NEWS: Canada Sends Navy To Arctic North

OK.
I fail to see why the Canadians are getting all upity about a bit of rock within their boundries.

Do they not think that their forces would be better deployed somewhere else?

(waits for the onslaught of Candian flaming ) educate me here guys...

Originally posted by Bikereddie
OK.
I fail to see why the Canadians are getting all upity about a bit of rock within their boundries.

1200sq. nautical miles of sea territory is at stake over that bit of rock. Its been
mentioned earlier in the thread.

edit: 1200, not 1700

[edit on 23/8/05 by subz]

Well seems to me the Spanish decided to take the Falklands into their own possession once and what did the British do about..

Now I'm not suggesting that's what's happening here but I'm suggesting Canada does what it feels it must in her own waters.

Dallas

The places where Canadian Forces are being sent is all in this link...

www.forces.gc.ca...

Take a good look at it, Biker Eddie...there's some really good info there about the type of missions our soldiers are on these days.
There is also good news about the increases in funding, which, to my simple mind, is way overdue.

The Arctic has been guarded by the Canadian Rangers for too long a time, underfunded, unheralded...these capable individuals have done a great service to Canada...but they need to be backed up with our Navy.

[edit on 23-8-2005 by masqua]

Originally posted by subz

1700sq. nautical miles of sea territory is at stake over that bit of rock. Its been mentioned earlier in the thread.

OK. i wasn't trying to be flippant in any way or form. I just thought that the title and outcry was a bit over the top regarding the bit of rock, when the World has more serious issues at stake.
Like i said previously,"educate me here".

No offense intended with this ,or my earlier post.

Nevermind
.

[edit on 8/23/2005 by Gools]

Originally posted by Bikereddie
when the World has more serious issues at stake.
Like i said previously,"educate me here".

No offense intended with this ,or my earlier post.

No offence taken, hey, we're Canadian.

The thing is, here's the biggie, we are not the world. Don't want to be. We don't screw with other peoples policies, I know it seems different but that's the way we are. That is the difference to us betweeen Afghanistan and Iraq. We're in the former but not the latter.

However, on the homefront, we have NO problem getting our collective behinds off of the couch.

O Sh__ no. No offense taken at all. And thanks for being sensitive about it. Canadian or no, its just a matter of land, water and MONEY in oil up there (laugh)!

Dallas

I've often heard the warning that to leave a place unprotected and lonely is to invite its' loss. So it is with our Arctic coast. It is the job of our Canadian Forces to be vigilant at all times on this immense and forbidding area.

To not do so is to lose it. As the conditions improve for probes by outsiders on our most northern shores, it becomes much more difficult to patrol. This job has, up til now, mostly fallen on the Native American populations which already live in these areas. They, the Canadian Rangers, are given the very basics in gear...'sort of' uniforms, minor pay scales, old Lee Enfield rifles (which they prefer,btw) and lots of good training.

This type of guard is no longer enough,IMO...and that is why our ships are steaming there.

Thanks for the understanding and education here guys

Originally posted by Bikereddie
Thanks for the understanding and education here guys

And thank you for your interest, eh?

Originally posted by masqua
I've often heard the warning that to leave a place unprotected and lonely is to invite its' loss. So it is with our Arctic coast. It is the job of our Canadian Forces to be vigilant at all times on this immense and forbidding area.

And that is what stirred the pot when it was discovered that the Red and white flag flying on the rock was not the Maple Leaf.

Canada and Denmark will resolve it diplomatically, and if not each country can dump two members of its armed forces and wrestle for it. Whomever does not fall into the sea first is the winner.

Yes, if only all disputes between Countrys' could be handled it the same manner you suggest. No knives, Guns, missles or nukes needed. Just the money saved alone as well as no loss of Human life......just think of it.

Dallas

What is the worst that could possibly happen in this situation?

The worst that could happen, for Canadians, is that if Denmark holds Hans Island there are several other countries that will hop on board with claims of their own. Russia, the US and Norway would all like to have pieces of the North that we claim as ours. This could set a very bad precedent for Canada.

The US considers this international territory and does not even advise us when sailing through. We don't like that very much.

"If we're not firm with Hans Islands, which by the way is the only sovereignty issue that concerns land, we're going to be setting up a terrible precedent for remaining issues that are very significant for Canadian Arctic sovereignty."

The United States is challenging Canadian sovereignty in six other areas of the Arctic, including the Northwest Passage.

If sea ice continues to thin due to climate change, the Northwest Passage will eventually open up as a major shipping route. More and more, the U.S. and other countries believe that the Arctic waters are international waters -- as is the case in the Antarctic.

Retired Colonel Pierre Leblanc, a former commander of the Northern Area, says Canada may have already lost its claim to the Arctic waters, due reports over the past 30 years of unidentified submarines being spotted in the area.

www.ctv.ca

Originally posted by DuzeyThe US considers this international territory and does not even advise us when sailing through. We don't like that very much.

The US powers that be need no real excuses to challenge anything they deem might interfere with their perceived space, as such excuses are readily manufactured. Now if these powers in fact were thinkers, they might realise it best to back Canada, for to declare it international waters means that their enemies also have right of easement.

[edit on 8/23/05 by SomewhereinBetween]

Have to disagree with you slightly on this one. Simply mentioned, where would Canada be without help in Northern Patrols without the United States being involved?

what it might boil down to is what would the USA do if told to leave Canadian waters until invited back. Would the order be respected? I think it would.

Dallas

Finally a conflict between two modern nations. This could impact the way everyone dispute between developed contrys are handles conflicts for the next century. No 1st world vs third world. Or third world vs third world. Just 1st vs 1st

Originally posted by Dallas
Have to disagree with you slightly on this one. Simply mentioned, where would Canada be without help in Northern Patrols without the United States being involved?

Don't have a problem with your disagreement at all. This is something I've been following for a few years and now I actually have people to talk about it with. I'm excited and hoping we'll have a great little discussion on the topic.

Which leads me to SomewhereinBetween's post:

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Now if these powers in fact were thinkers, they might realise it best to back Canada, for to declare it international waters means that their enemies also have right of easement.

Bingo!!! Someone give this member a prize because they got it on the first try. If this is Canadian territory it is protected by Canadian law. Also a bonus for the environmentally friendly because it is protected by the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act.

A day I never thought I would see was the day Paul Cellucci and I agreed on something. But it happened on this topic. With the concerns the US has over terrorism it makes good sense to support Canada's claim on Hans Island because it gives us control over the waters.

Most important, it's time to persuade Washington -- by far the most influential opponent of Canada's sovereignty claim -- to change its position. Our neighbour's policy on the Northwest Passage dates from the Cold War, when the U.S. Navy needed an assured right of transit and its submarines had to sail submerged. Today, Washington is more concerned about terrorists finding a back door to North America, or rogue states using the oceans to transport weapons of mass destruction to other states or terrorist groups. In the Arctic, these new threats could just as easily be handled by a strengthened Canadian Coast Guard and navy.

Canada's ability to police the Arctic would be enhanced if its domestic laws could be applied to their full extent. It does not serve the interests of the United States to have foreign vessels shielded from those laws, and most of international law, by insisting that the Northwest Passage is an international strait.

Nor is it likely that Canada would ever deny the U.S. Navy access to the Northwest Passage. Indeed, Ottawa and Washington are planning to expand maritime co-operation in conjunction with the renewal of the NORAD agreement next year.

Last November, Paul Cellucci, the outgoing U.S. ambassador, suggested that U.S. national security might be enhanced if Washington recognized Canada's claim over the Passage. "We are looking at everything through the terrorism prism," he said. "Our top priority is to stop the terrorists. So perhaps when this is brought to the table again, we may have to take another look."

Invitations to negotiate do not come any clearer . It's time to show that we're ready and able to police Arctic waters. The Prime Minister could then seize what might be our last best chance for a Canadian North both strong and free.

Arctic Net

This is why it is so important to build the military and get some men stationed up there. The US and Canada's interests coincide on this issue and all we need to do is show we can patrol it. We need a couple of new icebreakers, one cold weather and one warm, helicopters that don't crash and lots of other neat things.

I have no problem with the US helping us out, I just want their support on this issue. The point to me is we would just wave them through and it would be nothing but a small formality that shows respect for us. It hurts our claim when they do this.

I don't think we'd ever tell the US to get out of the waters unless they did something like fire on us. I hope they don't do that though.



[edit on 23-8-2005 by Duzey]

Way up on Ellesmere Island is a place called Alert.

www.tscm.com...

This woebegotten place was the information gathering place for signals and excursions eminating out of the old USSR...that bugbear out of our youth. Since that bear has gone into hibernation of recent decades, this station has (so I hear) fallen into disrepair. It was (for decades) jointly occupied by Canadian and American Forces personnel during its' heyday and has quite a history, once you begin looking into it.

The reason I bring this up is that we're forgetting just who the closest superpower is to us in the far north. It would be smart of us not to let that slip out of our minds in the developing story about Hans Island.

America and Canada have a long history of co-operation in the Arctic and I doubt this will change when I see China and Russia playing war games today. Putin may seem to be fairly innocuous but lets not forget his KGB upbringing. They, and he, are masters at pulling wool over eyes.

I think there is much more to the Hans Island scenario than meets the press...but that's just me...an old conspiracy nut.