Canada gives up on their military. I wonder who they're depending on now?

The BBQ Pit
201

First of all, I call horseshit. “You’re mooching off us” isn’t anything else but an attempt to besmirch us.

Secondly, you provided a variety of cites and not a single one of them supports your claim we’re “mooching” anything, or relying on you for anything. You seem to be really confused here; “Canada has problems with its armed forces” does not equal “Canada is mooching off the United States.” When the USA allowed its army to go to seed in the 1920s, were you mooching off us?

And if my grandma had wheels, she’d be a wagon.

Fact is, Canada has mooched nothing, is mooching nothing, and plans to mooch nothing. There is no plan for the Canadian Forces to “disappear.” You based an OP and a variety of nasty accusations on something that has never happened, isn’t happening now, and isn’t planned to happen, no matter what that twit Belinda Stronach says.

It works both ways. If the United States bordered China instead of Canada, YOU would have a much, much greater need for defense spending, wouldn’t you? Imagine how much more the USA would have had to spend on maintaining a standing army had you shared your border with the USSR. You’re trying to have it both ways here, asserting that Canada benefits from sharing the border with the USA (which is surely true) and conveniently leaving out the fact that the USA benefits just as much from sharing a peaceful border. That accident of history and geography in no way costs the USA anything - it’s of enormous benefit to BOTH countries, militarily and otherwise.

If it were to come to pass that the USA were to have to assume defense responsibility for Canada, I would agree we’d be mooching. But that isn’t the case, is it? And there simply isn’t any realistic chance that’s going to happen. You are bitching and whining about a phenomenon that does not exist.

Yeah, I wish I was. It’s MY country helping YOURS. You’re getting the good end of this bargain. Not that I’m suggesting it’s a huge amount of help in the grand scheme of things, but let us be crystal clear as to who is helping who; it’s CANADA helping THE UNITED STATES. Not the other way around.

The reason there’s so much bitterness here is because you’re being amazingly stupid, ignorant and insulting. It’s almost surreal; OUR country is helping to defend YOURS, in money and blood. Your country is doing absolutely nothing to defend ours, has never been asked to, and never has. And you’re complaining, to my absolute amazement, about… the exact opposite of reality. You’re accusing US of relying on YOU, even though that isn’t happening, has never happened, and in the actual real world, WE’RE helping YOU. It’s as if your posts are coming from Opposite Reality Bizarro World. We spend God only knows how much money and send our soldiers to die to fight those who attacked you, because you’re our allies. Would you like me to bake you some cookies, too? Would that make you happy?

It’s as if you lent your brother $1000, and he came back to you the next day and demanded to know why you weren’t paying him back the money he lent you. And when you say “Um, I lent you the money, don’t you remember?” he started babbling about how you might-maybe-in-the-future borrow money from him if certain things go just a certain way so let’s forget what really happened.

202

Whatever you say, man. Time will tell. But I know one thing for sure, and that’s that this argument has reached the level of pointlessness and having had my say I’m done with it. You can backshot me to your heart’s content.

203

Airman doors,

Nice googling, but it doesn’t prove a thing. (The bias of some of your sources would be very clear to a Canadian.)

Without offering any reasons to back up your point, you dismissed Canada’s coming to America’s aid in Afghanistan after 9/11 as irrelevant to this discussion. It is very relevant. America is far more likely to be attacked than Canada. We will be coming to your aid again.

Canada is capable of monitoring it’s borders. We meet our NATO requirements (although just barely) at current spending levels. Spending on the military will most likely increase somewhat in the near future.

You are really making a non-point.

204

As we have consistently spent less than other NATO countries in our common defence (that is the purpose of NATO after all), then it is obvious that others are taking up the slack and thus subsidizing us. As we have signed a treaty for our common defense, then it is the right of others to comment on the fact that they think we are not doing enough to live up to that agreement.
Nato figures on %GDP spent on the military

205

Sorry bub, but I alone could account for 1000 soldiers, and i don’t even know how to take the safety off a gun. However, I am an exceedingly creative and violent guy (hence the screen-name) so I’m not worried.

Now, since i know quite a few Canucks who make their livings from knowing how to fire guns, I’m not worried about assembling a guerilla troop to waste your bitchy little ass, punk. :slight_smile:

To other people: Belinda Stronach is just a Canadian version of Ross Perot. This will be come evident in the months to come.

As for Canadian share. Does any *civilized * (ie. Western) nation spend as much on the military as the US? On a per capita or total basis? I mean, the USA has more than 700 military bases around around the world, and I really don’t think that any nation comes anywhere close to that level of military commitment, mostly because just about every other nation on the planet thinks that level of military commitment is overkill.

I said it once, and I’ll say it again. The world doesn’t need more soldiers. It needs more cops.

206 

Military $ 2001....GDP 2000....Military Share of GDP 2001/2000	
US	396.1	9810	4.0%	
Germany	21	1866	1.1%	
Japan	40.4	4765	0.8%	
UK	34	1427	2.4%	
France	25.3	1294	2.0%	
Costa Rica 0	31.9	0.0%	(GDP: PPP)
Canada	7.7	701	1.1%	
Russia	60	1200	5.0%	(GDP: PPP)
Iceland	0	9	0.0%	
Spain	6.9	561	1.2%	
Finland		121	2.0%	
				
Iceland's defense provided by US-manned Icelandic Defense Force (IDF)

Here’s some data. I weaved it together from the Statistical Abstract and the CIA factbook. The Russian calculation should be treated with suspicion, since I used purchasing power parity GDP figures, but actual military figures: the share is therefore bogus. All are welcome to improve this on this table.

207

Airman Doors, my swearing and name calling was uncalled for and inappropriate for this, or any other forum. I appologize. Obviously, I was rather upset, and now I’m going to attempt to explain why, free of profanity.

You are a member of the military. You understand the trials of such. The strain on the individual as well as the strain on the family. The forced separations. The worry about safety and well being. The lonelyness associated with frequent moves.

As I said, my entire family is military. They have proudly served their country, putting the welfare of others before their own, and before that of their loved ones. More than 150 collective years of service have been provided to the military by members of my family. They have worked hard and sacrificed in order to have the privilage to do so. They have served overseas and at home. My grandfather was away from his family almost 5 years during WWII. He didn’t meet his first son until he was 5 years old. My father proudly served in the regular forces for 34 years - he retired a respected and decorated officer. My brother served in the militia for 6 years before and while attending RMC. While he never saw any “action” he provided invaluable service and commitment to his community helping out during natural disasters, removing snow, and bringing food and water to those traped in their homes.

That you have the gall to belittle their contributions to their country and their assistance around the world by suggesting that they have “mooched” from you sickens me.

Shame on you.

208

See my previous link. I don’t think Airman is suggesting we have to pay as much per capita as the US. They have a different take on what defense means to them, but if we are part of NATO then we have certain obligations to come to the aid of a fellow member if warranted/required. If we can’t do that then we aren’t living up to our obligations under that treaty, are we? And as we consistently spend less than the average NATO member does are we not in fact depending more on them than they are on us?

Now back to comparing penis sizes: :slight_smile:
Barb, You don’t have a problem with me calling you ‘Barb’ do you? Anyway, Barbie, that you can account for 1000 soldiers only proves that you are an accountant and not actually worthy to meet my glorious hordes in battle. :smiley:

Alice:
The first person who suggests that the people in the military have done anything less than their duty I’ll be all over them. You on the other hand it seems, haven’t been in the military and as a member of the population support governments that have continued to allow soldiers to go into situations where they have been underequipped, underfunded and because of it most likely unprepared. I would suggest it is you, as a Canadian, who are mooching from them, not AirmanDoors who is just bringing up a justified concern.

209

Good question. Does it mean we are depending on our allies at our current spending levels? Do you really need the most expensive, up to date equipment in all cases? If we still send in the required number of troops, maybe they have older equipment, but they are still doing their jobs. For example the case people have cited about troops leaving giving their equipment over to the troops coming in. It sucks for us, but it doesn’t really affect our NATO allies. Or us having to pay commercial freighters to move our equipment over. As long as it gets there.

Sure, there is a threshold where below that you cannot afford to field your troops effectively. For example, our sea-kings. Generally, are we at that point?

210

I guess the only ones who would care if you had the most up to date equipment are the soldiers you expect to do the job, isn’t it? When you send soldiers into the desert with arboreal camoflauge who does it hurt other than the soldiers? I mean, if we don’t care about what the US thinks of us, or that we don’t spend as much as others in NATO, ask yourself what it is you expect of the people you send into battle or peace-keeping missions. Obviously, they don’t need the latest and greatest stuff, but it should be able to do the job that you give them to do. So, if you don’t have communication equipment that works with your allies, what are the possible consequences? You probably can’t talk to them, or the enemy might be able to monitor/disrupt your communications easier than the more modern stuff. If you have to rely on others for transport? Maybe you don’t get to move when you need to.

211

I think that even pacifists like me agree that our military should be funded adequately. The issue here is whether present and future plans for our military spending will result in Canadians relying on the US for defence.

This is a specious question. Military spending in Canada is likely to go up considering the terrorist threat and the stance on defence by the two front runners in the upcoming election. Also, the vast size of our country in relation to our small tax base and our reputation as a peaceful (non-threatening) nation limit the amount we can or should spend on defence.

Finally, Canadians have come to the defence of America, which by its economic and military power, is perceived as a threat by extremists etc. Americans have not had to bail us out, nor are they likely to… with the exception of some catastrophic natural distaster or freak attack.

There are many ways a nation can be brought to its knees. A small bacteria or virus could do the job just as well as a nuke. You might be interested to know that Canadians sent vaccines to Asia to assist in the efforts to prevent bird flu from mutating with common flus to become a potential pandemic. Public health here in Toronto has done an excellent job limiting the spread of SARS, which could have easily gone south.

212

I just want to say “Good job, Canada!”

Well, not just that…

Welcome to our group of no-good moochers. As you are probably all aware of, the civilized world’s plan of laying down weapons and having the USA fight all our battles for us are well underway. As you have probably noticed there is still at least one non-US nation in almost every skirmish at the moment, but we hope that through our work, American soldiers will be fighting for both sides before 2010.

God bless America.

Shame on the rest of this sissy-ass world where no-one seems prepared to spend their money on building a Real Army to “defend their country” - what the hell is education and healthcare worth is you are overrun by Arabs or the stinking French? Wimps.

213

You know what? At the end of the day, that’s what it comes down to.

I venture to say that even my great-grandchildren will not see the day when Canada’s military surpasses that of the Americans’. And I’m fine with that. America has a super-size mentality ~ from Freedom Fries to military. We don’t. Though we’re catching up at Burger King, so who knows. But for the moment, we don’t. It could very well be that we’ve been treated as the “kid brother” with such lack of respect for so long, that we assume the role of “kid brother”. Especially when we see “Big Brother” (don’t pardon the pun), bullying the world where they see fit.

However… It seems to me that I heard a story back in the day of Gulf War I. The Canadian Army were sent in with the wrong colour camouflage helmets. They had the dark green kind, not the sand kind. To camouflage their helmets, they were forced to wear their underswear over their helmets. If that’s the case, and not a Canadian urban legend, it certainly is time that we pour more money into the military than we are now. Forget the danger we put our men and women in, imagine the shame. No wonder we’re left guarding doors in Afghanistan while the Americans are on the field. I want the people who risk their lives for me to be proud of it. And there’s just a lack of dignity that no one can argue with, about a soldier dying with his underwear on his head.

I don’t feel we should cut social spending to provide more money for the military. I feel that we should tighten up the money we’re spending on ridiculous things. I’ve already mentioned that the Governor General’s position should be done away with. But there is such ridiculous money being spent on other things as well. For example, we spent a shitload two years ago (I forget how much, but believe me, a shitload) on sending a group of people to France to observe the art of a parade, and how parades have evolved in the past century. We’re doing THAT while our military is suffering?

Houston … er … I mean Ottawa, we have a problem.

214

Problem number one is corruption and backroom deals that line the pockets of cronies and corporations (like Quebec ad firms) at taxpayer’s expense. The culture minister can handle promoting the arts instead of our GG, who should stick to her budget when trying to impress dignitarites.

I’m not sure if the underwear tale is true either. However, it points to the resourcefulness of our soldiers. In ‘The Wars’ by Timothy Findlay, the author described how Canadian soldiers (and probably those of other nationalities) saved themselves by pissing on a rag or hanky and holding it to their mouths to prevent inhalation of deadly mustard gas. Anyway, underwear on the head notwithstanding, our soldiers should be proud of themselves.

Those ubiquitous little Canadian flags sported by students backpacking through Europe and elsewhere, have done more for Canadian public relations and to build our reputation as a polite, peace-loving people than amassing military might ever could. I am Canadian!

215

By ‘stinking French’, I assume that are not implying that our French Canadians smell bad. Just give one a sniff; they smell just like a rose.

216

Let’s say Canada dug into its pockets and spent an extra 1% of GDP on guns and battleships. That would amount to an extra 7 billion, US, about 2% of total US defense spending.

While not exactly rounding error, that’s not large either.

To put it too crudely, I would happy if the US hired Canada out as an independent contractor. One job the US is not so hot at is peacekeeping: in many parts of the world, those who don a US military uniform may as well paint a large target on their chests. Or their foreheads. Better to have others do that sort of work.

Furthermore, let’s also not forget that even in the best of circumstances, peacekeeping is dangerous. Canadians have suffered about twice the fatalities than the US in this line of work (106 deaths vs. 54).

http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/fatalities/totals.htm

Speaking personally, I value the diplomatic cum military friendship & support of those in the Great North more than a few extra percentage points of military spending.

217

Canada Invades Haiti!

218

The underfunding of the Canadian military is a disgrace. You guys who don’t care seem to think that the military is only necessary to defend a country from attack. In fact, Canada has made many international commitments - The U.N., NATO, NORAD, other military agreements. We have pledged to undertake certain roles as part of a mutual defense pact. We are now in violation of those agreements because we are no longer capable of doing what we have promised to do.

In some cases, these are specific roles adopted in defense plans under NORAD and NATO. Failure to do them properly doesn’t just leave us undefended, it endangers the soldiers of the countries we have allied with. Canadians should be known as people who never renege on their agreements. We should carry our responsibilities with pride and competence.

There is another reason why it is tragic that we are dismantling our military. That is, Canada has been extremely fortunate to have a military of unsurpassed quality. We have consistently punched above our weight. This has allowed us to project equivalent power at a lower cost than other countries - a significant advantage. Our military was a valuable asset that we are now letting atrophy.

Losing the ability to contribute militarily on a world stage leaves you unable to influence events to your liking. Canada has had strong diplomacy in the past, no doubt partly proportional to our military strength. A number of the rules that make up international law were contributed by Canada, and reflect our values.

We no longer command respect, and therefore no one seeks our advice or approval, either.

Canada gives 8 billion dollars a year to its native population. It can afford a 20 billion dollar military. If it can’t, it should cut some other programs. We could start with the idiotic 2 billion dollar gun registry that doesn’t work but won’t be killed by the government.

219

With respect you are so wrong on that that it’s beyond the point of being funny at all. Of course we would defend Canada against some attacking force. 1) We have treaties to that effect and 2) It’s a bloody great border/flanking issue for us. 3) Despite all the cross border verbal sniping that goes on here our countries really are very very good friends, and we are each the largest trading partner of the other. It’s in our own best interest to help maintain Canada’s security. As well and beyond the self-interest we think of Canada as one of, if not the closest, ally, and for that reason alone we would defend them.

Personally, I have great respect for the Canadian Peacekeepers precisely because they KNOW they’re underequipped and effectively sitting ducks. Yet they sally forth anyways. That’s bravery of the highest order. The shame here is in their country not equipping them to do their job properly. That’s an issue Canada MUST resolve. If they don’t, sooner or later you ARE going to hear about some unit of Canadian Peacekeepers getting wiped out to the last man, precisely because they didn’t have the tools to do the job you are asking of them. Worse, there could well be an attack on your own soil by terrorists who (like it or not) don’t make much difference between The Great Satan, and The Great Satans Next Door Neighbor. I sincerely hope it does NOT come to the CN tower being reduced to a pile of rubble before the Canadian people understand that they too have enemies (as do ALL western nations), and they MUST be prepared to defend themselves against them.

Be that as it may, I find the announcement by the Navy to be the most deserving. Essentially they are saying that they cannot patrol their own coastline. That’s a huge problem that Canada needs to address.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

220

NATO commitments are being met, just barely. NORAD are being met as far as I know. Our military has better accomodation and pay, however, gear and equipment is outdated. A moderate increase in funding is all that is required.

I’m not sure why you say Canada is no longer respected. No one seeks our advice or approval for what?

You lost me on your last point. Perhaps throwing money at our first peoples isn’t the answer, but most on reservations live in squallor. Social problems, such as domestic abuse, drug abuse and suicide among teens abound. I, for one, would like to see some workable solutions put into place for first nations peoples. Military spending is a separate issue.