Up yers you small hairy ape man. I’m a girl.
Well “up yers” too. So am I.
For fucks sakes. Have I gotten so low as to debate with the likes of THIS? Where’s Airman?
I’m right here. And I’m wondering how this turned so personal. Geez. I know I’ve been harsh, but I never resorted to attacking someone else like this.
Canada’s got girls? Who knew?
Hmmm. Maybe CSIS is more competent than I realized.
Oy! Thank G-d you’re here! I thought the whole debate went to shit! It’s not personal, Airman; I still think you’re great. It’s just we get funny about Canada. I think there’s been some bad blood between us in the past little while. We’ll fix it up. Just don’t give us noogies anymore.
Gufaw! Okay girl, up yers, as in bottoms up. What’s your favourte brew? (Hoping you don’t say Brador.)
Yo! Married one just four weeks ago as of tomorrow.
We wear a lot of over-clothes. It’s hard to tell, even for us…
Baloney.
Soldiers are paid in accordance with established federal government guidelines; they’re paid salaries equivalent to what federal civil servants of the same level of experience and rank are paid, which is very decent money, and you can retire with full pension in just 20 years. They are, in fact, arguably the best-paid soldiers in the world.
I think the point of this thread is that Canada isn’t pulling its fair share of the defense of NA.
The only reason that Canada isn’t in the sights of some other country is because of the US to the south of us. In the past I’d say invading someone across the ocean would be tough, but have you seen the size of cruise ship, or oil tankers lately? A couple of cruise ships packed with troops could easily match the forces we could bring to bear quickly and if they did a ‘Sherman March’ from Ocean to Ocean it would devastate Canada. It wouldn’t take huge amounts of artillery and air power, either, as Canada doesn’t have much to counter with.
I’m not saying that this is even slightly likely, but the only reason that Canada is Canada is because of our neighbors to the south and if you deny it I think you are deluding yourself.
IMHO (having been in the Canadian Infantry and having had a chance to see what Canada is really good at), We should cut back on the size of the military even further yet keep the current funding. We should concentrate on our strengths which is supplying some of the best soldiers on the planet. Create a fast light infantry reaction force that is capable of going into those situations where tanks and other expensive weapons aren’t necessary. Scrap the airpower as the US handles that anyway better than we could hope to. Get the necessary helicopters/aircraft that can move those troops to where they are needed. Make them the best trained and equiped army for their role and size in the world.
ONLY Molson Dry will do, my friend. Pour yourself one and let’s watch this debate die down nicely.
Man, this is an interesting thread - I wish I’d seen it sooner. I have an interesting perspective as a Canadian living in New Zealand. We’re having the exact same debate here, but only with Australia in the place of the USA. According to the CIA world factbook, New Zealand is 144th in our defense spending (Canada is 135th). The USA and Australia are 47th and 55th respectively. Ironically New Zealand probably faces far more in the way of direct threats than Canada does (or will do in the next 100 years). We’ve got most of Asia, Indonesia and the like who are unstable at the best of times. And how have we reacted?
We sold off our airforce.
Well, that’s not entirely accurate. We got rid of our old A4’s (you know the ones the Brits trounced back in the Falklands with their Harriers?) and nixed a deal to buy F16’s. All we have now is search and rescue capablity and disaster relief. And that’s something we do very well. Australia’s been bitching at us for several years to upgrade our defensive forces, but people here really don’t give two hoots about having tanks and jets (yes, we have no tanks at all!)
I’m glad that both my home country and the country I grew up in are sensible enough to realise that they only need enough forces to help others in their time of need, although by the sounds of it, Canada’s forces could use some better digs!
Sounds good to me. Can I have an Alexander Keith’s pale ale. I a wussy Torontonian.
Well, I like your proposal (though I’d increase the funding anyways) about specializing in infantry, but I have to say that your suggestion that anyone could march coast to coast with the forces that would fit on a couple supertankers is utterly ridiculous. Think logistics, my friend.
Absolutely Right! Canada is a massive country…it takes most of a week just to cross the thing. If the locals dynamited the railroads and the tunnels it would be damn near impossible to get through the rockies without getting bogged down for a couple of weeks.
Hence my comment about Sherman’s March to the sea. Travelled across Georgia living off the land, burning everything as he went. Would be relatively easy to do in Canada (assuming again that there wasn’t a US to the south of us to help out.)
But where would this threat come from? Can you name one country that would have the will and the resources to prosecute such a campaign? At the moment the only country I could think of that might even be a blip on the radar in that regard is China…and to be honest I see them going for Japan, Taiwan, Korea et al looooong before Canada hits their agenda.
The USA has had a ‘substantial’ military from the late 19th century onwards; yet is has NEVER been called on to protect Canada in all that time. What makes people think that this will change in the next 50 or 100 years?
Surely you aren’t being serious. A modern army can’t live off the land. And a non-modern army would be massacred by partisans whilst crossing the prairies. There’s a reason we’re ticked off about the gun registry, you know.
Anyways, our navy might not be tremendously formidable, but I do believe our frigates are a match for your average cruise liner.