Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[GR66]

Simple , three reasons for this. One the American are literally next door the Germans you may have noticed are across an Ocean.
Two , the Americans have fairly large stocks of the vehicle and can spare a small number.
The Germans do not and are from all appearances are about to start a rather panicked rebuild of their own.
Three, we really have to rebuild our political capital with the Americans .

I'd add to this that in most situations where we are likely to deploy tanks we are almost certainly going to be deploying along side American forces also using the Abrams. Not so certain that we'll be deploying alongside other nations using the Leopard. If the Ukraine conflict has shown us anything it's that logistics are absolutely a key enabler for military effectiveness and being fully interoperable with American forces would be a force multiplier for both our forces.

I'd go so far as suggesting that for any new military equipment purchases we should first look at what the US is using and justify why the same equipment isn't suitable for the Canadian military before we start shopping elsewhere. That would ensure maximum interoperability with our closest ally and simplify our logistics in case of war. It could also possibly encourage investment by US military contractors in the Canadian economy either for direct production or production of components within the supply chain if they see the potential for ongoing orders coming from Canada. It should also hopefully simplify our procurement system as it would only have to deal with those items where there is a demonstrated Canadian-specific need that isn't met by current US systems.

As far as our tanks go specifically I'd propose gifting our Leopards to Poland which is currently upgrading some of their Soviet-era vehicles with Leopards already which would give them the opportunity to then gift an equivalent number of their now surplus T-72s to Ukraine. We could then reach out the the US to replace our 82 x Leopards with enough Abrams to equip a Canadian ABCT (plus spares).

 

[Halifax Tar]

We have the ability to push through purchases for military equipment. And we have the justification, its a question of hand wringing and dealing with the inevitable MSM fallout of actually giving the CAF a modern ability to kill.

Sometimes Govs need to do what's right and not what will win seats. Do our politicians have that will power ?

 

[suffolkowner]

I'd add to this that in most situations where we are likely to deploy tanks we are almost certainly going to be deploying along side American forces also using the Abrams. Not so certain that we'll be deploying alongside other nations using the Leopard. If the Ukraine conflict has shown us anything it's that logistics are absolutely a key enabler for military effectiveness and being fully interoperable with American forces would be a force multiplier for both our forces.

I'd go so far as suggesting that for any new military equipment purchases we should first look at what the US is using and justify why the same equipment isn't suitable for the Canadian military before we start shopping elsewhere. That would ensure maximum interoperability with our closest ally and simplify our logistics in case of war. It could also possibly encourage investment by US military contractors in the Canadian economy either for direct production or production of components within the supply chain if they see the potential for ongoing orders coming from Canada. It should also hopefully simplify our procurement system as it would only have to deal with those items where there is a demonstrated Canadian-specific need that isn't met by current US systems.

As far as our tanks go specifically I'd propose gifting our Leopards to Poland which is currently upgrading some of their Soviet-era vehicles with Leopards already which would give them the opportunity to then gift an equivalent number of their now surplus T-72s to Ukraine. We could then reach out the the US to replace our 82 x Leopards with enough Abrams to equip a Canadian ABCT (plus spares).

I believe we have moved in this direction a little bit where the last few procurements state that the equipment needs to be in operation by at least two allied nations. Don't quote me on that lol.

We have the ability to push through purchases for military equipment. And we have the justification, its a question of hand wringing and dealing with the inevitable MSM fallout of actually giving the CAF a modern ability to kill.

Sometimes Govs need to do what's right and not what will win seats. Do our politicians have that will power ?

Yes just lacking the political will. The Liberals are actually the party in a good position to do so as I don't see push back from the Conservatives like you would unfortunately if the roles were reversed ie AW101 and F-35

 

[Kirkhill]

For me I will believe it when its more than promised spending years down the road.

We need huge capital real investments and we need them now. Soul sourced major purchases of weapons systems need to happen. And we need drastic increased recruitment.

Honestly we are so far behind the 8 ball for people I am not sure how the system could deal with a massive influx of people without ending up with thousands on pat platoons for years again.

More than capital investments I'd like to see the magazines reloaded so that training could be upgraded. And start filling the system with single shot "disposable" systems.

Money for new gaskets, seals and bearings would also be good.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

We have the ability to push through purchases for military equipment. And we have the justification, its a question of hand wringing and dealing with the inevitable MSM fallout of actually giving the CAF a modern ability to kill.

Sometimes Govs need to do what's right and not what will win seats. Do our politicians have that will power ?

All about the money! Not just how much but who and how they are given authority to spend.

 

[dimsum]

The Liberals are actually the party in a good position to do so as I don't see push back from the Conservatives like you would unfortunately if the roles were reversed ie AW101 and F-35

In this specific case, I don't think any party in its right political mind would push back - maybe the Bloc.

Canada has the world's 2nd largest Ukrainian population - those are a lot of votes that they would stand to lose.

 

[KevinB]

I've worked in our National HQs before. The culture that exists within our Higher HQs (L2 and Above) is the antithesis of dynamic, innovative, progressive.

I 100% guarantee that I could fire 80% of the people in some of our L2+ HQ and see no actual decrease in outputs.

I bet it would increase…

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I bet it would increase…

Get rid of all the sand and the oil will provide even better lubrication

 

[GK .Dundas]

[/QUOTE]

The Abrams is a better tank in my opinion right now it also has a better and clearer upgrade future. Yes its a bit thirsty and super heavy so would likely be worse than useless in Ukraine right now. But the APU probably helps a little with that. Not sure on the need for 350 of them though

If I were King it would be in the range of almost 850 -1200 .And that is a very realistic number if you really think about it and are being serious about the current threat..
At first glance it looks utterly insane until you start taking into account , training ,maintenance, upgrades and war reserve stocks. Then you have losses through accidents .
The reserves get a troop per each regiment at first then you grow that to a squadron .
I'm presuming of course that the threat is real and we are serious.

 

[Kirkhill]

The Abrams is a better tank in my opinion right now it also has a better and clearer upgrade future. Yes its a bit thirsty and super heavy so would likely be worse than useless in Ukraine right now. But the APU probably helps a little with that. Not sure on the need for 350 of them though

On the other hand the Leo has the advantage of being built and supported in the most likely theater of operations. And there are a fair number of existing chassis to refurbish locally.

Keep the 80 or so we have in Canada and get the Germans to refurb another 120 or so for us and keep them in their warehouses.

 

[Navy_Pete]

The big problem with a lot of the up front spending is that there isn't the training/support infrastructure for anything. We need a lot more worker bees on the LCMM side, and having 9 different fleets with unique equipment makes it a lot harder to support everything, so any big one off buys of shiny kit adds work to an already overworked bunch of people. And with a bunch of existing training gaps on equipment we already have, it's already a problem.

Getting contractor support for individual items isn't bad, but most of it is integrated somewhere with other kit, and that's not something that's easy to contract for, and has a long ramp up time. And someone still has to manage that contract, so HR will continue to be a problem, and we've already tapped most experience contractors who can't find people either.

I just don't see us having the peopel to actually grow anything; I think we'd be better off shrinking a bit and focusing on properly supporting equipment we have, instead of trying to get even bigger when we are stuggling to support what we currently have.

 

[YZT580]

We have the ability to push through purchases for military equipment. And we have the justification, its a question of hand wringing and dealing with the inevitable MSM fallout of actually giving the CAF a modern ability to kill.

Sometimes Govs need to do what's right and not what will win seats. Do our politicians have that will power ?

If the libs and cons can sit down as adults and produce a workable bi-party agreement winning seats won't matter. Each will maintain their status quo and contest the others as they do now. Plus, if the libs order stuff now, it will all be forgotten by the next election: even if the election were next month. Forget getting buyin from the NDP.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

The big problem with a lot of the up front spending is that there isn't the training/support infrastructure for anything. We need a lot more worker bees on the LCMM side, and having 9 different fleets with unique equipment makes it a lot harder to support everything, so any big one off buys of shiny kit adds work to an already overworked bunch of people. And with a bunch of existing training gaps on equipment we already have, it's already a problem.

Getting contractor support for individual items isn't bad, but most of it is integrated somewhere with other kit, and that's not something that's easy to contract for, and has a long ramp up time. And someone still has to manage that contract, so HR will continue to be a problem, and we've already tapped most experience contractors who can't find people either.

I just don't see us having the peopel to actually grow anything; I think we'd be better off shrinking a bit and focusing on properly supporting equipment we have, instead of trying to get even bigger when we are stuggling to support what we currently have.

I've said this for a long time. I would rather have a Defence Force that is smaller, but better equipped and more agile than what we currently have.

We've also got a whole lot of staff power tied up managing hollow units and formations.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I can dream:

-a one time x Billion dollar investment in capital projects to bring us up to peer with a NATO contributing nation at %2 GDP. Let's use Denmark or Poland.
-capital projects must be a pre-existing, off the shelf capability. Zero requirement for Made in Canada .
-all capital projects under this program must be delivered NLT 3 years after contract being signed.

Call it the CAF Great Reset or something.

As for personnel:

-Change Universality of Service so non-deployable jobs can only be filled by non-deployable pers. It has baffled me that we either boot people with 10 plus years of corporate knowledge for not being able to possibly deploy at some time. It also baffles me that we take someone employable in a bde and send th to instruct for 4 years because "breadth of knowledge."

-Severely amend the grounds for medical release; if you're able to be retained in a non-operational role, keep that person in a uniform. If you are able to be retained and you choose not to... no golden ticket.

-Cull the Senior Officer corps and limit staff positions within HQs: 10th Mtn Division doesn't have a J35-2-3-5-6... a CMBG shouldn't either.

-accept that you're going to have high turnover. Millennial and Gen Z are big believers in the Gig Economy. Offer a solid 5 - 10 years of gainful employment and benefits; including training and schooling incentives.

-develop a proper Canadian Military Culture. There I said it. We have a lot of British military traditions, but have seen a lot of spill over of "Americanisms" that have affected our organizational structure. The U.S. Army has the numbers to have multiple layers of command. We don't have the luxury. Make our numbers count.

 

[Kirkhill]

Force reconstitution was already being done due to COVID. But keep cancelling anything that has nothing to do with rebuilding and training. I would turn the whole machine into a training establishment until we get to where we need to be.

Yes. Efficiency needs to go hand in hand with any changes. Like you I’m doubtful but we’ll see. I’d simplify the recruiting process and risk manage certain things.

Yep. But out of the box thinking and some improvising would be in order.

Quite likely. But we’ll see what comes out of this when budget time comes.

I am fully prepared to be disappointed. But I still have room to be pleasantly surprised.

If they were serious I might be thinking about this:

Year 1

Refurbish existing gear. Sustain.
Restock magazines. Sustain.
Purchase additional small arms and disposable weapons and pyro. Sustain.

Year 2

Launch Recruitment and Training Focus for 1 year to bring up numbers. Sustain.
Artillery focus on Portable and Light Systems (to include ATGMs, SAMs and LAMs). Sustain.
Air focus on UAVs. Sustain.

Year 3
GBAD Focus. Sustain
Armour and Artillery Focus. Sustain.

Year 4
Air Focus. Sustain.
Navy Focus. Sustain.

And when I say Focus I mean Initial Operating Capacity for new systems.
Planning and Purchasing needs to start immediately.
And be sustained.

 

[TacticalTea]

Honestly we are so far behind the 8 ball for people I am not sure how the system could deal with a massive influx of people without ending up with thousands on pat platoons for years again.

Speaking with PCCs and CMs, the focus for a while has been manning operations, with training coming almost dead last.

It seems to me we've got it upside down.

In this specific case, I don't think any party in its right political mind would push back - maybe the Bloc.

Canada has the world's 2nd largest Ukrainian population - those are a lot of votes that they would stand to lose.

Even the Bloc is a centrist party, I'd expect more opposition from NDP/Greens

 

[daftandbarmy]

-develop a proper Canadian Military Culture. There I said it. We have a lot of British military traditions, but have seen a lot of spill over of "Americanisms" that have affected our organizational structure. The U.S. Army has the numbers to have multiple layers of command. We don't have the luxury. Make our numbers count.

The more that people my age retire out of the CAF, the more the culture shift will happen, IMHO.

The younger troops are already there, they just used to look at dusty old anglophiles like me and roll their eyes, I hope

 

[Kirkhill]

The more that people my age retire out of the CAF, the more the culture shift will happen, IMHO.

The younger troops are already there, they just used to look at dusty old anglophiles like me and roll their eyes, I hope

Is it just the Canadian Military Culture or is it the Canadian National Culture?

The Military Culture will always be a subset of the National Culture.

Is the National Culture sufficiently militaristic to support a military with its own independent culture?

For me that is an open question.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Is it just the Canadian Military Culture or is it the Canadian National Culture?

The Military Culture will always be a subset of the National Culture.

Is the National Culture sufficiently militaristic to support a military with its own independent culture?

For me that is an open question.

I'm of the view that Canadian National Culture in 2022 is fundamentally at odds with Military Culture writ large.

War is a team sport, individuals don't matter. Look at the meat grinder that is Ukraine atm. Rockets, Bombs, Missiles and Shells don't give a damn about "accommodations".

We are sacrificing group cohesion to cater to the individual. It's an interesting experiment

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Not sure if this is proper spot for this, so Mods can move it if warranted. And my apologies if its been posted somewhere else. Since we are talking about rearming the CF with modern weapon systems including ATGM I happened to find this article stating that JTF-2 had purchased an unknown number of Israeli Spike missile systems. So if we are looking at purchasing new anti-tank weapons, go with the Spike system, as I've mentioned before, it comes in more variants then the US Javelin, and apparently its already in Canadian service. so we already have soldiers trained in its use.

Machine translation below:

For Special Forces: The Canadian Army has purchased Rafael Spike missiles

The Canadian military has confirmed to Israel Defense that in 2016 the Ministry of Defense purchased a version of the missile system. His reference comes after the publication of photos of Canadian soldiers who fought in Iraq, along with Raphael's missile system

Ami Rohex Dumba | 21/11/2019

The Special Forces of the Canadian Army purchased Spike missiles from the Raphael Company in 2016, as confirmed by Captain Jamie Donovan, of the Canadian Defense Forces Defense Forces. "In 2016, the Canadian Ministry of National Defense purchased a version of the SPIKE missile system to command special operational forces in Canada," the spokesman said in a statement.

The purchase item was first published on the Peresh website based on photos that were leaked to the network. In the same photos, Canadian soldiers were seen during the fighting in Mosul, Iraq in 2016, equipped with spike missiles. The photo was taken from an article by the Kurdish Rudaw channel, in which a pair of Canadian soldiers are seen on the armor of the Kurdish forces, admiring a Spike LR launcher from the new model ("Unified Launcher"). The Canadian soldiers wore ordinary uniforms with a badge that clearly looked like the Canadian flag. Following the publication, we contacted the Canadian Army, which confirmed the correctness of the purchase.

Meanwhile, Rafael announced earlier this week that it had recently signed a major contract to supply spike missiles to the German army. The transaction was made through Rafael's subsidiary in Europe - Eurospike . The company explained that this is a multi-year framework agreement for the supply of missiles and launchers from the Spike family.

As part of the framework agreement, the first shipment will include 1,500 spike missiles, alongside hundreds of ICLU launchers . "The multi-year agreement will allow the German Ministry of Defense to continue to purchase Spike missiles in the coming years.

Original Link (In Hebrew)