I'll believe it when I see it.
the yard is still there and could be repurposed but I seem to recall a deal whereby the feds bailed them out but the yard was to close immediately on completion of the work underway. Very hazy memory, a lot of beer, a lot of whiskey and a lot of time has passed since then
Posted this a year ago regarding St John ShipbuildingOur office is discussing this article today. Here is my reply to one of our gang talking about "room for growth"
Quote “Considering we plan for ships to have a 30 year service life but then go on to drive them for half a century”
This is an unsustainable policy. You’d think that since we have spent all this money initiating the National Shipbuilding Strategy (or whatever its called now) that we’d plan for a 25-30 year lifecycle and forego the major refit at 20 years and just sell the bloody things and build new?
Anyone remember that place we poured billions into in the 80’s? Are we going to do that again?
View attachment 70080
I’ll just shut up now, and go back to grumbling.
I'm not surprised at all that all 3 were saying the same things. Very good interview.You really need to make a sticky for the podcasts you listen too! Thank you so much for sharing!
I had to double check to make sure the article wasn't from The Onion.NATO summit defense spending pledges may exceed 2% target, Austin says
Members nations hold their next summit in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius in July.www.defensenews.com
he will deliver. or at least he will provide a promise to deliver or at least to study the issueI had to double check to make sure the article wasn't from The Onion.
Good luck wringing any extra money from our current illustrious leader "Because they’re asking for more than we are able to give right now”
He probably won’t do Jack and Shit, but apparently Canada has committed to action.he will deliver. or at least he will provide a promise to deliver or at least to study the issue
The HQSS is big bulky and seems more suited to running a static camp (IMHO) but CA units have it in their hands. The depots are certainly full of spares.How many of these are in service now? Any?
Maybe I’m cynical, but these are routine and while necessary, it comes across as similar to me announcing a purchase of new underwear if my wife asks me about our mutual fund growth over the last quarter. Necessary but…not something expected to impress people.
I had to chuckle at the part in the pic. The obsession with anything HQ lives on!!
View attachment 76409
That should be an advertising slogan.Canada's Army: fighting yesterday's wars, tomorrow.
Debt to GDP ratio we are similar to Greece - in fact we are higher than Greece.
What is NOT being talked about right now is the amount of federal income tax revenue that went last year, pre substantial interest rate hikes, compared to what will have to go this year, next year and the next few going forwards, to cover just the interest on the debt. Much like all the chatter about the average CDN needing to cut back on expenditures in order to deal with large mortgage payment increases, our Federal Government will be in the EXACT same situation going forwards. Which in turn means, either large cuts to services/programmes will occur, a substantial income tax increase is coming to the 60% of Canadians who actually pay income taxes.
Roughly 7.10$ out of every 100$ in income tax goes to servicing the interest on the debt today. Its safe to say that this number will be north of 8$ per 100 in 2023 and more than likely higher yet in 2024.
Canada's army ill equipped to fight yesterday's wars or tomorrow'sCanada's Army: fighting yesterday's wars, tomorrow.
Don't leave out the third option: more borrowing.alot of services will be cut or expect to be paying alot more in taxes (and as a result your standard of living falling accordingly)
Concerning but not surprising unfortunately. Also quite interesting as this article from the Atlantic Council posted on the Real Clear Defense website suggests that there could be a push by some countries at the July NATO Summit in Vilnius to RAISE the NATO spending target to 2.5% of GDP.
Acquiring the capabilities necessary for success in high-intensity warfare will require sustained higher levels of spending than NATO nations have undertaken since the end of the Cold War. To accomplish that objective, three initiatives should be agreed upon at the Vilnius summit.
First, NATO should agree that nations should spend at least 2.5 percent of GDP on defense instead of the 2-percent goal previously agreed. The United Kingdom has established such an aspiration, and Estonia has recommended such a requirement for all allies.74 While only the United States, Poland, and Greece currently meet the 2.5-percent target, a number of nations— including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, which have larger militaries—have increased, or set plans to increase, budgets.75 It will be important for those additional budgetary amounts to be utilized to meet the requirements necessary to achieve the objectives of the New NATO Force Model.
Is anyone surprised?
Is anyone surprised?
Let's be completely honest with ourselves, people like Trudeau* look down on the military as a service, as well as people that tend to make up the membership of the military. Though they are smart enough to not say it out loud, they view us as the people too dumb to do anything else. Why waste money on defence when it can be spent enhancing the arts, or solving world hunger?
*I don't mean LPC, I mean the entire "upper" crust of Canada regardless of which colour they vote. It's not limited to just the Laurentians, or Bay St, it's the wealthy and university educated from coast to coast.
I have zero doubt that there are lots of individuals that you've met who feel that way, but I also have some life experience and have encountered exactly what I described. Lots of people are very polite and make the right mouth noises... If wealthy people's kids serving in the CAF was normal, you wouldn't need to point out that you know of a few examples. We'd all know a few, because they'd be everywhere.Well....
I've never found an anti-CAF civilian amongst the 'elite' out this way. OTOH, they are very interested and grateful for our military members, based on what I've seen so far.
I've even bumped into a few bejillionaires with family members in the CAF, like JTF 2, RCAF, RCN and th'Army. Some even send their kids back to their countries of origin to do their national military service, like they did themselves, as a condition of citizenship/ the right to vote.
Now, does the CAF actually ever network with these people to build on this obvious strength of feeling?
No, not at all based on what I've seen. And every effort that I made, whilst serving, to try and do that has fallen upon deaf ears largely because IMHO: 'Stinkin' Civvies, what do they know?' type attitudes.
I mean, it's always easier to invite senior military folks like yourself to cocktail parties and dinners in an echo chamber fashion as it's less ego-threatening, and it might even be good for your (marginal) CAF career