Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[SupersonicMax]

@dapaterson
Not to pour too much more salt but as was previously noted...



Pixie dust, unicorns and rainbows ...

Well, this is true. We are not a military power. Maybe we were in the past but it’s not the case anymore, probably since the Korean War. We contribute to warfare in that we’ll provide people and equipment an contribute to someone else’s initiative. We chose our battles. And that’s the key, right there, to our contribution.

Canada, as a generally rational nation, measures its military involvement well. When Canada participates militarily, it sends a message to the World and gives legitimacy to a military operation. When we do not, that also sends a powerful message. When we are asked to participate militarily to an operation, it is not because of our military might: it’s because it gives legitimacy.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Her statement and Anand saying that maybe we need to aggressively start increasing our defence spending and commitments is a sign that maybe a new narrative on defence spending is coming.

Anand's statement is a used car sales pitch.

We already agreed to model of car, 2% GDP.

We've had years to provide that but we didn't. Now the dealership is offering "options" to provide the car they were already supposed to provide. On top of that there's new options to provide something less than promised, and options to provide "an even better model" i.e exceeding what we promised.

 

[FormerHorseGuard]

we need a serious increase in spending to just replaced what we sent to the Ukraine. Ammo, Carls, vests, nvgs, rations, helmets, machine guns, sniper rifles , plus jet fuel to get it there. Our transport fleet will have decades cut off their service life with the amount of service they are flying right now.

Plus new equipment incase we get into a shooting war again. The freezer has thawed everything out and we are getting back to the post war 2 worries. The wall came down but it is being rebuilt with the blood of innocent people over there.

 

[dimsum]

On a related, but completely different note, how does one make it so the original article stays at the top like this one? Can it be the norm for all threads that have articles?

 

[SupersonicMax]

Our transport fleet will have decades cut off their service life with the amount of service they are flying right now.

No it won’t. It is taken from an already allocated yearly flying rate. Our Air Mobility fleets are used to high tempos (it is pretty much their routine).

 

[daftandbarmy]

Anand's statement is a used car sales pitch.

We already agreed to model of car, 2% GDP.

We've had years to provide that but we didn't. Now the dealership is offering "options" to provide the car they were already supposed to provide. On top of that there's new options to provide something less than promised, and options to provide "an even better model" i.e exceeding what we promised.

As along as there are some FNC1s left, I'll be good if they drag me back

 

[Quirky]

Our Air Mobility fleets are used to high tempos (it is pretty much their routine).

We are used to doing more with less, so lets make it our SOP.

 

[SupersonicMax]

We are used to doing more with less, so lets make it our SOP.

An airplane that doesn’t fly doesn’t make financial sense. High Op Tempo for the aircraft, especially transport aircraft, is perfectly normal.

 

[Quirky]

An airplane that doesn’t fly doesn’t make financial sense. High Op Tempo for the aircraft, especially transport aircraft, is perfectly normal.

It's not the airplanes i'm worried about..

 

[Weinie]

As along as there are some FNC1s left, I'll be good if they drag me back

I would like FN # 0L0608, which I was issued in Cornwallis in 1983. It shot straight.

 

[Weinie]

An airplane that doesn’t fly doesn’t make financial sense. High Op Tempo for the aircraft, especially transport aircraft, is perfectly normal.

So we should call it Normal Op Tempo?

 

[SupersonicMax]

So we should call it Normal Op Tempo?

The the aircraft, yes. But as Quirky alluded to, not for personnel.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Canada, as a generally rational nation, measures its military involvement well. When Canada participates militarily, it sends a message to the World and gives legitimacy to a military operation. When we do not, that also sends a powerful message. When we are asked to participate militarily to an operation, it is not because of our military might: it’s because it gives legitimacy.

What would you say the reason is that Canada being involved gives something legitimacy?

You mention we measure our military involvement well. Isn't that due to our military being is in such a shit state, not for more lofty, philosophical reasons?

 

[TacticalTea]

Ultimately though you are talking about the past. We aren’t a military power anymore and haven’t been for a while . It’s an honest statement. As much as I think her words are a bit misplaced she isn’t wrong in this case.

That doesn’t mean we can’t contribute. But let’s be honest about what we can actually do with what we have. And it isn’t that much in the grand scheme.

We lament that we are under equipped, under manned and lack capabilities and that the cupboard is worse than bare and yet when someone points it out we get offended.

I take her comments as a good sign that maybe, finally the gvt is actually admitting that we can’t do as much on the military side of things instead of saying a bunch of BS about how we are more than capable and that we contribute our share blah blah. The first step is admitting we have a problem and fix it.

Her statement and Anand saying that maybe we need to aggressively start increasing our defence spending and commitments is a sign that maybe a new narrative on defence spending is coming.

Like most, I’ll believe it when I see it but at least the gvt isn’t living in denial or trying to convince Canadians that everything in defence is all fine and dandy.

I agree with your assessment, but I don't see how it follows from her statement.

Saying "Canada is not a military power and that's that" is a fatalistic argument against increased military spending, not a call to action, far from it.

And those examples of military deployments I provided... Of course they're in "the past"!

The military is an insurance policy. You don't call up your insurance broker when you're about to crash your car! Just like you don't cancel your insurance after the crash.

It takes years, decades to build a strong military, ready to respond to threats.

We are a degraded military power only because she and her friends have let it degrade.

 

[JLB50]

Canada was a second if not third rate military power prior to WW1 and WW2, yet look what we accomplished in both of those wars. Maybe I’m wrong but I think Ministers Freeland and Anand are strong Believers in having a strong military.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The state of Canada's military capability doesn't just happen. It is a consequence of what federal governments did or left undone. If it is unsatisfactory, it can be made satisfactory. All that lacks is political will and some clear thinking.

 

[dimsum]

The military is an insurance policy. You don't call up your insurance broker when you're about to crash your car! Just like you don't cancel your insurance after the crash.

It takes years, decades to build a strong military, ready to respond to threats.

I broadly agree with the idea but I find the "insurance" analogy too simplistic. Our issues aren't just limited to funding DND/CAF, but what we do with the money already given.

Canada was a second if not third rate military power prior to WW1 and WW2, yet look what we accomplished in both of those wars.

Yes, but the tech level was very different. Today's combat systems are so advanced that we can't roll out aircraft, ships, and tanks at the same rates as we did in WWII.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

As I stated earlier, unfortunately the Russo-Ukranian has to be the event that is finally rousing the Great Reset crew from their slumber.

We have reaped the harvest of over 30 years of relative peace and security; but now it's time to beat the ploughshares into swords. At least some of them.

 

[JLB50]

The state of Canada's military capability doesn't just happen. It is a consequence of what federal governments did or left undone. If it is unsatisfactory, it can be made satisfactory. All that lacks is political will and some clear thinking.

It seems to me that the invasion of Ukraine has made Canadians increasingly aware of the importance of having a strong and capable military. Hopefully our politicians will stop dithering.

 

[Remius]

We are a degraded military power only because she and her friends have let it degrade.

It goes way further back than just her and her friends.