- Reaction score
- 27,819
- Points
- 1,090
Sorry, I should say, cut back in number. Their size remains large.
2023 Canadian Armed Forces General and Flag Officer senior promotions and appointments
- Thread starter dangerboy
- Start date
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,473
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 6,299
- Points
- 1,040
Maybe all the new capabilities we spool up then never use? NTOG is probably a good example, we developed the capability but don't ever have ROEs that support opposed boardings (and even normal boardings is pretty limited). BMD defence without infrastructure? 'Fitted for but not with?' Systems without ammo? Submarines with no days at sea?
Lots of things we have just 'in case' that suck the air out from things we do regularly, but no one will give them up 'in case we need them', so we just end up doing a lot of things half/partially assed.
Was a big contrast working with the Scandis; they don't necessarily do anything blue water, but they are laser focused and ready if Russia decides to FAFO.
We have no real strategic purpose, so just try and kind of do everything and be like a mini US, but with Dollar General funding with half a roster.
Maybe just ask NATO, and see what they would want us to bring to the table.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,451
- Points
- 1,260
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,473
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 6,299
- Points
- 1,040
I think that would basically be something comparable with the CPFs, and maybe a few tankers to have something on each coast.
I absolutely understand the strategic capabilities subs bring to the table, but frankly we can't afford the cost to maintain them (in people or money), or crews to sail them. So unless we get big funding boosts and SWE to do it properly, they are a pretty big golden goose.
But things like the Oriole are still kicking around, and that's some Adminrals pet wank, so just expect we'll keep spreading ourselves transparently thin. Fully expect some kind of PRO like event on the CPFs before end of the class though.
If what some others have said is true it sounds like we’d be lucky if it’s only that bad…
- Reaction score
- 22,085
- Points
- 1,260
The whole Cdn Heavy Bde to Europe has been an ask for years. Canada just pretends not to hear what NATO asks for…
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,141
- Points
- 1,010
Canada doesn't have a heavy brigade. If someone was asking me for something I didn't have I'd ignore them too.
Best I can offer is medium battlegrounp with tanks and no replacements when it gets smashed.
GR66
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,196
- Points
- 1,160
I think the US (and NATO) would be satisfied with the Canadian-led multinational Brigade so long as it's properly equipped, supported and sustained so that it can provide a credible deterrence against Russia. Do that, meet our 2% GDP commitment and follow-through with our other major modernization plans (CSCs, JSS, MRTT, P-8, F-35 and NORAD modernization, etc.) and I think we'd be seen as a valuable partner with useful capabilities.
- Reaction score
- 22,085
- Points
- 1,260
Who’s the fool? the entity that asks for something that isn’t available, or the entity that doesn’t actually accept they don’t.
I think conceptually NATO has asked and expected a modern 4 CMBG’esqe entity, which Canada doesn’t have.
I’d suggest that successive CCA’s have failed to address the whole NATO Europe aspect, and wished it away as a concern that never will come to be required.
I don’t think we as America will be happy unless Canada can plunk an Armored DIV in Europe and self support, along with the other above items you mention.
There are various reasons for that, but the one major thing is it’s a given the Canadians will fight - the same isn’t always a given for the Euros.
GR66
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,196
- Points
- 1,160
Personally I think the US would rather bully the Europeans into taking their own defence seriously than have Canada max out its budget on a Division in Europe. Things like NORAD modernization (and hopefully BMD participation) and investment in air and naval capabilities that both provide tangible defence of the homeland and capabilities that can be useful in the Pacific I think would be more appreciated.
- Reaction score
- 22,085
- Points
- 1,260
If Canada was a serious country, a DIV to Europe wouldn’t phase your budget…
Sort of, the major issue with Europe is the they are Europeans and can easily go home. Canada is like America in the respect the only option is to fight.
I was talking a friend who is a current 2* down here, he found it difficult to understand with the size of Canada, and the paper strength of the CAF (which was already tough for him to grasp) that the Army didn’t have 2-3 actual Divisions. Honestly I couldn’t fault him for that as It’s hard to understand how a Corps sized entity is so useless.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,473
- Points
- 1,160
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,141
- Points
- 1,010
No fools. Just politicians.
- Reaction score
- 2,139
- Points
- 1,160
What generals, DM's and defence policy advisors keep giving the reassurance to politicians that this has been okay? The current state of affairs isn't just the fault of politicians or a disinterested electorate.
National Defence is a key, perhaps the most important responsibility of a government towards the country and its people, whether any of them like it or not. To have been so derelict in a such a primary duty, government and Parliament has utterly failed but there must be a reason why they haven't seen that, or alternatively have recognized the problem and decided that the risk is acceptable. Who granted a pass or gave an idea to a sitting Canadian government and to Parliament by actually giving some assurance that we could let national defence atrophy into a small pile of harmless mush.
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,567
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 5,984
- Points
- 1,260
It required an Army of almost 50,000 to 'maintain' one "heavy" brigade group in Europe in the 1950s and '60s. By 'maintain' I mean keep it staffed and equipped and either: 1. expand it to a smallish division in 90ish days; or 2. replace it when it ended up on the Rhine at less than 1/3 strength. In other words, the entire Canadian Forces in 2024 is too small to have one "heavy" brigade somewhere, anywhere close to harm's way.
I think you have made an important distinction here - it's one thing to get a CMBG into the field. It's quite another to keep it viable (never mind growing) once it starts taking casualties.
- Reaction score
- 357
- Points
- 780
Don;t think so, we'ed have to form 43 study groups, ave 3465 meetings etc etc, Not in our present wheel house!
Similar threads
