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

Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Canada says it will look at increasing its defence spending and tacked on 10 more Russian names to an ever growing sanctions list.

By Tonda MacCharles
Ottawa Bureau
Mon., March 7, 2022

Riga, LATVIA—On the 13th day of the brutal Russian bid to claim Ukraine as its own, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is showing up at the Latvian battle group led by Canadian soldiers, waving the Maple Leaf and a vague hint at more money for the military.

Canada has been waving the NATO flag for nearly seven years in Latvia as a bulwark against Russia’s further incursions in Eastern Europe.

Canada stepped up to lead one of NATO’s four battle groups in 2015 — part of the defensive alliance’s display of strength and solidarity with weaker member states after Russia invaded Ukraine and seized the Crimean peninsula in 2014. Trudeau arrived in the Latvian capital late Monday after meetings in the U.K. with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte.

Earlier Monday, faced with a seemingly unstoppable war in Ukraine, Trudeau said he will look at increasing Canada’s defence spending. Given world events, he said there are “certainly reflections to have.”

And Canada tacked on 10 more Russian names to an ever-growing sanctions list.

The latest round of sanctions includes names Trudeau said were identified by jailed Russian opposition leader and Putin nemesis Alexei Navalny.

However, on a day when Trudeau cited the new sanctions, and Johnson touted new measures meant to expose Russian property owners in his country, Rutte admitted sanctions are not working.

Yet they all called for more concerted international efforts over the long haul, including more economic measures and more humanitarian aid, with Johnson and Rutte divided over how quickly countries need to get off Russian oil and gas.

The 10 latest names on Canada’s target list do not include Roman Abramovich — a Russian billionaire Navalny has been flagging to Canada since at least 2017. Canada appears to have sanctioned about 20 of the 35 names on Navalny’s list.

The Conservative opposition says the Liberal government is not yet exerting maximum pressure on Putin, and should do more to bolster Canadian Forces, including by finally approving the purchase of fighter jets.

Foreign affairs critic Michael Chong said in an interview that Ottawa must still sanction “additional oligarchs close to President Putin who have significant assets in Canada.”

Abramovich owns more than a quarter of the public shares in steelmaking giant Evraz, which has operations in Alberta and Saskatchewan and has supplied most of the steel for the government-owned Trans Mountain pipeline project.

Evraz’s board of directors also includes two more Russians the U.S. government identified as “oligarchs” in 2019 — Aleksandr Abramov and Aleksandr Frolov — and its Canadian operations have received significant support from the federal government.

That includes at least $27 million in emergency wage subsidies during the pandemic, as well as $7 million through a fund meant to help heavy-polluters reduce emissions that cause climate change, according to the company’s most recent annual report.

In addition to upping defence spending, the Conservatives want NORAD’s early warning system upgraded, naval shipbuilding ramped up and Arctic security bolstered.

In London, Johnson sat down with Trudeau and Rutte at the Northolt airbase. Their morning meetings had a rushed feel, with Johnson starting to usher press out before Trudeau spoke. His office said later that the British PM couldn’t squeeze the full meeting in at 10 Downing Street because Johnson’s “diary” was so busy that day. The three leaders held an afternoon news conference at 10 Downing.

But before that Trudeau met with the Queen, saying she was “insightful” and they had a “useful, for me anyway, conversation about global affairs.”

Trudeau meets with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg Tuesday in Latvia.

The prime minister will also meet with three Baltic leaders, the prime ministers of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, in the Latvian capital of Riga.

The Liberals announced they would increase the 500 Canadian Forces in Latvia by another 460 troops. The Canadians are leading a multinational battle group, one of four that are part of NATO’s deployments in the region.

Another 3,400 Canadians could be deployed to the region in the months to come, on standby for NATO orders.

But Canada’s shipments of lethal aid to Ukraine were slow to come in the view of the Conservatives, and the Ukrainian Canadian community.

And suddenly Western allies are eyeing each other’s defence commitments.

At the Downing Street news conference, Rutte noted the Netherlands will increase its defence budget to close to two per cent of GDP. Germany has led the G7, and doubled its defence budget in the face of Putin’s invasion and threats. Johnson said the U.K. defence spending is about 2.4 per cent and declined to comment on Canada’s defence spending which is 1.4 per cent of GDP.

But Johnson didn’t hold back.

“What we can’t do, post the invasion of Ukraine is assume that we go back to a kind of status quo ante, a kind of new normalization in the way that we did after the … seizure of Crimea and the Donbas area,” Johnson said. “We’ve got to recognize that things have changed and that we need a new focus on security and I think that that is kind of increasingly understood by everybody.”

Trudeau stood by his British and Dutch counterparts and pledged Canada would do more.

He defended his government’s record, saying Ottawa is gradually increasing spending over the next decade by 70 per cent. Then Trudeau admitted more might be necessary.

“We also recognize that context is changing rapidly around the world and we need to make sure that women and men have certainty and our forces have all the equipment necessary to be able to stand strongly as we always have. As members of NATO. We will continue to look at what more we can do.”

The three leaders — Johnson, a conservative and Trudeau and Rutte, progressive liberals — in a joint statement said they “will continue to impose severe costs on Russia.”

Arriving for the news conference from Windsor Castle, Trudeau had to detour to enter Downing Street as loud so-called Freedom Convoy protesters bellowed from outside the gate. They carried signs marked “Tuck Frudeau” and “Free Tamara” (Lich).

Protester Jeff Wyatt who said he has no Canadian ties told the Star he came to stand up for Lich and others who were leading a “peaceful protest” worldwide against government “lies” about COVID-19 and what he called Trudeau’s “tyranny.”

Elsewhere in London, outside the Russian embassy, other protesters and passersby reflected on what they said was real tyranny — the Russian attack on Ukraine. “I think we should be as tough as possible to get this stopped, as tough as possible,” said protester Clive Martinez.
 
I used to call it coincidence.... now I am not so sure

Neither the Russians nor the Ukrainians have had much success in building and sustaining bridges across the Severo-Donetsk for long. And now the Ukrainians have to get across the Dnipro in Kherson. Of course they are operating in waters more suitable to launches than either amphibious buggies and rubber dinghies or frigates and submarines. Yet another race-course demanding yet another horse.

No sooner noted than another horse presents itself. Thanks to don3wing...

Here is a article on the 23 aircraft DHC-515 orders that DeHavilland has received.


No. Not his useful link to the DHC-515 article but the follow on article.

Coming to Canada: The Whiskey Multi Mission Reconnaissance Craft​



1687023211800.png


Might want to generate an enclosed cabin version for Canada's waters, but still....

MMRC.... redesignate as MMRRC (Multi Mission Reconnaissance and Rescue Craft) and paint some orange.


If you want to do this sort of stuff more often, give the Naval Reserve in Victoria two CB 90 assault boats, they can double as patrol boats and landing craft.


Inland Navy.jpg

If you want to build a presence and small boat skills then operate launches on those waters. Equip them with an RWS like the TAPVs but keep the guns in a gun-locker.
 
Only the eastern portion of the St Lawrence, the rest are RCMP, Ranger/FN guardians territory. You have Naval Reserve units already in Vancouver and Victoria, give them the task of protecting these two ports from the inland side, the RCN proper protects the Shipping lanes and outer coasts. The CB 90's gives some flexibility to land a armed party almost anywhere on BC coastline and the speed to deploy there from either base in 24hrs.

Put similar boats in the Western and Eastern Arctic, perhaps Tuk on the western side. You have to start manning it with Southerners at first, but slowly build a marine version of the Rangers. They operate in the summer months, hauled out for winter and stored in hangers, where training and maintenance can take place. They can provide presence patrols, support the Rangers, RCMP and CBSA doing shipping inspections, SAR, medical evacs. Plus they can work with the AOP's as they move through their patrol areas..
 
I used to call it coincidence.... now I am not so sure



No sooner noted than another horse presents itself. Thanks to don3wing...



No. Not his useful link to the DHC-515 article but the follow on article.

Coming to Canada: The Whiskey Multi Mission Reconnaissance Craft​



View attachment 78202


Might want to generate an enclosed cabin version for Canada's waters, but still....

MMRC.... redesignate as MMRRC (Multi Mission Reconnaissance and Rescue Craft) and paint some orange.





View attachment 78203

If you want to build a presence and small boat skills then operate launches on those waters. Equip them with an RWS like the TAPVs but keep the guns in a gun-locker.
no weapons on the Great Lakes but doesn't mean you can't install the mounting hardware. Regardless of jurisdiction having a reserve unit with boats in places like Saskatoon, Lake Winnipeg and North Bay may be a good way to recruit and train up reservists. Maintain their current jobs, train for navy and kept current all without going away for 3 months until called up (would it work?)
 
For Afghanistan the request was made early in September 2006. The government approved the deployment of a 15 tank squadron and an armoured engineer troop on the 15th of September. The first tank arrived in theatre on the 3rd of October. The tanks were originally ready to forward deploy in November but the Dutch commander of ISAF RC(S) held that up until Lavoie, coming back from HTLA, convinced him that a 105mm round from a tank was a kinder and gentler way of dealing with strongpoints than a 155mm HE or a 500 lb bomb. With ISAF approval granted, the tanks forward deployed on 2 Dec 2006.

🍻
Wouldn’t that be 120mm from the Leo2
 
no weapons on the Great Lakes but doesn't mean you can't install the mounting hardware. Regardless of jurisdiction having a reserve unit with boats in places like Saskatoon, Lake Winnipeg and North Bay may be a good way to recruit and train up reservists. Maintain their current jobs, train for navy and kept current all without going away for 3 months until called up (would it work?)
I don’t think the weapons on that would contravene the GL rules.
It’s a small boat - so the C-16 GMG would be the largest thing on it, and given we have Mk19’s on some stuff that trains on Lake Michigan, I doubt it’s an issue.
 
no weapons on the Great Lakes but doesn't mean you can't install the mounting hardware. Regardless of jurisdiction having a reserve unit with boats in places like Saskatoon, Lake Winnipeg and North Bay may be a good way to recruit and train up reservists. Maintain their current jobs, train for navy and kept current all without going away for 3 months until called up (would it work?)

I think that was modified ca 2006? I know it is a CBC report but...

U.S. to put machine guns on Great Lakes cutters​

CBC News · Posted: Mar 15, 2006 6:54 AM MST | Last Updated: March 15, 2006

U.S. Coast Guard vessels on the Great Lakes will soon be armed, marking the first time weapons have been authorized on boats patrolling the inland waters bordering Canada and the United States since 1817.

Petty Officer William Colclough said 7.62-mm machine guns will be stored below decks of the coast guard's 11 Great Lakes cutters and will be mounted only when needed.

Warning shots will be fired when vessels refuse to stop
, said Colclough, who is based at the U.S. Coast Guard's Great Lakes headquarters in Cleveland.

Colclough said staff have already conducted live-fire drills in American waters off the coast of Sault Ste-Marie, Ont.

Demilitarization dates back to 1817

In the Rush-Bagot treaty of 1817, the two countries agreed to demilitarize Great Lakes waters.

The treaty followed the War of 1812, which saw Canadian and American forces wage violent battles on Lake Erie and Lake Huron.

Its provisions have now been reinterpreted because of U.S. concerns about customs violations, human smuggling and international terrorism.

An official with Foreign Affairs says Canada has agreed to read the treaty in such a way that machine guns of sizes up to .50 caliber will be considered weapons of law enforcement rather than weapons of war.

So perhaps something like this? With the gun stowed?


1687042168371.png


And revised the map to add a few more Northern Rivers of interest for the Rangers. Those rivers all have communities along them

Inland Navy.jpg
 
It doesn’t apply to training - just patrolling vessels.
So you can put stuff on for Military Training — as long as it isn’t doing Coast Guard or LE patrol type work.
 
No. The Leopard C2 was the first tank deployed. They came out of existing Canadian stocks and carried a 105mm. They were replaced by the German/Dutch Leo 2 the year after.

🍻
Roger. I hadn’t realized any of those hadn’t been scrapped already.
 
Roger. I hadn’t realized any of those hadn’t been scrapped already.
I don't think that they'd scrapped any yet but I think only about half of the 100 and some odd fleet were runners. The LdSH had been using some of them as ersatz MGSs as they had been trialling the Direct Fire Unit concept with the ADATS and TUA the year or two previously.

🍻
 
I was going to post this in the Ukraine war thread as the YouTube video that linked it stated this is what the Ukraine's will be facing when they start their Offensive.

But IMHO, thought the video may be more appropriate here.

Think the CAF could do this? Dream on.


Click to expand...
We literally validate doing this all the time
And you have ALL the assets in the related video, or is it NOTAL Atk helo's, air superiority, mine breaching specialized vehicles, AFV's etc. etc, etc.
 
And you have ALL the assets in the related video, or is it NOTAL Atk helo's, air superiority, mine breaching specialized vehicles, AFV's etc. etc, etc.
Well air superiority is a state not an asset, but yes we have CAS on station. We do this live, with explosive breaches, bales into anti tank ditches, plow tanks and engineers clearing lanes, all the damned time. The only thing we do t include is the attack helo but that’s not a critical asset. It’s a nice to have.

Have you never done a combat team attack / breach ? It is very very common, and involves those assets. I recommend you take a look at the BG in operations to get a sense of the assets have to do these things. I’m also fairly sure if you went on AITIS you could fine the power points and videos for combat team commander.
 
I don't think that they'd scrapped any yet but I think only about half of the 100 and some odd fleet were runners. The LdSH had been using some of them as ersatz MGSs as they had been trialling the Direct Fire Unit concept with the ADATS and TUA the year or two previously.

🍻
My understanding is the TUA turrets are in storage, could probably be useful put on a LAV.
 
My understanding is the TUA turrets are in storage, could probably be useful put on a LAV.
I think that you are right but I'm not sure if that's the way to go.

The TUA turret is 2003/5 technology designed to function with the then TOW ITAS which was fairly new at the time and is still in service.

I would think one might be better off to evaluate some of the newer modular turrets currently making their way onto a variety of IFVs. Aside from the cost of acquisition, the modification process would probably be equally expensive.

🍻
 

Now because I hate dual role setups because I see that the CA would simply buy half of what was needed and claim a savings…

I’d suggest that the Infantry and Armoured (Cav) units have the cannon and Hellfire for Anti-Armor (and it’s NLOS capable)

Then the ADA Troops get the Stingers and Cannon
 
If an outsider could see this. We are struggling to project obsolescent capability to an Ally so that our political masters can avoid the requirement, moral and otherwise, to equip its own forces. There are days when I wish my parents had chosen to emigrate to a real country
 
If an outsider could see this. We are struggling to project obsolescent capability to an Ally so that our political masters can avoid the requirement, moral and otherwise, to equip its own forces. There are days when I wish my parents had chosen to emigrate to a real country
Mine almost went to the States. That would have made me a prime candidate for Vietnam.

All things considered ...

🍻
 
  • Insightful
Reactions: ueo
Back
Top