wishful thinking but defense should be a joint effort by all major parties. The governing party should set the budget and then give to a bi-partisan group to decide on allocation. In my dream this would remove the necessity to support Bombardier or Airbus or Boeing for any particular purchase and avoid fiascos like the helicopter, SAR and pistol purchases.

 

[OldSolduer]

wishful thinking but defense should be a joint effort by all major parties. The governing party should set the budget and then give to a bi-partisan group to decide on allocation. In my dream this would remove the necessity to support Bombardier or Airbus or Boeing for any particular purchase and avoid fiascos like the helicopter, SAR and pistol purchases.

I am glad you said "in my dream" because unless we face an existential threat this will not change for one millisecond. There is too much pandering and pleading with a spoilt child who keeps threatening to leave.

 

[CBH99]

I am glad you said "in my dream" because unless we face an existential threat this will not change for one millisecond. There is too much pandering and pleading with a spoilt child who keeps threatening to leave.

Who is the spoiled child who keeps threatening to leave?

(Genuinely asking for clarity is all - I’m following the chat by scrolling up instead of scrolling down today. Cracked screen life.)

 

[McG]

wishful thinking but defense should be a joint effort by all major parties.

Realistically, shouldn’t the good of the country should be a joint effort by all parties? And if a subject is not a matter of what’s good for the country, does it even belong in Parliament? So everything worth Parlaiment’s time should be a joint venture?

… so our politicians are doing everything wrong as partisan politicking & point scoring always comes before anything in Parliament?!

Maybe there is something wrong with our system.

 

[Kirkhill]

Realistically, shouldn’t the good of the country should be a joint effort by all parties? And if a subject is not a matter of what’s good for the country, does it even belong in Parliament? So everything worth Parlaiment’s time should be a joint venture?

… so our politicians are doing everything wrong as partisan politicking & point scoring always comes before anything in Parliament?!

Maybe there is something wrong with our system.

I think you have to start from the premise that most people are trying to do the best they can. And that includes politicians.

Many Canadians just can bring themselves to believe that there is a threat. Some people just want to believe that people are good. Others want to believe that this place is special and not like their homelands. They want a refuge. If Canada is a country like any other, and their problems are the same then why did they uproot themselves and come here?

A few years ago in an inappropriate setting I blurted out an inappropriate question and got an answer I was not expecting. Having supper the conversation drifted and I ended up asking the hostess what she would do if her daughter were threatened and she, the hostess, had the means to kill her daughter's attacker. Would she kill to save her daughter? The answer was no.

There are some good people that just don't think the way I do. And apparently I don't think the same way as a lot of you folks.

The need for guns is not more obvious to many than the need for butter.

 

[CBH99]

That article was sobering to read. It's something we have been screaming about on this forum for a least 20 years.

Hopefully our Francophile PM heeds the advice; then again, he doesn't listen to his own cabinet and other advisors, so I hold out little hope.

The guy didn’t listen to his own cabinet Minister about the whole SNC Lavalin scandal, re “accepting bribes to change the law so your buddies don’t get charged isn’t allowed…”

Or the “awarding a sole source contract for a Billion dollars to a charity your family just so happens to run, is again, not allowed…”


International embarrassment doesn’t seem to affect him either, ie dressing more Indian than people living in India.

And it isn’t the first time Canada has been called out for being laggards when it comes to defense matters. I wouldn’t bank on him being embarrassed into doing anything, because some people really just are an embarrassment.


I disagree with him that Canada should be more involved in some places like Africa.

I don’t like the comparison of then & now when it comes to the UN…yes we used to have 3,300 assigned to missions compared with some token assignments now.

But that doesn’t acknowledge the troops we had on IMPACT, REASSURANCE, PODIUM - the rotational training for those troops also - plus the RCAF being extremely active in NATO roles, flying supplies to various places worldwide, SAR, and forward deployed aircraft to support our Ukraine efforts as well as UN efforts in Africa.


Overall though, I do agree with the French ambassador’s broader point. He isn’t wrong.