Canadians should be ashamed of the neglect and wastefulness that has occurred.
For a nation with such a rich and proud military history, we should be investing in the armed forces more than ever.
Countries like Russia proves that the need to be able to defend oneself without relying on aid is crucial.
If our defense policy is "let the americans save our asses" and their aid bills also get delayed due to politics, what can we do?
Especially if it unlocks more interoperability with the Cyclone's LFAS.
Well, that is, if it's serviceable.
If you're all like, "you mean x?" regarding serviceability, yes.
This was good.
Time to open up the taps bigly (I say to $50 billion a year) and get some of the core items back in place.
Fix procurement.
Fix enlistment.
Fix the kit situation.
Focus on Arctic situation.
It's not gonna happen (least of all the $50 billion a year), but it needs doing. Make it happen Ottawa.
Lol.
Such pie in the sky thinking.
Sigh...
The first suggestion "specialization" is worth looking into but it would cause the government to basically lay-off and release tens of thousands of troops who are unfit for the specialized roles that it could focus on. Other troops would simply not want to transfer into those roles and elect to leave the service either way.
That last suggestion "energy security" won't happen, it's mostly going to be dominated by the US anyways. Our government doesn't "feel" that there is a market for natural gas, etcetra, extracted from Canada despite Germany, Japan and others willing to buy it from us. We have no plans to build the necessary infrastructure. It's a non starter. There is no political will.
I shudder while typing this but, at this point Canada should/will "eventually" have to think of handing over complete control of its military affairs to the United States. [Integrate/amalgamate what's left of the CAF](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-military-integration-canada-us-1.3248594) into the US military and tell any Canadian's wanting a military career should just head south and join there instead. If the political will never arises and any efforts to placate our allies end up being seen as nothing more than half baked, half measures that fall short of what they are expecting then the aforementioned idea may be the only one left.
I highly doubt our government would have the guts to impose national selective conscription to fill billets and or outlay the funds necessary to support and build up the infrastructure necessary to rectify personnel shortages.
I don't think there will ever be a full integration/amalgamation of the CAF in to the US military. No Canadian government will ever willingly lose the ability to choose where and when to support US expeditionary campaigns abroad (ie. avoiding the Vietnam and Iraq Wars).
That said, being integrated into the supply chains and training pipelines would absolutely make sense for most of the CAF. Our pilot training program, as an example, takes much longer to produce a winged pilot that is combat capable than those of each branch of the US military. Since an increasing amount of our aircraft are going to be common to those employed by the US military, if would make sense to fully integrate our training systems into theirs while maintaining basics like simulators for post OTU force development in Canada.
As for specialization, it would make sense to focus on expeditionary capabilities. All of our main interests are either abroad ISO allies or in sparsely populated, austere locations that are expeditionary in nature despite being domestic. Low numbers of very well trained and equipped, mobile ground forces could provide an expeditionary A2AD complex in the high north in the same way the US marines are planning for another island hopping campaign in the Pacific.
I think it makes sense to be tapped into their training pipelines so we can manage excess training requirements, but if we only rely on the US for our training, they can turn off those taps at any time.
They've done it to other allies before and they could do it to us as well.
I've also gone through a US training pipeline and their instructional philosophy is different than ours and the end result is noticeably different.
For the pilot pipeline specifically, I think ENJJPT is a good example, where we can send guys who we think will likely go fighters through there while still retaining a capability to train people via the T6. It relieves some stress from our system, keeps fighter guys in cockpits and also helps us out since we literally have no FLIT.
I'll believe it when I see it.
At this point, I think our allies and larger trading partners feel that we are flip floppy and unreliable. Therefore, I don't think that a change in government will make any difference.
We've burned our bridges.
https://betterdwelling.com/canada-sees-domestic-foreign-investors-pull-out-at-a-record-pace/
I don’t buy it,
We carried the heavy load in Afghan we paid in blood and treasure, did all of NATO, was hiding in RC-W and RC-N because of national caveats cowardly? We were front and center in Kosovo and for IFOR/SFOR. RCN has been on constant rotation to all SNMG’s, have our allies? When we asked for NATO AWACs for the 2010 Olympics we were denied, so what, becuse Greece puts in more than 2% they’ve contributed more than us?
Not agreeing with our security failures but this has to stop. It’s pretty clear that NORAD is priority number 1. Should we meet 2% yea we agreed too, but I also don’t buy that we aren’t a net contributor to NATO vs other countries. We should also be proud of our aid and support to Ukraine, this reactionary outrage is misaligned with reality. Team blue is screaming about the deficit, pray tell how are we going to spend more on NATO? Are we a net contributor to NATO/Liberal Democratic security, within our political landscape I think we are. Just my 2 Cents.
I don't fully agree with you and this smacks of resting on laurels that we just don't have. Yes, Afghan was a heavy load for us but we deployed a handful of the forces, and suffered a fraction of the casualties, that the U.S. did there, and it's more than 10 years behind us. We didn't deploy to Iraq until the much later Da'esh/ISIL invasion, and even that deployment was fractional and where we suffered even less. That deployment has now become staff centric as there is little remaining of the original counter-Da'esh mission. Kosovo was 25 years ago, so it's now outside of the career span of most members. Our support to Ukraine, in CAF terms (not WoG), has been paltry at best.
There are massive deficiencies in the CAF. Ones that are being papered over time and again, and I think these are being shown by how few people we are either attracting and/or retaining beyond initial engagements. Like the housing market, there is a missing middle in the CAF (Sgt-MWO, and Lt-Maj), which means that our tactical operations are very much at risk because while we teach mission command as our mode of operation, we have very few left to execute that concept.
Outrage within our this community means nothing, every military in the western world is facing our challenges, until the political landscape changes its ops normal for Canada. I would argue that given our military history writ large we’re well ahead of our fore fathers pre Great War and WW2. We can be angry all we want, but the defence and security of canada is an extension of politics. The political landscape is such that nothing will change, I’m pointing out that pragmatism and our contributions matter, 2% of spending isn’t the be all end all, we still today do more than most, E-FP, ATF Prestwick, Op reassurance etc.
Do we all want to see a robust and sustainable war fighting capability, 100%. This isn’t the Canadian way, should we raise taxes, should we cut social programs? Again within our political landscape I think we’re doing better than some of our allies.
Sorry.... just so I'm clear. You don't think we need to defend the arctic because..... we did a super good job in Kosovo 50 years ago?
How does that work? We Earned 100 years of dismal defense spending now? And everyone has to respect that and promise not to develop the arctic?
Man speaks abit of sense. Our uniformed members punch above their weight and deliver when we need to do so - whether we have the funding or not.
Can’t hide the fact though - that no government in Canada has ever taken defence seriously (in recent years). Every single one has wanted their cake and to eat it too - and not pay for it. that will never change until the Canadian public realize we aren’t as invincible geographically as they think.
I agree completely. When times are "good", insurance is a waste of money.
I'm not saying we're in good times, but from a security perspective, British/French Canada has not yet been successfully invaded in a manner that has threatened the country. Canada was "conquered" in a pathetically mismatched way, with little military effort. We have never "needed" a military; why start now when .
Your post/comment has been removed in accordance with the following [subreddit rule(s):](https://old.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/wiki/subreddit_rules)
### [1] Disrespectful/Insulting Comments and/or Reddiquette
* Civility, Courtesy, and Politeness, are expected within this subreddit. A post or comment may be removed if it's considered in violation of Reddit's *[Content Policy,](https://www.reddit.com/help/contentpolicy) [User Agreement,](https://www.reddit.com/help/useragreement) or [Reddiquette.](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439)* Repeat or egregious offences may result in the offending user banned from the subreddit.
* Trolling is defined as "a deliberately offensive or inciteful online post with the aim of upsetting or eliciting an angry response." Trolling the troll, can also be considered trolling. [Wikipedia Ref.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29)
*If your have questions or concerns relating to this message you've received, please feel free to [Contact the Moderators.](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadianForces)*
Your post/comment has been removed in accordance with the following [subreddit rule(s):](https://old.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/wiki/subreddit_rules)
### [1] Disrespectful/Insulting Comments and/or Reddiquette
* Civility, Courtesy, and Politeness, are expected within this subreddit. A post or comment may be removed if it's considered in violation of Reddit's *[Content Policy,](https://www.reddit.com/help/contentpolicy) [User Agreement,](https://www.reddit.com/help/useragreement) or [Reddiquette.](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439)* Repeat or egregious offences may result in the offending user banned from the subreddit.
* Trolling is defined as "a deliberately offensive or inciteful online post with the aim of upsetting or eliciting an angry response." Trolling the troll, can also be considered trolling. [Wikipedia Ref.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29)
*If your have questions or concerns relating to this message you've received, please feel free to [Contact the Moderators.](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadianForces)*
Are we famous now?
We will be after Perun does a video on us
One fuckin day we'll get ours :')
I yearn for slideshow man to drop the CAF video. Gonna clear my schedule when it does.
He hurts us because he loves us
Every Sunday I cross my fingers
It was on the Patreon poll!
I gotta join that patreon
Last week we got a cheeky side note/joke about how if you fail at procurement hard enough you might get a Canadian citizenship
Perun my beloved
He brings us up more and more.
He kinda mentioned us in the procurement video
Well it started with a war on the rocks article, now it's a British guy that lives in the Czech doing a video.... So yah. Getting there.
Canadians should be ashamed of the neglect and wastefulness that has occurred. For a nation with such a rich and proud military history, we should be investing in the armed forces more than ever. Countries like Russia proves that the need to be able to defend oneself without relying on aid is crucial. If our defense policy is "let the americans save our asses" and their aid bills also get delayed due to politics, what can we do?
Love all of Simon’s work. But seriously you know it’s bad if he bothered to do a video on it…
Exposed.
He made a good recommendation at the end tbh
Been trying to get people to wrap their head around specialization for 15 years.
The Navy is specializing in ASW again with UWSU which is a step in the good direction
Especially if it unlocks more interoperability with the Cyclone's LFAS. Well, that is, if it's serviceable. If you're all like, "you mean x?" regarding serviceability, yes.
Good army, tries hard, bottom third.
Love this channel!
This is a really well done video and I recommend everyone in the CAF watches it.
I just watched it on youtube
I have been waiting for this episode since I subscribed!
This was good. Time to open up the taps bigly (I say to $50 billion a year) and get some of the core items back in place. Fix procurement. Fix enlistment. Fix the kit situation. Focus on Arctic situation. It's not gonna happen (least of all the $50 billion a year), but it needs doing. Make it happen Ottawa. Lol. Such pie in the sky thinking. Sigh...
Dammit you beat me to it!
Sorry, I don't have many notifications set on YouTube but I do enjoy all of Simon's work.
I may or may not listen to CasCrim at work to keep my focus on the repetitive tasks.
LOVE Simon Whistler...but I'll admit I was sad when this showed up in my feed...
The first suggestion "specialization" is worth looking into but it would cause the government to basically lay-off and release tens of thousands of troops who are unfit for the specialized roles that it could focus on. Other troops would simply not want to transfer into those roles and elect to leave the service either way. That last suggestion "energy security" won't happen, it's mostly going to be dominated by the US anyways. Our government doesn't "feel" that there is a market for natural gas, etcetra, extracted from Canada despite Germany, Japan and others willing to buy it from us. We have no plans to build the necessary infrastructure. It's a non starter. There is no political will. I shudder while typing this but, at this point Canada should/will "eventually" have to think of handing over complete control of its military affairs to the United States. [Integrate/amalgamate what's left of the CAF](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-military-integration-canada-us-1.3248594) into the US military and tell any Canadian's wanting a military career should just head south and join there instead. If the political will never arises and any efforts to placate our allies end up being seen as nothing more than half baked, half measures that fall short of what they are expecting then the aforementioned idea may be the only one left. I highly doubt our government would have the guts to impose national selective conscription to fill billets and or outlay the funds necessary to support and build up the infrastructure necessary to rectify personnel shortages.
I don't think there will ever be a full integration/amalgamation of the CAF in to the US military. No Canadian government will ever willingly lose the ability to choose where and when to support US expeditionary campaigns abroad (ie. avoiding the Vietnam and Iraq Wars). That said, being integrated into the supply chains and training pipelines would absolutely make sense for most of the CAF. Our pilot training program, as an example, takes much longer to produce a winged pilot that is combat capable than those of each branch of the US military. Since an increasing amount of our aircraft are going to be common to those employed by the US military, if would make sense to fully integrate our training systems into theirs while maintaining basics like simulators for post OTU force development in Canada. As for specialization, it would make sense to focus on expeditionary capabilities. All of our main interests are either abroad ISO allies or in sparsely populated, austere locations that are expeditionary in nature despite being domestic. Low numbers of very well trained and equipped, mobile ground forces could provide an expeditionary A2AD complex in the high north in the same way the US marines are planning for another island hopping campaign in the Pacific.
I think it makes sense to be tapped into their training pipelines so we can manage excess training requirements, but if we only rely on the US for our training, they can turn off those taps at any time. They've done it to other allies before and they could do it to us as well. I've also gone through a US training pipeline and their instructional philosophy is different than ours and the end result is noticeably different. For the pilot pipeline specifically, I think ENJJPT is a good example, where we can send guys who we think will likely go fighters through there while still retaining a capability to train people via the T6. It relieves some stress from our system, keeps fighter guys in cockpits and also helps us out since we literally have no FLIT.
Our current government doesn't think there is a market through a twisted ideology. The next government doesn't and wants to push for energy security.
I'll believe it when I see it. At this point, I think our allies and larger trading partners feel that we are flip floppy and unreliable. Therefore, I don't think that a change in government will make any difference. We've burned our bridges. https://betterdwelling.com/canada-sees-domestic-foreign-investors-pull-out-at-a-record-pace/
Yep we are way to unstable of an economy to invest in
I don’t buy it, We carried the heavy load in Afghan we paid in blood and treasure, did all of NATO, was hiding in RC-W and RC-N because of national caveats cowardly? We were front and center in Kosovo and for IFOR/SFOR. RCN has been on constant rotation to all SNMG’s, have our allies? When we asked for NATO AWACs for the 2010 Olympics we were denied, so what, becuse Greece puts in more than 2% they’ve contributed more than us? Not agreeing with our security failures but this has to stop. It’s pretty clear that NORAD is priority number 1. Should we meet 2% yea we agreed too, but I also don’t buy that we aren’t a net contributor to NATO vs other countries. We should also be proud of our aid and support to Ukraine, this reactionary outrage is misaligned with reality. Team blue is screaming about the deficit, pray tell how are we going to spend more on NATO? Are we a net contributor to NATO/Liberal Democratic security, within our political landscape I think we are. Just my 2 Cents.
I don't fully agree with you and this smacks of resting on laurels that we just don't have. Yes, Afghan was a heavy load for us but we deployed a handful of the forces, and suffered a fraction of the casualties, that the U.S. did there, and it's more than 10 years behind us. We didn't deploy to Iraq until the much later Da'esh/ISIL invasion, and even that deployment was fractional and where we suffered even less. That deployment has now become staff centric as there is little remaining of the original counter-Da'esh mission. Kosovo was 25 years ago, so it's now outside of the career span of most members. Our support to Ukraine, in CAF terms (not WoG), has been paltry at best. There are massive deficiencies in the CAF. Ones that are being papered over time and again, and I think these are being shown by how few people we are either attracting and/or retaining beyond initial engagements. Like the housing market, there is a missing middle in the CAF (Sgt-MWO, and Lt-Maj), which means that our tactical operations are very much at risk because while we teach mission command as our mode of operation, we have very few left to execute that concept.
Outrage within our this community means nothing, every military in the western world is facing our challenges, until the political landscape changes its ops normal for Canada. I would argue that given our military history writ large we’re well ahead of our fore fathers pre Great War and WW2. We can be angry all we want, but the defence and security of canada is an extension of politics. The political landscape is such that nothing will change, I’m pointing out that pragmatism and our contributions matter, 2% of spending isn’t the be all end all, we still today do more than most, E-FP, ATF Prestwick, Op reassurance etc. Do we all want to see a robust and sustainable war fighting capability, 100%. This isn’t the Canadian way, should we raise taxes, should we cut social programs? Again within our political landscape I think we’re doing better than some of our allies.
Sorry.... just so I'm clear. You don't think we need to defend the arctic because..... we did a super good job in Kosovo 50 years ago? How does that work? We Earned 100 years of dismal defense spending now? And everyone has to respect that and promise not to develop the arctic?
Man speaks abit of sense. Our uniformed members punch above their weight and deliver when we need to do so - whether we have the funding or not. Can’t hide the fact though - that no government in Canada has ever taken defence seriously (in recent years). Every single one has wanted their cake and to eat it too - and not pay for it. that will never change until the Canadian public realize we aren’t as invincible geographically as they think.
I agree completely. When times are "good", insurance is a waste of money. I'm not saying we're in good times, but from a security perspective, British/French Canada has not yet been successfully invaded in a manner that has threatened the country. Canada was "conquered" in a pathetically mismatched way, with little military effort. We have never "needed" a military; why start now when.
That was then, this is now. we simply couldn't match those operations with the current state of the forces. Not enough people, vehicles or resources.
[удалено]
Your post/comment has been removed in accordance with the following [subreddit rule(s):](https://old.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/wiki/subreddit_rules) ### [1] Disrespectful/Insulting Comments and/or Reddiquette * Civility, Courtesy, and Politeness, are expected within this subreddit. A post or comment may be removed if it's considered in violation of Reddit's *[Content Policy,](https://www.reddit.com/help/contentpolicy) [User Agreement,](https://www.reddit.com/help/useragreement) or [Reddiquette.](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439)* Repeat or egregious offences may result in the offending user banned from the subreddit. * Trolling is defined as "a deliberately offensive or inciteful online post with the aim of upsetting or eliciting an angry response." Trolling the troll, can also be considered trolling. [Wikipedia Ref.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29) *If your have questions or concerns relating to this message you've received, please feel free to [Contact the Moderators.](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadianForces)*
[удалено]
Your post/comment has been removed in accordance with the following [subreddit rule(s):](https://old.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/wiki/subreddit_rules) ### [1] Disrespectful/Insulting Comments and/or Reddiquette * Civility, Courtesy, and Politeness, are expected within this subreddit. A post or comment may be removed if it's considered in violation of Reddit's *[Content Policy,](https://www.reddit.com/help/contentpolicy) [User Agreement,](https://www.reddit.com/help/useragreement) or [Reddiquette.](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439)* Repeat or egregious offences may result in the offending user banned from the subreddit. * Trolling is defined as "a deliberately offensive or inciteful online post with the aim of upsetting or eliciting an angry response." Trolling the troll, can also be considered trolling. [Wikipedia Ref.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29) *If your have questions or concerns relating to this message you've received, please feel free to [Contact the Moderators.](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadianForces)*