# Conservatives plan major military expansion in Canada. Thoughts? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 24, 2006, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899 "2006-02-24T06:40:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2006, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/81 "2006-03-05T21:56:37Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > How are you defining ‘projection of power’? If you mean parking an extra aircraft carrier in the Gulf to send a message, then the U.S. has never asked for U.N. permission to do that. > > There are lots of ways to project power that don’t involve topping governments. Flying air cover for a friendly nation, for example. Putting an aircraft carrier in a position to defend an asset or an ally. Flying air patrols in international airspace bordering a nation to be able to alert allies if there is belligerant activity. I didn’t mean to restrict the term “coerce” to regime change. Sometimes all that is needed is a little nudge this way or that… as far as the US getting UN permission, you open a sore subject. The UN (and par;ticulrly the security council)was founded essentially to be an arm of the State Department–the growing influence (and size) of the general assembly has undercut that mission. That US foreign policy aims have diverged from UN sanctioned tracks speaks badly for US foreign policy. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2006, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/82 "2006-03-05T22:01:02Z")
> [@alaricthegoth](#): > > I didn’t mean to restrict the term “coerce” to regime change. Sometimes all that is needed is a little nudge this way or that… > > as far as the US getting UN permission, you open a sore subject. The UN (and par;ticulrly the security council)was founded essentially to be an arm of the State Department–the growing influence (and size) of the general assembly has undercut that mission. As has been demonstrated, the UN Charter in no way suggests that countries cannot use military power in appropriate circumstances outside of the purview of the Security Council. The UN as it is structured really doesn’t work as some sort of international police force. It worked fine in Korea and Kuwait, and in 100 other cases of countries stomping their neighbours and massacring civilians it didn’t work at all. Now, I am not some right win anti-UN nut; it does have other purposes and some of them it does extremely well. But we’re talking about CANADA, not the USA and its foreign adventures. Canada needs some modicum of an armed forces, and we have a responsibility to ensure it’s a good, well equipped and capable armed forces. > [@](#): > > That US foreign policy aims have diverged from UN sanctioned tracks speaks badly for US foreign policy. By all means go start that thread if you like. We’re talking about Canada here - a separate country that has pursued a separate foreign policy. ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2006, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/83 "2006-03-05T22:35:42Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Canada here - a separate country that has pursued a separate foreign policy. to your credit, no doubt. I wonder if the shift in leadership will produce a realignment of the same. You escaped Iraq–be glad. Yesterday a canadian soldier had his head split open by an ax-wielding teenager, while you danced to the US tune in afghanistan ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2006, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/84 "2006-03-05T22:48:35Z")
> [@alaricthegoth](#): > > to your credit, no doubt. > > I wonder if the shift in leadership will produce a realignment of the same. You escaped Iraq–be glad. Yesterday a canadian soldier had his head split open by an ax-wielding teenager, while you danced to the US tune in afghanistan Danced to the \*\*\* US \*\*\* tune? Unlike Iraq, the operations in Afghanistan are supported by the United Nations, and it has an active role. Canada is leading a _multinational_ force there. The International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan has widespread support around the world, and the strong support of the government of Afghanistan. ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/85 "2006-03-07T01:00:55Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > Danced to the \*\*\* US \*\*\* tune? Unlike Iraq, the operations in Afghanistan are supported by the United Nations, and it has an active role. Canada is leading a _multinational_ force there. > > The International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan has widespread support around the world, and the strong support of the government of Afghanistan. fair enough (altho I think the actual operational entity in afghanistan is NATO, not the UN.) ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/86 "2006-03-07T01:05:37Z")
- government of Afghanistan\* sort of an oxymoron–perhaps you mean the mayoralty of kabul… ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/87 "2006-03-07T01:37:39Z")
> [@alaricthegoth](#): > > fair enough (altho I think the actual operational entity in afghanistan is NATO, not the UN.) No, it’s the UN. People (and in Canada, too) are, unfortunately, starting to conflate Afghanistan with Iraq. I’ll grant some blame for that goes to George, but it’s still wrong. They’re different wars fought for different reasons. I was pleased Canada went to war in Afghanistan and I would be disappointed if we left. I was pleased we stayed out of Iraq and I’d be disappointed if we went in. ---
**Author:** ![Balduran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cc9497/32.png) [@Balduran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balduran)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/88 "2006-03-09T01:04:35Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > People (and in Canada, too) are, unfortunately, starting to conflate Afghanistan with Iraq. I was rather perturbed to hear Alexa McDonough state she’d like to pull our troops out of Afghanistan because she doesn’t want us to be a stooge to the US. On a postive note, Timmy’s in Kandahar is a go! ---
**Author:** ![rippingtons\_fan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rippingtons_fan/32/11767_2.png) [@rippingtons\_fan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rippingtons_fan)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/89 "2006-03-09T01:19:54Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > I knew the Conservatives planned to spend more money on the military, but I didn’t see this coming: > > - Personnel increased by 40% (!!) by recruiting 33,000 new soldiers. (the cite below says 13,000 new full-time soldiers and 10,000 new reservists, but the National news tonight said the number of new soldiers would be 33,000) > - Three new icebreakers to defend Canada’s northern territorial waters. > - New strategic heavy airlift capability > - Re-opening talks with the U.S. over a joint missile defense program. > - A re-aligning of NORAD to bring closer cooperation between the U.S. and Canada in patrolling North American waters. > > [Link](http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/02/23/defence060223.html) > > Personally, I think this is great. I hope they start by reinstating Canada’s airborne regiment, disgracefully disbanded by the Liberals. But I also agree with the Liberal critics who say that this is going to cost a lot more than the 5.3 billion increase over five years the Conservatives have said they’ll spend. > > But, it’s a long time coming. The Liberals have neglected the military for so long that drastic measures are warranted to rebuild it, especially given current world conditions. > > Comments? I’m GLAD that Canada is going to spend more on their military! The more that nations take care of their own defence, the less dependent they’ll be on U.S. military power. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/90 "2006-03-09T03:18:29Z")
> [@rippingtons\_fan](#): > > I’m GLAD that Canada is going to spend more on their military! The more that nations take care of their own defence, the less dependent they’ll be on U.S. military power. We’re building up our armed forces for our benefit, not the benefit of the United States. I am unaware of any time Canada has ever relied on U.S. military power to safeguard its borders. I would point out, though, that recently Canada has put a lot of money and effort and some of our young men’s lives into defending the United States. ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/91 "2006-03-09T03:59:45Z")
unrelated to your newfound muscle, what about Harar? (sp?) your **citizen** who was kidnapped, ‘rendered’ to syria, torured, releseed. Is that just alright with y’all? if nothing else, for cryin out loud, don’t we owe you some sort of special consideration (neighbors, fighting in afghanistan, quaint accents, cute girls, 14 yr old age of consent–all in all a civiilized bunch of folks.) ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/92 "2006-03-09T04:19:07Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > We’re building up our armed forces for our benefit, not the benefit of the United States. I am unaware of any time Canada has ever relied on U.S. military power to safeguard its borders. > > I would point out, though, that recently Canada has put a lot of money and effort and some of our young men’s lives into defending the United States. Now \*\*WAAIIITT \*\* jus’ a minute… NORAD? ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/93 "2006-03-09T04:21:42Z")
> [@rippingtons\_fan](#): > > I’m GLAD that Canada is going to spend more on their military! The more that nations take care of their own defence, the less dependent they’ll be on U.S. military power. I am still confused, really, no snark, who other than us would you be likely to be **obliged** to fight, as opposed to a frolic undertaken in cold deliberation and after weighing the pros and cons? Son’t we sort of, you know, surround you? ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/94 "2006-03-09T04:25:39Z")
relative to your population, is not the level of militarization set frth in Stone’s inventory a higher per capita committment than ours? I haven’t run out the numbers, but we are what, ten times the population more or less, and we run a standing army (I think,) of 500,000. ( Iam engaging in a moment of “google rebellion” and refusing to conclude the window of ambiguity) ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/95 "2006-03-09T05:06:38Z")
> [@alaricthegoth](#): > > Now \*\*WAAIIITT \*\* jus’ a minute… > > NORAD? You do realize Canada contributes its fair share to NORAD? It’s not a US-only thing. It was our fighters intercepting the Bears that strayed into our airspace. As to your point about population… no, not even close. The U.S. armed services is well over a million strong regular force, plus nearly a million reserves. (Not sure where you got the 500,000 figure from.) The Conservative plan would bring the Canadian Forces to just over 100,000 total, including reserves, making it still less than half the size proportionately speaking. As to who we might be obliged to fight… umm, Afghanistan would be the obvious example. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/96 "2006-03-09T05:11:27Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > I would point out, though, that recently Canada has put a lot of money and effort and some of our young men’s lives into defending the United States. Defending the United States? Where are we doing that? ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/97 "2006-03-09T05:18:59Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > We’re building up our armed forces for our benefit, not the benefit of the United States. I am unaware of any time Canada has ever relied on U.S. military power to safeguard its borders. Wasn’t going to answer this, but how about the Cold War? Yes, Canada contributed to it and even if we had spent twice as much and had twice the manpower it wouldn’t have been the Canadian military that would have stopped, or prevented, the USSR from coming across the Bering Straight. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/98 "2006-03-09T16:20:48Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Defending the United States? Where are we doing that? Afghanistan. The United States was attacked, as I am sure you will recall, by agents of al-Qaida working out of, and with the permission of the then-government-of, Afghanistan. Canada invoked Article 5 of the NATO treaty and engaged in combat in Afghanistan to destroy al-Qaida and the Taliban. They attacked the USA, so we attacked them. How else could that possibly be interpreted? > [@](#): > > Wasn’t going to answer this, but how about the Cold War? Yes, Canada contributed to it and even if we had spent twice as much and had twice the manpower it wouldn’t have been the Canadian military that would have stopped, or prevented, the USSR from coming across the Bering Straight. For one thing, I somehow doubt it’s a realistic scenario that WWIII would have involved a Soviet invasion across the Bering Strait into Alaska that would have crossed all the way across Alaska into the Yukon. Firstly, WWIII would have gone nuclear in a week, two at most, resulting in the likely destruction of Western civilization. Secondly, even on the miniscule chance it didn’t, the Soviets were not going to put a heck of a lot of effort into invading Alaska because that would have been nuts. The conventional war would have been concentrated in Europe. For another, **it didn’t happen**. I am sure we could all construct theoretical scenarios where the U.S. would defend Canada, or might have in the past if history was different. It is certainly true that if the Soviets had secretly launched a cross-Pacific invasion force to land in B.C. and had landed and caused mayhem, the United States would have responded with force. We can play Harry Turtledove all day. But it DIDN’T happen, and until it does we don’t owe anyone any thanks for defending us. I cannot even think of any substantial expenditure of effort or money the U.S. is engaging in to prepare itself against a theoretical threat to Canada. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2006, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899/99 "2006-03-10T05:36:02Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Afghanistan. The United States was attacked, as I am sure you will recall, by agents of al-Qaida working out of, and with the permission of the then-government-of, Afghanistan. Canada invoked Article 5 of the NATO treaty and engaged in combat in Afghanistan to destroy al-Qaida and the Taliban. They attacked the USA, so we attacked them. How else could that possibly be interpreted? Uh, if you attack an ally it is as if you attacked us. If someone attacked Canada the US would intervene, too. We are effectively fighting for ourselves. Also, at least 25 Canadians died in the tower on Sept, 11th, too. [CBC News](http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/sep11/cdncasualties.html) > [@](#): > > For one thing, I somehow doubt it’s a realistic scenario that WWIII would have involved a Soviet invasion across the Bering Strait into Alaska that would have crossed all the way across Alaska into the Yukon. Firstly, WWIII would have gone nuclear in a week, two at most, resulting in the likely destruction of Western civilization. Secondly, even on the miniscule chance it didn’t, the Soviets were not going to put a heck of a lot of effort into invading Alaska because that would have been nuts. The conventional war would have been concentrated in Europe. And whose nukes prevented the attack in Europe? Would that be Canada’s nukes? No, we don’t have nukes, remember. > [@](#): > > For another, **it didn’t happen**. I am sure we could all construct theoretical scenarios where the U.S. would defend Canada, or might have in the past if history was different. It is certainly true that if the Soviets had secretly launched a cross-Pacific invasion force to land in B.C. and had landed and caused mayhem, the United States would have responded with force. We can play Harry Turtledove all day. But it DIDN’T happen, and until it does we don’t owe anyone any thanks for defending us. I cannot even think of any substantial expenditure of effort or money the U.S. is engaging in to prepare itself against a theoretical threat to Canada. It didn’t happen because the US would have stopped it, or at least attempted to stop it. Do you think that if the US had somehow become magically impotent that any other country, or group of countries, could have done so? Did the US on its own, without the help of any other country or group of countries, have the ability to prevent USSR expansion? (Assuming of course that we agree the USSR would have expanded further if it was unoppossed. If you don’t think this is true then you have actually entered the worlds of Harry Turtledove and there is no point in discussing things further unless we move to Cafe Society.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-plan-major-military-expansion-in-canada-thoughts/345899.md?page=4)