Canadian CF-18 fleet unable to meet NORAD and NATO commitments

a reply to: InTheLight

As long as people fight for resources a strong military is needed.

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: Irishhaf
If you want to have a modern military and want to be able to project power for what ever reason tickles your pickle you have to spend the money.
It is not possible to keep weapon systems modern and able to function in a war time environment you need to keep them updated.

Updated equals big bucks. What about peace and love?

What govt wants peace and love, and not power and wealth.

originally posted by: Irishhaf

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: Irishhaf
If you want to have a modern military and want to be able to project power for what ever reason tickles your pickle you have to spend the money.
It is not possible to keep weapon systems modern and able to function in a war time environment you need to keep them updated.

Updated equals big bucks. What about peace and love?

What govt wants peace and love, and not power and wealth.

It is not easy. D E S T R U C T I O N.

What do you expect, Canada is like 1/10th the size of the U.S., and is one of the smallest countries in NATO besides the Nordics, Baltics and some E. European countries. Either way, they will in time, they're one of the wealthiest countries on the planet despite their small populace.

a reply to: IndyFront

Things dont get cheaper the longer you blow off the updates, and thats going to continue to be a bigger and bigger problem.

The Canadian troops I have met are fantastic soldiers that work daily miracles with a shoe string budget.

a reply to: IndyFront

What do you expect, Canada is like 1/10th the size of the U.S.

Uhhmm, no its not, its the second largest country on earth after Russia. Canada is 9.984 million square km versus the US at 9.63 million square km.

and is one of the smallest countries in NATO besides the Nordics, Baltics and some E. European countries.

Please re-read what I just said and consider your statements. At this point I genuinely dont know what the hell you are talking about. Canada is neither physically small in comparison to those areas you named nor is it small in economic terms.

they're one of the wealthiest countries on the planet despite their small populace

So you just contradicted yourself in one breath, one minute they are "small" the next they are wealthy. Exactly what is it you are trying to say here?

a reply to: thebozeian

326,766,748 USA population

compared to 36,953,765 - Canada’s population .......

In the second largest land mass.....

Economically, right now, we seem to be quickly building debt rather than wealth

a reply to: [post=23974896]tadaman[/p
Not with your current leadership specificly.

Not ever general.

Our current suck ass Pm campagned on trashing the F-35 and completely ignored that we were one of the original investment group. They also (mis)presented the life time cost of running the f-35 as the upfront cost.

They are running a bid competetion. I expect the current govenmnt to drop the ball delibertateily.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: InTheLight

As long as people fight for resources a strong military is needed.

Then if the American people need or want Canada's resources, then you can help to protect those resources.

a reply to: InTheLight

What do you think we've done for decades? Helping protect them doesn't mean Canada gets to have a free ride and ignore their commitments though.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: InTheLight

What do you think we've done for decades? Helping protect them doesn't mean Canada gets to have a free ride and ignore their commitments though.

What commitments are we ignoring except for 'temporarily' not being able to keep pilots/techs now - we have for the most part kept our commitments and are working on fixing this 'temporary' problem? If your President keeps upping your military budget because you can (can't really) afford it, why should we follow suit if we can't afford it? Keep it real.

a reply to: InTheLight

So you'd be fine if the US met our commitments to help defend Canada "for the most part"? The entire point of this thread is that the Canadian Auditor General has said the RCAF can't currently meet all their commitments and it's getting worse.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: InTheLight

So you'd be fine if the US met our commitments to help defend Canada "for the most part"? The entire point of this thread is that the Canadian Auditor General has said the RCAF can't currently meet all their commitments and it's getting worse.

We have met our commitments in the past up until now and we are working on fixing the problem. Question: Why not step up and assist us during this temporary time of need instead of criticizing? Keep this up and the U.S. will have no allies at all.

a reply to: InTheLight

Because no one has asked for help. If they ask for it help can be given, but without asking we're not going to do anything.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: InTheLight

Because no one has asked for help. If they ask for it help can be given, but without asking we're not going to do anything.

Help was not asked for because new programs are being developed to fix the pilot/tech problems. We would certainly ask for military help if it was warranted, but it is not warranted.

a reply to: InTheLight

New programs that will take years to be effective. Short term help is needed, just as we need help getting our maintenance programs back on track. Buying second hand, worn out aircraft isn't the answer.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: InTheLight

New programs that will take years to be effective. Short term help is needed, just as we need help getting our maintenance programs back on track. Buying second hand, worn out aircraft isn't the answer.

I don't disagree with you, but as I said they are in the process of figuring it all out and I am sure when certain tax monies start rolling in they will have more buying power and $ persuasion with pilots and techs. This is definitely something to keep an eye on. In the interim, if we were to need short term help, which we don't right now, y'all could step up and make the offer.

When Russia starts encroaching on the disputed Canadian Arctic shelf, I hope we stand back and watch you "fight" that battle with "peace and love". We will send you all the peace and love we can muster.

Maybe when certain of our tax monies roll in we will consider meeting certain commitments like spilling American blood on behalf of countries who refuse to participate in their own defense. In the interim, if you need short term help, we have lots of peace and love to spend. With glowing hearts we'll watch thee rise-- the true north, weak and "free."

originally posted by: RadioRobert
When Russia starts encroaching on the disputed Canadian Arctic shelf, I hope we stand back and watch you "fight" that battle with "peace and love". We will send you all the peace and love we can muster.

Maybe when certain of our tax monies roll in we will consider meeting certain commitments like spilling American blood on behalf of countries who refuse to participate in their own defense. In the interim, if you need short term help, we have lots of peace and love to spend. With glowing hearts we'll watch thee rise-- the true north, weak and "free."

Sure you do that and sit back and watch what real allies do to help each other - live and learn.

a reply to: InTheLight

Sorry, we're broke. Unessential spending like bailing out countries who refuse to spend even 1.5% GDP on defense has to end. I'd also reassign workshare for the F-35 program seeing as you've flipped the bird at the other international partners in that program. No need to feed your industry when we have so many other poor countries including ourselves who need the work.

Canada has a larger GDP than Russia, so you should be fine on your own. EU has roughly ten times or more the Russian GDP. They should be able to field a credible defensive force without the US, too.

Peace and love