CAnada's Military - Page 3




 
--
 
January 31st, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
canadian armed force's main job right now is to do peace-keeping or humanlitirian missions.....but we got to admit that they need better equipments and larger size to accomplish those missions perfectly.

fact: canada has to rent airplanes to bring its troops to hot spots
January 31st, 2005  
r031Button
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck
The question is, does Canada ever have to fight a war by itself? I mean, in what kind of even bizzaire scenario do you see Canadian forces fighting an enemy in a conventional war without the backing of the US or anyone else? I think such a chance is so remote, that the government is really better off making a military that is highly mobile and works to mainly support allied operations worldwide.
You have to design your military around the mission.
And in a situation where a place becomes unstable and Canadian civilians must be withdrawn, I think Canada's got the right stuff for that kind of operation, though I'm not sure what Canada's air and sea lift capacities are.
The fact of the matter is this though;how would you feel if your military could only deploy on missions supported by a foreign power? I'm not talking about an all out conventional war, but I do think we should maintain the skills/training systems needed for that situation intact in the event that we do deploy on our own.

Also Sexybeast; that's the statement that has killed our military. The belief that we're just "peace keepers" is an excuse to underfund the military and degrade it's equipment. It also displays an incredible amount of ignorance as to how a peacekeeping operation works: belligerent groups don't just stop fighting because the UN/NATO forces are such nice guys; they stop fighting because they know that those force are capable of defeating them in open conflict, and therefore the UN/NATO forces can enforce, not keep, peace in the region.

You are right though; we do need more strategic lift; read any. A fairly common suggestion is to mold the Canadian forces into a expedionary force similar to the USMC or RM.
January 31st, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
ya...wut i mean was canada needs MORE power to do the peace keeping stuff..but the main job is still peace-keeping...

like more lift power, more man power, better equipments for soldiers to accomplish their missions...(i dont like those jeeps and subs)
--
January 31st, 2005  
A Can of Man
 
 
I know what you mean about the pride issue.
But that's just the way things are.
The mission counts. But you're right, they're going to have to take this mission seriously. Calling it "peacekeeping" is a mistake because that entire type of operation, the way it's run, is a complete **** up fron the start anyways.
January 31st, 2005  
r031Button
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck
I know what you mean about the pride issue.
But that's just the way things are.
The mission counts. But you're right, they're going to have to take this mission seriously. Calling it "peacekeeping" is a mistake because that entire type of operation, the way it's run, is a complete c**k up fron the start anyways.
I don't consider it an issue of pride, I consider it an issue of sovereignty. A nation shouldn't be bound in it's actions by the will of it's neighbors. As for the "peace keeping" issue; it is not, I repeat NOT, the main job of the Canadian forces. Our duty is to defend Canada, and it's interests abroad. Loosely translated we fight wars; the frequency of that occurring is irrelevant; it still remains our duty.
January 31st, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
u must know the incidnet of canadian airborn regiment and how they got disbanded....

and recent discussioin suggests that government may use that disgraceful incident (torturing a boy to deah in a countr) as an excuse to cut funds and disband the airborn...

sometimes i think ppl want to give money to medicare more than giving to the military....
January 31st, 2005  
r031Button
 
 
Those are far from recent discussions. Everybody knows what happened to the Airborne(RIP); it's the reason no camera's are allowed in messes anymore.

It's also considered a fact that medicare in the priority in Canada.
January 31st, 2005  
A Can of Man
 
 
Your mission may be to defend Canada, but tanks etc. aren't required for that role anymore.
I think if anything, Canada should beef up its logistical ability so that it won't be reliant on others in terms of deploying troops.
The issue with the Canadian military is tricky because it shares a common border with no one that is a national threat. Basically the role of large land forces in defending Canada's pretty much disappeared.
I think it's pretty sad that a national healthcare funding can gut the living daylights out of all other spending.
January 31st, 2005  
Snauhi
 
Canada have a good and small military but it cannot operate alone.
February 1st, 2005  
r031Button
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck
I think it's pretty sad that a national healthcare funding can gut the living daylights out of all other spending.
Well yeah, we have a system that doesn't work; however, anybody that brings that point up is accused of being "too American". This is is also the case with the military; in fact during the last election; the Liberals had a massive add campaign accusing hte Conservatives of wanting to SPend billions of tanks and aircraft carriers ; god forbid that we spend money on our military for a change.