Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[QV]

The reality goes back to the end of the Mulroney era when the decision was made to scrap the 12 nuc subs in place of another 6 Halifax frigates as was the original plan - then scrap the 12 nuc subs altogether and then elect JC (not our Lord and Savior) and he in turned scrapped the EH101 and costs us a pretty penny and started to enhancement of the bleeding out of the CAF in the late 1990's. Add in a few other PM's who did nothing to staunch the bleeding out and voila, 25yrs later, here we are.

The decision by PM back in 2005 to not enter in the Ballistic Missile defense plan was a dick move that costed us creditability with the US. We now talk about the US no longer being a 'reliable ally', what do you think the US was saying about us in 2005?

And I believe it was around 2004 when the 2% GDP was first floated in NATO. Here we are 21 years later at 1.37%.

 

[Grunt_031]

Man, I thought our traditional defense relationship with the US was dead because Carney is tough on Trump? I guess I've been gaslit again.

Not gaslighted, just a reality. Its been 3 weeks under a new government so stop playing the victim already. Our guy didn't win. The opposition's job is to hold the government to account and PP is the master of this.

The relationship has changed. First starting under the previous governments, especially under JT, but Trump was the final straw.
We are partners due to geography and culture. It will be a delicate dance for the next 4 years. Carney was picked by Canada and if he fails, Canada fails. We can work together for the next 4 years until it is time to pick a new government.

 

[Remius]

The defence relationship with the US will never be dead despite Remius' wishes.

It’s not a wish. It has changed irrevocably though. Hopefully we get away from relying on them.

We are in a low period that dipped further thanks to JT and the LPC. We were about to pay a hefty economic price for staying in that low period.

Yep. And things are now changing. Hence why the old relationship is dead.

Now, all indications are Canada will bend the knee and kiss the ring to avoid that economic punch by spending more on defence including with US such as Golden Dome.

LOL. Golden dome great because it benefits us to do so. Hopefully we can build a better more integrated defence industry away from the US.

Never be in this position again.

 

[QV]

List me the countries you think would be a better defence partner for Canada then the US....

 

[Kirkhill]

The reality goes back to the end of the Mulroney era when the decision was made to scrap the 12 nuc subs in place of another 6 Halifax frigates as was the original plan - then scrap the 12 nuc subs altogether and then elect JC (not our Lord and Savior) and he in turned scrapped the EH101 and costs us a pretty penny and started to enhancement of the bleeding out of the CAF in the late 1990's. Add in a few other PM's who did nothing to staunch the bleeding out and voila, 25yrs later, here we are.

The decision by PM back in 2005 to not enter in the Ballistic Missile defense plan was a dick move that costed us creditability with the US. We now talk about the US no longer being a 'reliable ally', what do you think the US was saying about us in 2005?

Re the Mulroney subs.

When we were willing buyers, briefly, we were lacking willing sellers. France wasn't a reliable NATO member and the UK was a US client ans the US didn't want to sell thdm to us. We might have used them to control traffic in the arctic.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Re the Mulroney subs.

When we were willing buyers, briefly, we were lacking willing sellers. France wasn't a reliable NATO member and the UK was a US client ans the US didn't want to sell thdm to us. We might have used them to control traffic in the arctic.

I’ve read somewhere and heard through old Mulroney era connections, that the US and us had come to an agreement that we’d be ‘allowed’ to purchase the subs.
Cold feet and the sinking economy stopped it on our end.

 

[Furniture]

List me the countries you think would be a better defence partner for Canada then the US....

Depends...

For development of kit, South Korea, UK, Norway, Sweden, France, and Germany.

For continental defence, obviously the USA.

We can have many partners, rather than just being a sockpuppet of the USA.

 

[Kirkhill]

Depends...

For development of kit, South Korea, UK, Norway, Sweden, France, and Germany.

For continental defence, obviously the USA.

We can have many partners, rather than just being a sockpuppet of the USA.

I really do like the Turkish route. Buy from everybody and learn from them all. The goal is to be beholden to none.

That is a multi-decade project. One of the advantages of a basic dictatorship. Focus.

 

[KevinB]

I really do like the Turkish route. Buy from everybody and learn from them all. The goal is to be beholden to none.

Getting second rate shit from everyone isn’t a model Canada should emulate. Turkey did it because they have straddled the fence with Russia and being a NATO member.

That is a multi-decade project. One of the advantages of a basic dictatorship. Focus.

Or just having a country that understands what it’s priorities need to be.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Depends...

For development of kit, South Korea, UK, Norway, Sweden, France, and Germany.

For continental defence, obviously the USA.

We can have many partners, rather than just being a sockpuppet of the USA.

I wouldn't buy from the UK.

Norway and Sweden, very similar climates. And SK, their ability to mass produce. Those are my picks.

Lets get SK on the RCDs yesterday.