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

Trump administration 2024-2028

ytz said:
I've never seen you once criticize this admin on any substance. So I think that "burden" is obvious.

I'm fairly sure if Trump said the sky was purple you'd be here telling us his only mistake was not saying it's Indigo.
Click to expand...
If someone posts a valid criticism of the administration, I rarely feel a need to chime in with my agreement; and, most of what gets posted here is of no particular "substance" - it's just people venting their frustrations and spinning up oddball theories about what they imagine is going on or might happen.
 
ytz said:
Nothing worse than guys who served thinking they understand all of the military. Just enough knowledge to make them dangerous.
Click to expand...
Harjit Sajan comes to mind. He was sold to the public based upon his understanding of all things military. IMHO he did much to damage the image (and probably the operation of) the CF.
 
Brad Sallows said:
If someone posts a valid criticism of the administration, I rarely feel a need to chime in with my agreement; and, most of what gets posted here is of no particular "substance" - it's just people venting their frustrations and spinning up oddball theories about what they imagine is going on or might happen.
Click to expand...
A most arrogant post. Well done.
 
Nvlgzr said:
Harjit Sajan comes to mind. He was sold to the public based upon his understanding of all things military. IMHO he did much to damage the image (and probably the operation of) the CF.
Click to expand...

Among many examples I was thinking of. But think of how incompetent he was at an institutional level. And it all stemmed from him not being able to separate his military experience from being an effective minister.

By contrast, Anand had a solid reputation among the GOFOs I know. Listened. Fought at Cabinet for her department. Probably why Trudeau demoted her.
 
Brad Sallows said:
If someone posts a valid criticism of the administration, I rarely feel a need to chime in with my agreement; and, most of what gets posted here is of no particular "substance" - it's just people venting their frustrations and spinning up oddball theories about what they imagine is going on or might happen.
Click to expand...

Sure sure. You only chime to glaze them. Total coincidence.
 
ytz said:
Among many examples I was thinking of. But think of how incompetent he was at an institutional level. And it all stemmed from him not being able to separate his military experience from being an effective minister.

By contrast, Anand had a solid reputation among the GOFOs I know. Listened. Fought at Cabinet for her department. Probably why Trudeau demoted her.
Click to expand...
Sure. The business of tactics and even military strategy in the sense of force employment is very, very different from navigating the policy space, negotiating with cabinet and other political players to get certain desired things pushed through, and working with the central agencies to actually implement. MND isn’t about how CAF dos CAF stuff; it’s about how Canada achieves desired defence policy options, with CAF as the biggest but not the sole toolbox. It’s steering an entire institution that has to sail in formation with the rest of government and not crash.
 
ytz said:
Among many examples I was thinking of. But think of how incompetent he was at an institutional level. And it all stemmed from him not being able to separate his military experience from being an effective minister.
Click to expand...
I’m of the opinion that former military types make for terrible MNDs.
ytz said:
By contrast, Anand had a solid reputation among the GOFOs I know. Listened. Fought at Cabinet for her department. Probably why Trudeau demoted her.
Click to expand...
People that know their files and portfolios and how to advance them within the larger system probably do better. Anand is a pretty competent minister from what I can see.
 
Remius said:
People that know their files and portfolios and how to advance them within the larger system probably do better. Anand is a pretty competent minister from what I can see.
Click to expand...

Lest we forget, she wrote the original plan on how to hit 2%. She was shuffled out of the job shortly after. I suspect she is a big reason the government is at or close to 2% this year. Her blueprint.

Remius said:
I’m of the opinion that former military types make for terrible MNDs.
Click to expand...

I could see it going both ways. I actually think both Mattis and Austin were decent SecDefs in the US despite their time in. But then again they were GOFOs who got to see a cabinet secretary at work.

I think the biggest danger is those with just enough knowledge to be dangerous. Former enlisted and even some senior officers. Every GOFO has seen the institution at large and can tell you what should be reformed. With former enlisted and a lot of officers below say COL, they are too narrow minded and inexperienced to think of the institution write large. That's why we get the performative nonsense from Hegseth. And Sajjan wasn't that, that different. He just wanted to be a bro. Didn't know how to be the boss.
 
I remember Harper’s first MND was a former colonel. Always fought with Hillier, I recall. He didn’t last long.
 
OldSolduer said:
Paul Hellyer was a gunner in the RCA in WW2. Its likely he distrusted generals and admirals as well.
Click to expand...
One of Hellyer's big problems was that he started off in the RCAF. He tried to become a pilot but was remustered to the artillery in 1944 during the conscription crisis. Here he was forced to retake his basic training which pissed him off. The theory goes that this unnecessary (in his mind) duplication of training stayed with him all the way to when he became MND and had much to do with his concept of unification of the three services into one.
Nvlgzr said:
Harjit Sajan comes to mind. He was sold to the public based upon his understanding of all things military. IMHO he did much to damage the image (and probably the operation of) the CF.
Click to expand...
Trudeau had an option to take Andrew Leslie as his MND. He chose Sajan because of his BC constituency and, IMHO, because he was easier to control in a portfolio Trudeau had no interest in and wanted little trouble from. What he was sold to the public as is another thing completely.
ytz said:
And it all stemmed from him not being able to separate his military experience from being an effective minister.
Click to expand...
I don't think that military experience makes a whit of difference as to someone will make a good or bad MND. Our samples are simply too small to be determinative. There have been good and bad - O'Connor generally did a serviceable job of it as did Mattis (as you said). The issue I think is more determined as to how good the individual is at large-scale corporate management. I can point to numerous corporate executives that have made both good and bad ministers or secretaries of defence - Rumsfeld, need I say more? On the other hand Anand was neither corporate nor military but basically an academic with legal training and she was very good.
RangerRay said:
I remember Harper’s first MND was a former colonel. Always fought with Hillier, I recall. He didn’t last long.
Click to expand...
BGen - that would have been O'Connor. They were both armoured corps and had a history - O'Connor had a more disciplined approach to things than Hillier. Most of their feuds were concerning the moribund bureaucracy of Ottawa and not really that personnel. O'Connor spent a year and a half as MND before being moved to National Revenue and then Minister of State being in cabinet from 2006 to 2013. One needs to heed the fact that Hillier wasn't always right.

🍻
 
Last edited:
George Pearkes was an ex-solider and then a Minister of Defense as well. He was responsible for cancelling the Arrow.
 
FJAG said:
One needs to heed the fact that Hillier wasn't always right.
Click to expand...

Sure. He famously (for the RCAF) opposed the purchase of C-17s in lieu of more Hercs. Imagine where we'd be today without C-17s. But I can't imagine that time period was easy. Went from the decade to darkness to fighting in Kandahar. Somehow the budgets stayed the same. So choices were difficult.

dapaterson said:
I am not convinced that Saijan was a worse choice than Leslie.
Click to expand...

I have heard this from a lot of former CA Senior Officers. Was it the infamous tooth-to-tail service paper before he retired, calling for half of ndhq to be dismantled?

FJAG said:
The issue I think is more determined as to how good the individual is at large-scale corporate management.
Click to expand...

Good point. Flying under the radar right now is the CEO of the new Defence Investment Agency. Turns out being a banker makes him really good at pushing through multi-billion dollar projects. Or maybe he was smart enough to demand authorities before taking the job.

On topic Hegseth seems exceptionally focused on culture war nonsense and working out than ya know preparing DoD for a fight with China.
 
ytz said:
On topic Hegseth seems exceptionally focused on culture war nonsense and working out than ya know preparing DoD for a fight with China.
Click to expand...
The culture war nonsense was his undoing while he was in uniform, and buttered his bread as a correspondent at FOX News.

He's consistently shown where he stands on "uselss" things like planning, LOAC, CIMIC, and diversity and inclusion.

All things that are kind of crucial when one wants to conduct regime change in a foreign country....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top