That’s a fair comment.
Is there anyone one here who hasn’t heard Sea Kings in the Sun yet? (Link to the mp3 at the bottom of the article.)
Seriously, why does Canada need a projectable military? The only countries that are a threat to our sovereignty and economy are our friends. America continually provides self serving impediments to our “free trade”, robs us of our own grown Pacific fish, Japan rapes the Pacific with floating death traps and our Nato friends cleared out our Cod in the Atlantic. Furthermore, the last I’ve heard the only challenge to our sovereignty in our arctic has come from America. Also our European friends subsidize their farmers to to the serious detriment of ours in the West. If Canada pulls out of Nato and keeps its mouth shut, we’ll have nothing to fear from terrorists.
Rather than waste money on a projectable military, we should invest in a decent coast guard, and help the Canadian victims of the arbitrary actions of our friends.
This is not neccessarily my view, but it feels good to say it.
Gotta quote Bob Boudelang, Angry American Patriot on this one:
"In fact, as far as I know, no U.S. president has ever had to have the head of another foreign country make a special announcement to tell the world he is not a moron. Not even Our Greatest Of All Presidents President Ronald the Gypper Reagan. Although I am sure many people thought that then. It is an all time record that will go with all the other all time records and accomplishments in George W. Bush’s golden book of silver memories. Just think of them all!
You will notice that this is the third time he has been singled out for praise by overseas leaders, like when the Japanese leader pointed out George W. was not really an asshole like the foreign minister said, or the German leader pointed out Our Great President was not really just like Hitler like the justice minister said. "
Hey, now you know how we feel when outsiders badger us about OUR defense spending, the death penalty, voting, etc. Grow a skin, Canada.
However, in the interest of that great American art known as compromise, I propose the following:
The US will take over all of Canada’s defense needs. In return, Canada takes over our health care system.
Deal?
There’s a lot of misunderstanding about Canada’s need for a military in this thread - mostly the naive assumption that the only purpose for a military in today’s world is to protect your borders. News Flash: Neither the U.S. nor Canada has been susceptible to actual invasions of the continent for at least 100 years.
The purpose of a military is to represent your interests in the world, and to maintain obligations committed to by treaty.
In realpolitik terms, a strong military allows you to have diplomatic clout. For example, Canada has absolutely zero say in the potential war on Iraq, for the simple reason that we would have little to no effect one way or the other.
On the other hand, the U.S. desperately wanted Canada’s snipers in Afghanistan, which gave Canada the ability (and right) to sit at the table when determining how that conflict would be fought.
Why does France get to sit on the Security Council and have the ability to have veto power? Not because it has a strong economy or big social programs - it sits on the SC because it has a very large military.
Here’s an example of how Canada’s weakness affects our ability to project our values: Canada tried to stop the huge tragedy in Rwanda, one of the worst atrocities of the 1990’s. We tried to lead an international coalition to go there and protect the people. But our military wasn’t capable of doing it, so we were put in a position were we had to try to convince other people to do what we were unwilling or incapable of doing ourselves. The end result was the slaughter in Rwanda, and Canada showing itself to be ineffective on the world stage.
Imagine how it might have turned out had Canada simply sent a division or two, with good air cover, and defended those people. It would have given us moral authority. It would have given us the right to bang the table at the U.N. and demand that OUR interests be heard when something happens we don’t like.
And if our allies see our military as being a valuable contribution to a conflict, then we have the ability to shape that conflict.
Having a strong military and a strong diplomatic presence in the world goes hand in hand. It would give us strength in negotiating everything from climate treaties to the softwood lumber dispute with the U.S.
Instead, we’ve become a 1st world country with a 3rd world military. Is it any surprise that our stature in the world is diminishing, and Americans are starting to treat us like a joke? If that becomes the prevailing attitude, why will they pay any attention to us when our economic or environmental interests are at stake?
We are making a HUGE mistake in letting our military atrophy. And on a more personal note, I LIKE being in a country with a strong military. I was proud of our aerospace industry. I was proud of what our soldiers did in WWII, Korea, and in peacekeeping in the 80’s and 90’s, where Canada was the #1 peacekeeper in the world for a time. It sickens me that we have dropped from those lofty heights to being the world’s running joke.
Finally, let me address this:
How about the cold war? Do you think Canada would have stayed free if the U.S. hadn’t spent a fortune opposing the Soviets? Or if we were, how about our friends in Europe? Why are we so willing to abandon them? Whatever happened to the Canadian ideal of being a good world citizen, and LEADING by example?
I forgot to add the most important thing:
When a country sends one of its citizens into war, it has a responsibility to give them the best equipment and support it can. And this is where the Chretien government has really failed.
Did you know that we sent soldiers into the Afghan desert wearing JUNGLE camouflage? Desert camo uniforms had been cut from the budget. The Briits lent Canadians desert camo, without which they would have been dangrously visible at all times.
Canada’s Sea King helicopters are dangerously old and unsafe, but the government keeps putting off upgrading or replacing them.
Canadians were killed by friendly fire because they weren’t equipped with the latest IFF (identify friend or foe) electronics that other coalition forces had.
Canadian sailors have refused to sail aboard our submarines after they suffered a series of maintenance related failures in sea trials. The Chretien government is refusing to upgrade them.
A commission last year reported that Canada’s military needs 5 billion dollars a year more just to maintain its current state of readiness and prevent atrophy due to aging equipment. Not to expand the military, mind you - just to keep what we have now from deteriorating. The Chretien government’s response to this EMERGENCY was to raise the budget of the military by 1.2 billion over five years, about 1/25 of the amount necessary just for maintenance. And most analysts think that the Canadian military needs to be increased in size and not just maintained at its present size.
Chretien campaigned against Conservatives in part because they ‘wastefully’ spent $100,000 upgrading the RCAF transport craft used as our version of Air Force 1. So what did Chretien do once in power? He abandoned those aircraft, and personally ordered 100 million dollars worth of new personal aircraft from Bombardier, sidestepping government procurement processes and personally ordering the jets from Bombardier by phoning its president (a good friend, coincidentally…). To add insult to injury, he took the money for the jets out of the military budget.
And despite the lack of money and equipment, Canadian soldiers are still some of the best in the world. Canada has some of the best pilots in the world. Canada’s soldiers in Afghanistan racked up the highest kill ratio of any combatants, including the U.S. Canadian snipers hold the record in Afghanistan for the longest sniper kills in history. We still perform way over our heads.
But not for long, because aside from not funding the military, the Liberals are hostile to its culture. When a couple of renegade soldiers from our airborne killed a civilian in Mogadishu, the Liberals responded by disbanding Canada’s entire airborne regiment, one of the most effective fighting organizations on the planet - one that had a record of heroism going back to WWII. A disgraceful thing for the government to do to its military, to tar everyone in the airborne with that incident.
The United States wanted to give five Canadian snipers in Afghanistan the Bronze Star for bravery. The Canadian government stepped in and stopped it, until they could ‘review’ the issue. Then they let it quietly die. In the meantime, one of those brave soldiers was COURT-MARTIALED, for the heinous offense of saying ‘Fuck you’ to a chaplain after the chaplain asked him how he could stand to live with himself for being a sniper.
Our government is a disgrace. Our prime minister is a tinpot dictator wanna-be who counts the likes of Fidel Castro as one of his good friends. Unfortunately, our opposition self-destructed and left most Canadians with little alternative - we are in effect an oligarchy now.
I love this.
A left winger will complain that if he criticizes any anti-terrorism bill he will be pelted with “why do you hate America?” attacks. Yet, it is the argument and attack that they use for everything.
Against same-sex marriage, why do you hate homosexuals?
Against affirmative action, why do you hate minorities?
Against abortion, why do you hate women?
Against increasing farm subsidies, why do you hate the family farmer?
Want to privatize social security, why do you hate the elderly?
Want to cut taxes for everyone, why do you hate the poor?
Want to, or against [insert almost anything here], why do you hate the children?
:rolleyes:
But they didn’t just oppose same-sex marriages, they called it an endorsement of “buggery”. C’mon, that’s Chick-speak! The last time I heard someone use the word “buggery”, it was in Austin Powers!
Not to mention calling homosexuality “deviant” and “destructive”. By the sound of it, they do hate homosexuals.
Morons? Perhaps. One thing is certain, though, we should not arbitrarily follow their international relations policy simply because they think it is the right thing to do. Check this out: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=145677
Can you name the “obligations” we aren’t meeting as a result of low military spending?
Then Elvis1ives says:
Ah yes, this old chestnut. Tell me:
- When has the United States been called upon to defend Canada?
- What specific expenditures has the USA been forced to outlay in order to defend Canada as a result of Canada not spending enough on its own defense?
For all your ignorant pissing and moaning, the fact of the matter is that Canada is NOT a burden on the United States with respect to defense, and it’s ignorant to say it is. It would not matter if Canada spent $1.3 billion, $13 billion, or $130 billion on its military; the United States would spend the same amount and have the same problems and retards - sorry, “ass-hats” - like you and Pat Buchanan would say the same stupid shit. The scale of relative defense capabilities is just totally out of whack; if you doubled Canada’s defense spending we would STILL be a microscopic force by comparison. Canada could fall into the ocean tomorrow and American defense needs and preparedness would not change a whit. (Actually, I’m wrong in one respect; if the Canadian military was suddenly made absurdly large, the USA would have to spend MORE on defense, since an absurdly large Canadian military would not be a portent of good tidings.)
I agree with Sam Stone that Canada SHOULD be rethinking its defense spending because we have a moral duty to Canadian soldiers to give them the best support we can, and not just with respect to equipment; organization is a bigger problem in the Canadian Forces than old kit is. Furthermore, I agree it would benefit Canada to be able to project more military power. But get off this “wahhhh, we Americans are defending you” jag; it’s bullshit.
-
The Cold War. Defense of Britain, of which Canada was a colony, during WWII.
-
Man, it’d take a week to inventory it all. The U.S. paid for an awful lot of Canadian defensive gear during the cold war. We were partners in maintaining the DEW line and NORAD. There is a 15,000ft runway five miles from my house, build and paid for by the U.S. military, and which is now a major Canadian military base. Canada is also a direct beneficiary of the military R&D that the U.S. heavily funds.
Well said Sam, couldn’t have put it better myself.
You forgot to mention that the Avionics on the CF-18’s are so old that during the NATO action in Yugoslavia Canadian fighters couldn’t deliver their payloads unless the weather was perfect and they are no longer compatible with modern target aquisition systems. We also have 122 CF-18’s, of which only 60 are in combat wings. The rest are mothballed due to lack of maintence but they’re marked as “training” or “rotation” craft.
On top of that, there is a massive manpower shortage in the CF and its entirely their own fault. The recruitment process can take over a year to complete. Enlistment only enrolls twice a year. The standards are so ridiculously high that most young, eager men only qualify for such insulting positions as “Cook” or “Band Corps” when they want to enlist in the combat arm. Who can honestly put their life on hold for 6 months to a year waiting to hear if you’ve been “selected”?
No one is saying we need a massive army with which we can project our might across the world. What Canada needs is a modern, highly effective, professional army.
The issue isn’t about size, but quality of equipment and the ability to assume our role. Canada’s equipment is so often referred to as “the antique road show” it isn’t funny anymore.
The CF-18’s need to be completely refitted. They are not combat-safe.
Canada’s mechanized divisions need new and modern equipment, save for the Coyote. Its funny, because anytime sometime harps on about how old our equipment is, some Liberal trots out the party line about how the US is envious about the Coyote. They don’t mention how absolutely useless the Leopard is as a modern battle tank or that we have zero means of transporting these pieces ourself.
Our Artillery Divisions used to have airborne drop capability. Lack of funding scrapped it.
The Sea King maritime helicopters are falling apart. The Military has recommended a suitable replacement. The Liberal government has stalled and stalled and stalled and completely ignored the request of the Navy for which chopper they want. Instead discussing the contract with a company that produces a substandard helicopter but is better for the government politcally.
Why this is acceptable to Canadian voters is beyond me… and its not like they don’t know. The media convers it semi-regularly.
Once again, CANADA DOES NOT POSSES THE HEAVY LIFT CAPABILITY TO EVEN MOVE ITS OWN TROOPS AROUND. WE (THE US) GET STUCK WITH THE BILL.
Is that clear enough for you?
:smack:
Anyone rememer the details of that business about our army being held for ransom by the ship it rented due to a dispute over payment of the bill? More than any other example, that one drove home the point to me.
What condition is Bush’s helicpoter compared to the ones we use?
RickJay, really. “Retard”? “Ass-hat”? “Stupid bullshit”? I thought you were better than that, even in the Pit. Ah, well. Such invective forces a response.
I and others, on both sides of the 49th parallel, made it clear that Canada’s military obligations do not stop at Canada’s borders any more than the US’s obligations stop at its borders. Both countries are part of the world, despite the smug isolationism of many people, such as yourself apparently. Both countries have obligations to the world, as do all the industrial democracies. There are things we have to do simply because we can. You might have addressed that concept in an adult manner, as so many of your countrymen have.
As for the size of the budget, it’s worth noting that Canadian expenditures are just a fifth of American ones on a per capita basis. That means the average American taxpayer pays more to fulfill Canada’s military obligations than does the average Canadian taxpayer (including you, I take it).
Whatever, it’s good to know that the subject is now a matter of serious debate up there.
Actually, Elvis, it’s not. I cannot explain why, but these issues just don’t resonate with Canadians any more. Canadian apathy is well known, but it’s reaching all-time highs now.
You’ve often wondered why I’m so engaged about American politics and not Canadian politics. The reason is mainly because it’s almost impossible to engage in the Canadian political process. The government is secretive, there is no opposition to speak of any more, and the people apparently don’t care. None of my friends will talk about Canadian politics. It’s simply irrelevant to them. Not one of them could not give you even a ballpark notion of what our military budget is, or should be. Our government is corrupt, and no one cares.
The next election will be won by the Liberals. Its timing will be shamelessly manipulated to maximize their gain. Our opposition will continue to flounder due to internal squabbles and lack of funding.
The only way the Canadian political process will become engaged again is if, A) there is a crisis, such as a major terrorist attack, or B) a new, highly charismatic oppition leader arises and re-energizes the opposition, or C) The Liberals do something incredibly stupid like trying to nationalize Alberta’s oil production.
And if C) happens, I suspect that the reaction to it would be more of a threat to seperate, rather than an attempt to elect a different government. Most Albertans have given up on the idea of having much of a say in Federal politics. The Liberals have gerrymandered the game to prevent that.
Or alternatively, perhaps most Canadians don’t want to spend more money to support the USA’s foreign policy.