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

Ukraine - Superthread

Lumber

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
702
Points
1,090
My concern is that our Dear Leader will try to out shine everyone else then say to the CAF "we don't need no stinkin tanks".

My concern is real. Any opinions?
Do we need any stinkin tanks? We have tanks and an armoured corps because of our European/counter-Russian focused defence policy. Even with a shift toward the Pacific, ain't no one envisioning us fighting a land battle with tanks against China.

So, if the reasons we have our tanks is to one day be used against Russia, then let's send them all to Ukraine and have them fight Russians. Woe be to our zipper heads, yes, but if there's anything this conflict has shown is that we'll never actually send out own personnel to fight Russia unless Russia attacks NATO, and I'd say chances of that are low.
 

Quirky

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,337
Points
1,140
I'm not in the game anymore BUT its still important to me that we have a functioning Army that is capable.

Why? Army is basically hanging by a thread at this point. RCAF got their fighters, transports and refuellers. Navy got their new boaty things. Army…..bueller? Do we still need a combat capable Army at this point, because we don’t have one anyway.
 

brihard

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
8,439
Points
1,110
Do we need any stinkin tanks? We have tanks and an armoured corps because of our European/counter-Russian focused defence policy. Even with a shift toward the Pacific, ain't no one envisioning us fighting a land battle with tanks against China.

So, if the reasons we have our tanks is to one day be used against Russia, then let's send them all to Ukraine and have them fight Russians. Woe be to our zipper heads, yes, but if there's anything this conflict has shown is that we'll never actually send out own personnel to fight Russia unless Russia attacks NATO, and I'd say chances of that are low.

I remember when we thought we didn’t need tanks, and then Kandahar happened. A company of tanks doesn’t seem like a lot, until you need them and don’t have them. And unless you have kept and maintained a capability, you won’t have them for a while when you suddenly realize again that you ought to have them.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
6,824
Points
1,040
Do we need any stinkin tanks? We have tanks and an armoured corps because of our European/counter-Russian focused defence policy. Even with a shift toward the Pacific, ain't no one envisioning us fighting a land battle with tanks against China.

So, if the reasons we have our tanks is to one day be used against Russia, then let's send them all to Ukraine and have them fight Russians. Woe be to our zipper heads, yes, but if there's anything this conflict has shown is that we'll never actually send out own personnel to fight Russia unless Russia attacks NATO, and I'd say chances of that are low.
The simple reason that we need tanks is so that we can still train with them and keep alive our skills at combined arms operations. These are skills that atrophy quickly unless you keep your hand in the game with at least a part of your force.

Even if we're not quite working with the most useful set of gear not very much of it, its more than capable of ensuring we can roll through an annual combat team commanders course and practice battle group battle runs in Wainwright.

Never for a moment underestimate how quickly capabilities can fade and how long it will take to recover them when you run through a few years of officers and NCOs not being able to train the way that they should.

🍻
 

Lumber

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
702
Points
1,090
The simple reason that we need tanks is so that we can still train with them and keep alive our skills at combined arms operations. These are skills that atrophy quickly unless you keep your hand in the game with at least a part of your force.

Even if we're not quite working with the most useful set of gear not very much of it, its more than capable of ensuring we can roll through an annual combat team commanders course and practice battle group battle runs in Wainwright.

Never for a moment underestimate how quickly capabilities can fade and how long it will take to recover them when you run through a few years of officers and NCOs not being able to train the way that they should.

🍻
Agreed. The kiwis don't have their own PWO course (sort of the navy version of AOC), so they send all of their naval warfare officers to other 5eyes nations to get the PWO qualification. Couldn't we send out army officer on American Combat Team Cdr courses?
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
16,759
Points
1,160
Agreed. The kiwis don't have their own PWO course (sort of the navy version of AOC), so they send all of their naval warfare officers to other 5eyes nations to get the PWO qualification. Couldn't we send out army officer on American Combat Team Cdr courses?

As I recall our Cbt Tm Comd courses are pretty good and, in the great scheme of things, not that resource intensive.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
6,824
Points
1,040
Agreed. The kiwis don't have their own PWO course (sort of the navy version of AOC), so they send all of their naval warfare officers to other 5eyes nations to get the PWO qualification. Couldn't we send out army officer on American Combat Team Cdr courses?
Not in the numbers and levels we need. It's not just a handful of officers you need. It's a whole cohort of officers and NCOs.

🍻
 

Kat Stevens

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,715
Points
1,160
Agreed. The kiwis don't have their own PWO course (sort of the navy version of AOC), so they send all of their naval warfare officers to other 5eyes nations to get the PWO qualification. Couldn't we send out army officer on American Combat Team Cdr courses?
Send officers on a course to command a combat team full of equipment we don't have, crewed by crew commanders, drivers, loaders, and gunners we don't have either. what a uniquely Canadian approach to warfare.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
16,759
Points
1,160
Send officers on a course to command a combat team full of equipment we don't have, crewed by crew commanders, drivers, loaders, and gunners we don't have either. what a uniquely Canadian approach to warfare.

Corps 86 enters the chat ;)
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
6,701
Points
1,110
The simple reason that we need tanks is so that we can still train with them and keep alive our skills at combined arms operations. These are skills that atrophy quickly unless you keep your hand in the game with at least a part of your force.

Even if we're not quite working with the most useful set of gear not very much of it, its more than capable of ensuring we can roll through an annual combat team commanders course and practice battle group battle runs in Wainwright.

Never for a moment underestimate how quickly capabilities can fade and how long it will take to recover them when you run through a few years of officers and NCOs not being able to train the way that they should.

🍻
The Infantry Mortar Platoon enters the chat accompanied by the Pioneer Platoon.
 

YZT580

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
703
Points
960
Agreed. The kiwis don't have their own PWO course (sort of the navy version of AOC), so they send all of their naval warfare officers to other 5eyes nations to get the PWO qualification. Couldn't we send out army officer on American Combat Team Cdr courses?
a course is fine provided you are going to put into practice on a regular basis those things you learnt on the course and that means regularly, not once a year
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
6,701
Points
1,110
Send officers on a course to command a combat team full of equipment we don't have, crewed by crew commanders, drivers, loaders, and gunners we don't have either. what a uniquely Canadian approach to warfare.
Just like just before WW 2.
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,510
Points
1,090
Apparently it's coming from USIA though, not presidential draw down authority. Meaning the tanks will not come from US stocks.

On the bright side GDLS still has significant manufacturing capability for M1s, and at max capacity can build over 300 a year
 
Top