My years of service 1967-96. From infantry reserve regiments x2 & x1 regular armoured regiment. I’ve served under both traditional governing parties. Both cut our military. Both underfunded our military. These latest pronouncements are hard to take at face value given the history of Canadian governments cutting & delaying procurements. JT made promises that he will not be in power to make happen. Poilievre has already said that when he becomes PM he expects that Canada’s books will be so bad that he will not honour the promises. Sad for our military.
I served in Mr, Trudeau Senior's navy back in the 1970s and we expected to make bricks without straw back then because the PM had very public distain for our military (even after declaring martial law once). I'd have to say though that the guilty party for the decay if the Forces is 100% the Canadian taxpayer who has failed to support the Forces, make defence an election issue or generally give a crap and understand what is going on in the World around ue.
Our military is a far cry from what it once was during the Great War or the Second World War. The Canadian cat has been declawed and if war were to break out tomorrow, the Canadian Armed Forces would need a complete overhaul before we even begun sending troops into battle. Even then, given what you've said already of all the problems that faces our Canadian Forces, I doubt they would be very much use. Russia and China and other countries in their camp are already on a war footing and our camp is barely scratching the surface. It's pathetic! Rather than looking to today, Canada is living on past glories and pretending that we are the same as we've always been. We're not.
@@PeterLorimer-ji5ut Agree that the Canadian tax paying voter has never, ever, ever made the status of our military a voting priority. I was 3rd generation to have served in my family. I’ve learned that Canadians don’t want to pay.
@@histman3133 As a 3rd generation family member to have served & now a grandfather, I’m deeply disappointed in both our traditional governing parties & the Canadian voters who have put them into power. The Canadian voter has never cared about the status of the Canadian military. Both traditional governing parties take their lead from that indifference. It now falls to our trading allies (Europe & America) to make it clear that a functional Canadian military is critical to our military alliances (NATO & NORAD) if Canada wishes to continue to have tariff free access to their markets.
@@kevindelaney1951 I'm the second generation. (Both my grandfathers were too old to serve in WWI!) The last Canadian government to take defence seriously was Louis St. Laurent. Canadians will (again) wake up in the middle of a massive global crisis and try to rebuild the military from a standing start. It won't work this time though as the gear is now highly sophisticated, not quickly produced and even the boots-on-the-ground infantryman is using high tech weaponry. and the old fashioned training isn't enough anymore.
If only that money were staying here and spent here, eh? You can't get mad at Irving Co. though.. they have bought and paid for every government in the last forty years. Such is the capitalist system we exist in.
I don't understand why the government did not just build its own shipbuilding company and build them at cost, lots of governments around the world own company's.
I have been screaming about this since the cost comparisons were shown. It is insanity, and when we finally do build them, they WILL go over budget. Seaspan Vancouver/Victoria offered lower for the same project iirc and didn't get selected. There's some blatant corruption between Procurements Canada and Irving, but nobody cares because it's the military. I am quite frankly disgusted with this apathy towards our taxes. But the problem is most people would probably scream to defund the CAF if they were told and shown all this, and politicians want power so guess who they'll listen to instead of looking at the military's needs?
Conservatives or Liberals... does not matter. Neither care about our military. PP even said he is not going to reach 2%. The problem is two fold. Our procurment system is crap and the average Canadian does not care.
Pierre cannot spend a bunch of money when he gets in. Anyone with half a brain understands that. The liberals have been spending huge amounts of money for almost a decade. Maybe we should stop sending 100s of millions of dollars to Ukraine and fund our own military!
Well Canada's a laughing stock in every other aspect, our folks in the military are too professional so the government needed to find a different way to embarrass them. To all those in the military, I'm on your side, hopefully a new government will give you the respect you deserve.
The joke is on you. Your reference of laughing stock, is a self projection of your own personal paranoia of what others say or care about you. Like your bravado, it's imaginary. No one is laughing and you're making up something that doesn't exist. How we conduct our military and the funding that goes with it, is Canada's business. You would have us jump like fools every time some external influence penetrates the atmosphere of opinion. Yours is just that, an opinion, however misinformed. Your rhetoric is foolish at best. No one is laughing at the Canadian Military. IF you happen to have an inferiority complex, you will perceive some kind of laughing and would be bothered by that. Fact is, no one is laughing and you're making up silly nonsense that doesn't exist to suit your own personal weird agenda. Kindly keep your opinion sacred, but no one is listening, because you feel some sort of inferiority. Only a fool would react to laughing anyway. This isn't junior high school, and this is a serious matter for mature context of National Defense.
This has been the norm for decades. No one government in power or party can dismiss their culpability for the decimation of our CAF. I served in the RCN 1978 to 1980. The greatest participatiin i experienced was search and rescue patrol on an ancient minesweeper where we actually rescued a couple of fishermen who were at tisk of drowning in their foundered boat. It was a heroic task. But the vessel we used was embarrassing. I was in the west coast fleet that had restricted communications and operational capacity because of the ships' lack hardware. Awesome sailors, substandard equiptment, and no government will.😢
Agreed. Definitely. One only needs to see the billions being made by USA and see why the rhetoric has them pestering us to buy more of their toys that don't always work as specified. The pressure to spend more and pay THEM more is the media spin. Then the suckers who've been conditioned to speak up for them all scream to the rafters that it's so and so's fault and someone is laughing at us or whatever the mean girls would say. lol
@@drewthompson7457 I know that. We would have to start from scratch but it would be beneficial to Canada and Canadians to build our own military equipment
The cost of CSC that was quoted was not the build cost but the total build and in service and support costs. A Toyota Corolla costs $24k but would you buy it if the price was $57k? This would include all non warranty repairs and the fuel costs. Our current situation did not happen over night and is a product of cuts during the cold war when the west got complacent. Have a look at the performance of the British during the Falkland Islands conflict and they had equipment despite Thatcher era cuts. Also consider the american choices for newer ships, three classes of Littoral craft worth billions are worthless and most of the planned ships are canceled. They just chose an Italian design and spent an unholy amount of redesign to be a one trick pony. A great example of European decision making is the German procurement of American helmets. A decision that is heading past the 8 year mark because of red tape..for.. a.. Helmet. Meanwhile Poland is fielding new and legacy tanks, they are currently fielding 4 different MBTs (Leopard 2, Leopard 2PL, PT81 [being replaced by M1A2 SepV3] and now K2s from Korea) Anyhow. Take a look around and tell me who is spending right on military.
Canada needs to focus on industrializing our North with a new civilian component of the Military. Specifically for accomodating the Northwest Passage and a high speed rail from Churchhill to the Pacific.
That's actually an insult to the average spoiled child, who even if only 12 years old could no doubt do a better job as prime minister than the Peter Pan now in office.
Unfortunately if I say wtf I want I will piss off alot of people why because my family's heritage has always been to serve this country, uncles, dad's, brothers, cousins, self all served with dignity and respect and honour, problem is politely and gently put the politicians are a bunch of pussy ass whipped rely on others to save their asses, and have not served a day in actual service for this country ! My family's sacrifices like many others start at a very very young age and finish at a very very old age, it's time we buck up and start paying and treating our soldiers with the proper respect that they deserve ! Want our trip service to be the best of the best once again well then it's time to get these politicians to smarten up or else we will become the u.s.a.'s next state, wait a minute that's what we are already ! The u.s's poor boy Oliver asking for more poridge please sir ! Enough is enough and time to step up ! Put up and shut up !
The past three governments have all cut the forces budget to shamefully low rates with spending reaching a low of 1% of GDP under the Harper government. It's time to tuen this around.
Too basic of an analysis; it's HOW this money is spent, not just raw dollars. We could spend 2 percent of our GDP on military funding buying random junk that briefs well but serves no actual purpose.
@kellmurphy1344 Stop projecting. I called out the issue of percentages and raw dollars vice wise spending. 1 percent spent wisely is far more effective than 2 percent spent on garbage. The number is otherwise just arbitrary.
@@nemesis3329 You say this, and I agree, but then your next post is about some tampon hysteria. Kind of undercuts your whole argument in favour of looking deeper than the shallow political critiques.
We can blame justin as much as we want, and we should !! But the main issue with CAF wears the uniform and they have been undermining our capacities for decades. Caring more for their careers than the troops under them. Even if CAF spent 4% GDP, it would still be money well wasted, going into friends pockets and paying useless stuff like new/old british ranks conversation, new hats for the general. Money won’t buy numbers, let alone competent, able and willing to fight troops. Their need to be a top to bottom "trimming of the fat" before we start throwing money at a problem that was never adressed within rhe ranks: toxic "do as I say, not as I do" leadership
Something like 30% of our entire military is colonel and above. The number would ne pkay if our total strength was in the 100k - 150k area, but as long as we are sub 60k reg force it is far too much bloat.
I disagree that our military has been cut to the bone. At least one arm and leg amputation..reminds me of the knight on Monty Python, but Putin will never “call it a draw”. National disgrace. Freedom is not free. Grandson of WW 1 front line soldier
So a female CDS is suppose to fix things. Was terrible when I joined in 76 but I was proud to join and serve my country. In its current state I would never counsel my children or grand children to join the CAF
We need amphibious assault ships with F35s. It will project more power and a logistics capability advancement. They can act as aircraft carriers. It will be a step up over just acquiring new fighter jets and destroyers and submarines
Given that we cannot drum up enough trained crew to man our existing ships and subs, how would the RCN ever operate a 40,000 ton Amphibious ship with a crew of about 1200?
The general Canadian does not want spending increased on its military. It does not matter who is in power, they will in the end defer to the status quo or not be in government very long. All the moaning in the world by vets such as ourselves isn't going to work. The voting majority of Canadians do not want to spend on its military.
Turdeau should have bragged with Canada leading the way with tampon dispensers in the men's washrooms. Also, all those absent military vehicles lessen our carbon footprint. Something all militaries should be looking forward to. Canada, leading the way!
Truth of the matter is the Trudeau government was able to get away with this because Canadians simply don't care. People's worldviews are only what's in front of their doorsteps and NATO isn't seen by Canadians as their problems. They are more concerned whether something will cost them more tax dollars and that was IT.
There was never a sole source process to cancel. Harper never actually got thru contract negotiations on an actual purchase of F-35s back when development was still mired in delays and cost overruns and the capabilities were lower. Countries who were ordered LRIP batch aircraft back then have planes now that aren't fully combat capable and need expensive updates to bring them to the current block standard as the program has FINALLY reached full rate production status. The ones Trudeau has actually negotiated a contract for are much cheaper (per plane) than back when Harper ignored doing a competition at all, such that we're getting 88 of them instead of 66. That being said we really should be going to a mixed fleet setup like Australia of F-35s and something else (they've got 24 F/A-18F Superhornets and 12 EA-18G Growlers in addition to their planned order of 72 F-35As) because there are things the F-35 cannot do, and quick intercepts to defend Canadian airspace is one of them as its not particularly fast compared to some other platforms. Canada DID run an actual competition under Trudeau though. Boeing was disqualified as punishment for the Bombardier trade dispute, Eurofighter and Dassault withdrew from it themselves and Saab was the only one to see it through. The River class destroyers are based upon the British Global Combat Ship platform, of which the Type 26 Frigate was the first to be ordered. But the GCSP was always intended to be three different configurations, an ASW focuses ship, an AAW focused ship or a general purpose ship. Whether something is called a frigate or a destroyer largely comes down to its weapons fit and intended roles, as well as political for spending arguments. The Type 26 only has a short to medium range AAW capability thru its 48 CAMM missiles which are officially a 1 to 25km range weapon. But both Canada's and Australia's variants will have Standard SM-2s and ESSMs which have much greater ranges. Canada has also ordered Tomahawk land-attack missiles, has specified a main gun system that features precision long-range guided land attack projectiles, and a radar installation that has anti-ballistic missile capability. I do love how you attack the liberals but ignore the issues they inherited from Harper's lack of ACTUAL spending on the armed forces. Nine years of conservative rule thru two minority and one majority governments led to nothing other than a handful of sole sourced deals as a matter of urgent needs during our Afghan mission. The Hawk advanced trainers were leased by the government and not used exclusively by the RCAF pilots. They were a component of the NATO flight training program and as such other NATO members had pilots trained on them also here in Canada. Alberta is a BIG province with lots of airspace and ground space to conduct training that isn't possible to many small NATO countries. While the chronological age of the planes was low, the actual time on the airframes and engines was quite high, and the engines were obsolete and proving difficult and expensive to maintain. Britain has also recently grounded and retired a number of similar age Hawk trainers for the same reasons. And the need to replace those trainers has been known since Harper had a majority and yet nothing was done about it. The other aircraft used is the CT-156 Harvard II and both them and the Hawk's replacement will actually be a much more advanced and capable turboprop , the Pilatus PC-21 thru the new Future Air Crew Training program run by SkyLynne which is a new partnership of the two companies who ran the NATO flying program, CAE and KF Aerospace. Of course why would you report on publically available information that doesn't suit your editorial narrative. A PC-21 was actually in the RCAF Air Parade near the end on July 1st, painted red, and likely the official Pilatus demonstrator airframe. And because a significant portion of Canada's CF-18 fleet are two seaters, we don't strictly speaking need a lead-in jet trainer for the operational squadrons. We can have CF-18 instructors doing the transitional training in actual CF-18s for the new pilots going to the Hornet squadrons. As to the F-35, their primary training is done in advanced flight simulators in the USA until countries buying them get similar simulator setups operational in their own countries (which is btw included in that 19 billion dollar purchase agreement between Canada and Lockheed-Martin). Oh also in the air parade was a USN Boeing P-8 Poseidon, another of the new aircraft purchases for the RCAF announced this year.
Amen. I do not attribute the better F35s / contract the Liberals got over what Harper wanted to any "genius" on their part. More like the luck of waiting while the F35 was forced to get some much-needed improvements. And as you say, they could have opted to get a mixed or interim fleet of two fighter types in the meantime, be it super hornets, rafales, gripens, typhoons. However, from the days of the legacy hornets onward, the brass wanted only 1 type of (multi-role) aircraft, for efficiency on things like commonality of training, parts, and so on. However, yes, the side effect of this "efficiency" might be that in the end they lose more than they would have ever saved. The "River" class ships, same deal - each of the 3 countries had a different idea of what they wanted, and that's fair, given their different situations. In the end, by the type these "type 26" ships are on the water, there might be a need for an upgrade or new generation of them anyway, so if they are flexible, it could be the case where we get three tranches or 4 or 5 ships, then an evolution to the newer tech fr the next 4 or 5, and so on, on and on in a more constant evolutionary process of shipbuilding, rather than one big chunk of 15 ships where ship #1 is great for its time3 but ship #15 is obsolete by the time is is operational. To do that, you have to have a Canadian shipbuilding industry that is robust and permanent, and some of these same politicians are the ones who would rather die than see Canada building anything for itself or competing on an equal footing with military technology. It took something like 20-30 years of deliberate neglect to almost destroy Canadian shipbuilding, and only recently did politicians start to realize what a mistake that was. I HOPE the submarines issue will be decided and put to contract quickly and competently, not fumbled around while different major defense firms unleash some "political sponsored content" as they jockey for the billions of dollars in potential revenue, that delays it for a decade or so.
Never trust an enemy or an ALLY who's selling you THEIR equipment and pressuring your government through the media to spend more so they profit more. The estimates and the cost overruns are a constant in the universe. Especially don't trust an ally that has officially attacked you in the past or made official plans to invade at a government level. If we really need to spend more, let's make it ourselves and keep those billions North of the border instead of making american tech companies richer and richer. I mean imagine the powerhouse we'd be if Deifenbaker hadn't axed the Avro Arrow due to pressure from down south, eh? That plane would have been relevant even today!
Canada backing out on the F-35 Program and then jumping back in will cost the Canadian taxpayer twice as much for fewer fighters that will arrive years later.
The money was spent day one as usual, to experts, engineering firms, consultants flying to dinner parties to small islands and filling their own pockets with taxpayers cash, meanwhile Our military has been sifting through foreign trash bins for scraps ,recyclables and bandades to defend Ourselves since WW2. Maybe there is some extra cash in the Trudeau Foundation vault.
Since when has Esprit de Corps become a mouthpiece for the F Trudeau crowd? I used to read the magazine when I was a reservist in the 90s and got excited when I saw it here. Too bad it seems to have become partisan.
This government is spending far more than the previous government did. As well your pick for PM has already declared he will not abide by 2% of GDP. Furthermore, we spend approximately as much as Israel or Poland yet our forces are about 15% the size of theirs. Where does all the money go? We know it's not going to our servicepeople, so where is it? What do we have to show for it?
So the only way out is to spend ...spend....spend, and be told how poorly they spent..., I challenge all folks to write a letter to gov.ca and tell them where to buy....I on the other hand would like to see more of that 2% spent on training...from that where to spend will become evident....which ever branch trains up personel, regular or reserve to standard the most efficient gets the first ask at the cabinet table. Secondly stop canceling procurement of previous administrations this only fractures continuity and wastes money by training people for things that don't come to exist. Simple. Summary Decide on 2% Let the branches decide on what they need. First proven and trained up gets first dibs. Don't tell the CAF which tools they require, let them tell you. Don't cancel programs deemed fit by people who know what they are talking about for political capital and votes. Seems so straight forward. Journalists and TV personalities know squat about this subject same as me. So....
Ahh, the memories of being out in the field on Ex in Shilo and Wainwright … literally saying; … _”bullet, bullet”_ … during section attacks. 🙄 We switched it up saying bullet to; … _”budget cuts, budget cuts”_ … fact!
Can buy all the shiny toys they want to get to 2%, but if they don't have the people to crew them, it makes no difference. Recruitment is the #1 thing they need to solve, or everything else means zip.
We can just pay or rent the United States to protect us. I spent 15 years in the CF and it is a shit show from the top down. A rental agreement with the US would be very cost effective and a bonus for the US would be Canadian educated personnel being recruited to their military. We share a border and have similar interests around the world. We would be protected by the best armed forces on the planet!
Can you not report on military matters without injecting your personal bias against the liberals? Anybody that's studied our military knows that neither party has done much in the way of keeping our Armed Forces viable, something you seem loathe to admit. I'm sure you can comment on military issues without editorializing, if I want political opinions I'll watch the news.
Both the CONS and LIBS record for the armed forces is a joke. If anyone thinks the CONS and PP as the future PM will make a difference give your head a shake!
When JT runs a scorched earth budget and salts the earth like Carthage.... The CPC will have a tough first couple of years, like the US and Japan in the 1980s.
Our Military was almost ruined during father Pierre Trudeau's time . Now the Baby Blunder . The old saying THE NUT DOES NOT FALL FAR FROM THE TREE, is so true C A McLean
It's alway been too little too late. And half the time, crap the CF didn't want. Nobody asked for Griffins, nobody asked for the Challengers and nobody asked for the Airbus. Nobody asked for discard Brit subs.
Not submarines, but submersibles. Double use them for research and defense... Can be operated semi autonomous and reduce the lack off personnel and the qualifications required. Just throw the controller at a kid. Parental control strictly required.*
Buy Gripens to fill the gap. Build them here. Then push them into fighter pilot training with modifications. I bet my idea is better then what were going to end up with.
The main thing I see about your video is the cost of dithering. The CSC project was started long ago, under Harper, but they just kept announcing and re-announcing the same things. The same photo ops for the same local Conservative MP's (multiple times at the same shipyard), and meanwhile nothing was actually going on that the public could see. It's worth noting that the new CSC frigate/destroyer project had to wait until Harper's other big navy project, the AOPS, was completed. While I think there was some merit in plotting out the future of naval & coast guard shipbuilding in Canada and making sure the work was done in Canada, let's not kid ourselves that the Cons and Libs have used it the way yutube inserts ads into videos - just a useless interruption of what people really came the see. 😉 The fighter project is another one that shows the real enemy is the procurement process. The Cons decided to buy the F35 sight-unseen and cost-unknown because Washington told them to; then it turned out to be several times more expensive than they had claimed, and have a lot more performance issues too. (Following bad ideas as long as they are American ideas = what the Conservatives excel at.) The Liberals vowed to never buy it, but in the end they were so slow to make a decision on what else to buy, the military brass snookered them into never considering any other planes beyond what Boeing or Lockheed could provide; no real chance for the Typhoon, Rafale, or Gripen, which if they had chosen, the RCAF might be flying on missions already. Of course, the Liberals were done in by their usual indecisiveness, and that led to the embarrassing years-long 360 turn from the F35 to the ... F35. (Dithering in endless circles = what the Liberals excel at.) The truth is equipment gets old, new technology constantly evolves, and by the time such long-term projects get done, their shelf life as useful in combat might be less than the time it took to develop and build them. Flexibility in defense design & procurement would help matters stretgically, but for that you'd need a clear idea of Canada's unique strategic needs - the kind that is not tainted by partisan nonsense, alliance nonsense, media nonsense, or corporate profiteering nonsense.
How can Ukraine turn Canadian taxpayer money into "war winning equipment" in an instant, yet the CAF will be waiting a LOOOONG time to get basic replacements for already well past best before date equipment?!
While we wait impatiently for F35s and Type 26 destroyers our littoral fleet is in dismal low firepower posture. And we have not fielded mobile misslie launchers since 2004. WTF
Justin this Justin that this story old as the hills so what are we going to do about it cry some more we lack industrial base in this area need investment not guns per se look at Sweden couple years back they were making those boxy cars and apartment furniture not any more they taking the Japan route, We need to build our own same as the others no more running around at the rummage sales.
The country has got to implement mandatory conscription to build the forces back up. One year service must be completed between 18-26 years old like other countries around the world do. Will give the younger generation skills and work ethic to either continue on in a military career or op out after 1 year services to continue on their on path but with disciple, skills and work ethic. If they decide not to go, off to jail. Freedom isn’t cheap, sacrifices must be made during these times of uncertainty. Hell I’m 40 and I would go for a year!
@@espritdecorpsmagazineI’m reading a lot of comments on here,but I would like to hear from you as to what is the best solution to fix all this on a go forward basis. We have such a proud past and we need to mirror that image again.
Did anyone else see how bad those troops looked. They can't even blouse their boots correctly in front of the Prime minister. They don't deserve shiny new toys. Don't get me started on the grooming standard either. Orange hair and the foot long biker goatee wouldn't be able to get a mask on, let alone the rest with full beards. I'm ashamed.
The redone dress regs remove footlong goatees. 1 inch in bulk or length is the maximum. In fact no more super curly mustaches as their max length is also 1 inch.
@@klassensj2 ok. I figured it was older stock footage being used. How about the scene where PM was walking past a rank of troops and curly mustache (with the weeklong scruff) had his pants around his ankles? Much to improve upon. especially in front of the top of the top.
So when it comes to individual's personal habits having to take a back set to the greater good, you're in favour of that? Someone please tell this to those "freedom convoy" assholes, that their personal bullshit does not matter.
You can have your pants down up to the ankle now. And saying we dont deserve new equipment its so stupid. Your not the one using the crap equipment we have, we def deserve better.
The Korean submarines are NOT "Fit for Purpose". The f-35 is a "Hanger Queen" that will lead to maintenance cost overruns that will absolutely blow your mind. It's a shame that Canada is incapable of designing and manufacturing her own long range interceptor aircraft. Remember that old Company .... I think it was called "Avro" or something like that. They produced a few prototype aircraft that still have many attributes that rival planes of today. A modernized "Arrow" would at least be on par with the Russian Mig-31. But no ...... the Canadian Govt once again gets cowed into purchasing a single engine ground attack aircraft that is in no way shape or form suited for the massive size of Canada nor with the cold weather functionality required. Don't even get me started on the Type-26 Frigates.
All the equipment you listed is absolutely top of the line and will be great additions for Canada. The issue is that we waste so much time thinking about acquiring new kit that by the time we get it it's already obsolete. If Canada is going to have a small military it should be using cutting edge tech to offset the balance of our limited available man power.
@@derek89273 We do not have a manufacturer of combat aircraft. To build up the expertise and capability would easily double or triple the cost of any acquisition, especially because of the low numbers that Canada would buy, and we certainly could not compete in the world market. As for ships, yes, we can build ships in Canada, but take a close look at all the issues wrt the AOPS. For Canada to design, develop and build any vehicle from scratch would be prohibitively expensive, and so lengthy a process, that whatever we built would probably be obsolete at IOC.
@@hyperboreanesoterica6588 Further to your comment -- the acquisition process is also stretched out soooo far, to amortize the spending, that the last unit is even more obsolete before our military even gets it. The whole acquisition process is an administrative nightmare, that wastes money and is not effective in providing what the CAF requires, when it is required.
I spent 36 years in the CAF and this in not a new tune it is the same old story
Same old Song and Dance.....
I'm curious, in your 36 years did you ever at any time see funding come in that made an actual noticeable difference in your day to day?
My years of service 1967-96. From infantry reserve regiments x2 & x1 regular armoured regiment. I’ve served under both traditional governing parties. Both cut our military. Both underfunded our military. These latest pronouncements are hard to take at face value given the history of Canadian governments cutting & delaying procurements. JT made promises that he will not be in power to make happen. Poilievre has already said that when he becomes PM he expects that Canada’s books will be so bad that he will not honour the promises. Sad for our military.
I served in Mr, Trudeau Senior's navy back in the 1970s and we expected to make bricks without straw back then because the PM had very public distain for our military (even after declaring martial law once).
I'd have to say though that the guilty party for the decay if the Forces is 100% the Canadian taxpayer who has failed to support the Forces, make defence an election issue or generally give a crap and understand what is going on in the World around ue.
Our military is a far cry from what it once was during the Great War or the Second World War. The Canadian cat has been declawed and if war were to break out tomorrow, the Canadian Armed Forces would need a complete overhaul before we even begun sending troops into battle. Even then, given what you've said already of all the problems that faces our Canadian Forces, I doubt they would be very much use. Russia and China and other countries in their camp are already on a war footing and our camp is barely scratching the surface. It's pathetic! Rather than looking to today, Canada is living on past glories and pretending that we are the same as we've always been. We're not.
@@PeterLorimer-ji5ut Agree that the Canadian tax paying voter has never, ever, ever made the status of our military a voting priority. I was 3rd generation to have served in my family. I’ve learned that Canadians don’t want to pay.
@@histman3133 As a 3rd generation family member to have served & now a grandfather, I’m deeply disappointed in both our traditional governing parties & the Canadian voters who have put them into power. The Canadian voter has never cared about the status of the Canadian military. Both traditional governing parties take their lead from that indifference. It now falls to our trading allies (Europe & America) to make it clear that a functional Canadian military is critical to our military alliances (NATO & NORAD) if Canada wishes to continue to have tariff free access to their markets.
@@kevindelaney1951 I'm the second generation. (Both my grandfathers were too old to serve in WWI!) The last Canadian government to take defence seriously was Louis St. Laurent. Canadians will (again) wake up in the middle of a massive global crisis and try to rebuild the military from a standing start. It won't work this time though as the gear is now highly sophisticated, not quickly produced and even the boots-on-the-ground infantryman is using high tech weaponry. and the old fashioned training isn't enough anymore.
The River Class "Destroyer" (Type 26 Frigate) is going to cost 4x as much as the UK and AUS versions because they are being built in Canada by Irving.
If only that money were staying here and spent here, eh? You can't get mad at Irving Co. though.. they have bought and paid for every government in the last forty years. Such is the capitalist system we exist in.
I don't understand why the government did not just build its own shipbuilding company and build them at cost, lots of governments around the world own company's.
I have been screaming about this since the cost comparisons were shown. It is insanity, and when we finally do build them, they WILL go over budget. Seaspan Vancouver/Victoria offered lower for the same project iirc and didn't get selected. There's some blatant corruption between Procurements Canada and Irving, but nobody cares because it's the military. I am quite frankly disgusted with this apathy towards our taxes.
But the problem is most people would probably scream to defund the CAF if they were told and shown all this, and politicians want power so guess who they'll listen to instead of looking at the military's needs?
ah yes, let's have a toilet paper company build our ships. most Canadian thing to do ever.
Ah yes the "destroyers" why are they even called that
It's ok, India will come to our aid since we are their newest colony.
Conservatives or Liberals... does not matter. Neither care about our military. PP even said he is not going to reach 2%. The problem is two fold. Our procurment system is crap and the average Canadian does not care.
Pierre cannot spend a bunch of money when he gets in. Anyone with half a brain understands that. The liberals have been spending huge amounts of money for almost a decade. Maybe we should stop sending 100s of millions of dollars to Ukraine and fund our own military!
Well Canada's a laughing stock in every other aspect, our folks in the military are too professional so the government needed to find a different way to embarrass them. To all those in the military, I'm on your side, hopefully a new government will give you the respect you deserve.
Doubt it. Cons do not have a very good record either on Defense spending or taking care of vets
The joke is on you. Your reference of laughing stock, is a self projection of your own personal paranoia of what others say or care about you. Like your bravado, it's imaginary. No one is laughing and you're making up something that doesn't exist. How we conduct our military and the funding that goes with it, is Canada's business. You would have us jump like fools every time some external influence penetrates the atmosphere of opinion. Yours is just that, an opinion, however misinformed. Your rhetoric is foolish at best. No one is laughing at the Canadian Military. IF you happen to have an inferiority complex, you will perceive some kind of laughing and would be bothered by that. Fact is, no one is laughing and you're making up silly nonsense that doesn't exist to suit your own personal weird agenda. Kindly keep your opinion sacred, but no one is listening, because you feel some sort of inferiority. Only a fool would react to laughing anyway. This isn't junior high school, and this is a serious matter for mature context of National Defense.
they are not professional, the military has a poor character problem
This has been the norm for decades. No one government in power or party can dismiss their culpability for the decimation of our CAF. I served in the RCN 1978 to 1980. The greatest participatiin i experienced was search and rescue patrol on an ancient minesweeper where we actually rescued a couple of fishermen who were at tisk of drowning in their foundered boat. It was a heroic task. But the vessel we used was embarrassing. I was in the west coast fleet that had restricted communications and operational capacity because of the ships' lack hardware. Awesome sailors, substandard equiptment, and no government will.😢
This is why Canada needs to build its own military equipment
Agreed. Definitely. One only needs to see the billions being made by USA and see why the rhetoric has them pestering us to buy more of their toys that don't always work as specified. The pressure to spend more and pay THEM more is the media spin. Then the suckers who've been conditioned to speak up for them all scream to the rafters that it's so and so's fault and someone is laughing at us or whatever the mean girls would say. lol
We tried that, the government cancelled many projects.
@@drewthompson7457 I know that. We would have to start from scratch but it would be beneficial to Canada and Canadians to build our own military equipment
@@robertjackson2141 : our government doesn't like things that are beneficial to Canadians.
Was like this in the 90's. We used to pretend to throw dummy grenades and shoot m72's
If you are currently serving, you should get out now before they don't let you out.
The cost of CSC that was quoted was not the build cost but the total build and in service and support costs.
A Toyota Corolla costs $24k but would you buy it if the price was $57k? This would include all non warranty repairs and the fuel costs.
Our current situation did not happen over night and is a product of cuts during the cold war when the west got complacent. Have a look at the performance of the British during the Falkland Islands conflict and they had equipment despite Thatcher era cuts.
Also consider the american choices for newer ships, three classes of Littoral craft worth billions are worthless and most of the planned ships are canceled. They just chose an Italian design and spent an unholy amount of redesign to be a one trick pony.
A great example of European decision making is the German procurement of American helmets. A decision that is heading past the 8 year mark because of red tape..for.. a.. Helmet.
Meanwhile Poland is fielding new and legacy tanks, they are currently fielding 4 different MBTs (Leopard 2, Leopard 2PL, PT81 [being replaced by M1A2 SepV3] and now K2s from Korea)
Anyhow. Take a look around and tell me who is spending right on military.
How come nato doesn’t recognize the amount spent on tampons ?
aaaaahahahahahahah
You being on the rag 100% of the time does not actually move the metrics that much higher. 😆
Why not drop off the tampons to a women's shelter
They are not considered military equipment. Rather personal support items.
Canada needs to focus on industrializing our North with a new civilian component of the Military. Specifically for accomodating the Northwest Passage and a high speed rail from Churchhill to the Pacific.
How long has it taken Ottawa to build the LRT...?
@@nemesis3329 LOL. We're f*cked
High speed rail across boggy tundar? LOL
@@darb4091 Yah I know. But, Theres gotta be a way to do it. Maybe underground? Elevated?
Our military is totally useless in the coming conflict. We have been since his father's time.
We need to get our house in order and lead by example. The Ukraine has revealed we a ill prepared to help or even defend ourselves. Time to step up.
So tired of this country being run by a spoiled child.
Correction: spoiled children.
That's actually an insult to the average spoiled child, who even if only 12 years old could no doubt do a better job as prime minister than the Peter Pan now in office.
but pollievre the twerp isn't prime minister.
Sad to say if we toss JT in favour of PP we will be exchanging one spoiled child for another. Recall too that Harper was famous for ignoring the CAF.
@@bunkerhill4854 I couldn't agree more!
Our military is more concerned about installing tampons dispensers in the men’s washrooms 😂
To little too late is exactly right, giveth, take away. With an election on the near horizon…this budget will be going through the shredder!
What exactly do you mean with your word salad of idioms and cliches?
@@chamiltonart3319 It is right there, in English.
Unfortunately if I say wtf I want I will piss off alot of people why because my family's heritage has always been to serve this country, uncles, dad's, brothers, cousins, self all served with dignity and respect and honour, problem is politely and gently put the politicians are a bunch of pussy ass whipped rely on others to save their asses, and have not served a day in actual service for this country ! My family's sacrifices like many others start at a very very young age and finish at a very very old age, it's time we buck up and start paying and treating our soldiers with the proper respect that they deserve ! Want our trip service to be the best of the best once again well then it's time to get these politicians to smarten up or else we will become the u.s.a.'s next state, wait a minute that's what we are already ! The u.s's poor boy Oliver asking for more poridge please sir ! Enough is enough and time to step up ! Put up and shut up !
They are politicians. They do not care onless the money is going into their pockets.
"diesel electric" 😂🤣Those do not meet the 12 requirements put forth.
AIP look up the KSS III submarine
Tampons in the 'men's room is something so embarrassing that even our enemies won't mock us for it.
Loosing trades people is the biggest problem, all branches of the military.
"Despite the Trudeau Liberals increasing Canadas defense budget by over 54%"
Is this 54% Increase in the Room with us right now?
The past three governments have all cut the forces budget to shamefully low rates with spending reaching a low of 1% of GDP under the Harper government. It's time to tuen this around.
Too basic of an analysis; it's HOW this money is spent, not just raw dollars. We could spend 2 percent of our GDP on military funding buying random junk that briefs well but serves no actual purpose.
How about expensive tampon dispensers in all male washrooms on DND property. Does that count towards the 2 percent?
@@nemesis3329 why get so triggered. We need honest discourse to fix this not snowflakes getting angry at people who share their concerns on the issue.
@kellmurphy1344
Stop projecting. I called out the issue of percentages and raw dollars vice wise spending. 1 percent spent wisely is far more effective than 2 percent spent on garbage. The number is otherwise just arbitrary.
@@nemesis3329 You say this, and I agree, but then your next post is about some tampon hysteria. Kind of undercuts your whole argument in favour of looking deeper than the shallow political critiques.
We can blame justin as much as we want, and we should !!
But the main issue with CAF wears the uniform and they have been undermining our capacities for decades. Caring more for their careers than the troops under them.
Even if CAF spent 4% GDP, it would still be money well wasted, going into friends pockets and paying useless stuff like new/old british ranks conversation, new hats for the general.
Money won’t buy numbers, let alone competent, able and willing to fight troops.
Their need to be a top to bottom "trimming of the fat" before we start throwing money at a problem that was never adressed within rhe ranks: toxic "do as I say, not as I do" leadership
Way to many generals leading no staff
Something like 30% of our entire military is colonel and above. The number would ne pkay if our total strength was in the 100k - 150k area, but as long as we are sub 60k reg force it is far too much bloat.
@@klassensj2 Got a source on that number?
I served in the Army for 36 years. His father also crucified the Army as you know Scott
You've been singing the same tune since 1992!
I’m surprised we haven’t seen rainbow camouflage on our equipment and uniforms
We can't afford anything in this country anymore due to government corruption/ incompetance!
Sorry Scott, Military and politics don’t mix. Good luck
this is good stuff, keep it up.
🇨🇦😂 Canada is focked it’s so sad 😢🇨🇦
You can't even take your kids to the beaches of Wasaga any longer. Absolutely pathetic.
I disagree that our military has been cut to the bone. At least one arm and leg amputation..reminds me of the knight on Monty Python, but Putin will never “call it a draw”. National disgrace. Freedom is not free. Grandson of WW 1 front line soldier
So a female CDS is suppose to fix things. Was terrible when I joined in 76 but I was proud to join and serve my country. In its current state I would never counsel my children or grand children to join the CAF
What is a female CDS exactly? *thank you for your service.
trudope and his friends look at the military and say OMG they use guns we cant have that
We need amphibious assault ships with F35s. It will project more power and a logistics capability advancement. They can act as aircraft carriers. It will be a step up over just acquiring new fighter jets and destroyers and submarines
Given that we cannot drum up enough trained crew to man our existing ships and subs, how would the RCN ever operate a 40,000 ton Amphibious ship with a crew of about 1200?
JT is all words and no action unless it comes to new taxes!
Putting a lady who headed a DEI department will get people lining up to join.
I wonder what the CAF would look like if GC spent billions on recruitment, staffing, and training?
Maybe you could produce a puppet show and illustrate that for us, while we're drifting off into the land of fantasy and faerie tales?
The general Canadian does not want spending increased on its military. It does not matter who is in power, they will in the end defer to the status quo or not be in government very long. All the moaning in the world by vets such as ourselves isn't going to work. The voting majority of Canadians do not want to spend on its military.
And Canadian army generals increased our spending! It’s inside out destruction
from what I hear the sons we have now barely float or they're always in for repairs
Turdeau should have bragged with Canada leading the way with tampon dispensers in the men's washrooms. Also, all those absent military vehicles lessen our carbon footprint. Something all militaries should be looking forward to. Canada, leading the way!
Truth of the matter is the Trudeau government was able to get away with this because Canadians simply don't care.
People's worldviews are only what's in front of their doorsteps and NATO isn't seen by Canadians as their problems.
They are more concerned whether something will cost them more tax dollars and that was IT.
I was in when his daddy disemboweled us.
There was never a sole source process to cancel. Harper never actually got thru contract negotiations on an actual purchase of F-35s back when development was still mired in delays and cost overruns and the capabilities were lower. Countries who were ordered LRIP batch aircraft back then have planes now that aren't fully combat capable and need expensive updates to bring them to the current block standard as the program has FINALLY reached full rate production status. The ones Trudeau has actually negotiated a contract for are much cheaper (per plane) than back when Harper ignored doing a competition at all, such that we're getting 88 of them instead of 66. That being said we really should be going to a mixed fleet setup like Australia of F-35s and something else (they've got 24 F/A-18F Superhornets and 12 EA-18G Growlers in addition to their planned order of 72 F-35As) because there are things the F-35 cannot do, and quick intercepts to defend Canadian airspace is one of them as its not particularly fast compared to some other platforms. Canada DID run an actual competition under Trudeau though. Boeing was disqualified as punishment for the Bombardier trade dispute, Eurofighter and Dassault withdrew from it themselves and Saab was the only one to see it through.
The River class destroyers are based upon the British Global Combat Ship platform, of which the Type 26 Frigate was the first to be ordered. But the GCSP was always intended to be three different configurations, an ASW focuses ship, an AAW focused ship or a general purpose ship. Whether something is called a frigate or a destroyer largely comes down to its weapons fit and intended roles, as well as political for spending arguments. The Type 26 only has a short to medium range AAW capability thru its 48 CAMM missiles which are officially a 1 to 25km range weapon. But both Canada's and Australia's variants will have Standard SM-2s and ESSMs which have much greater ranges. Canada has also ordered Tomahawk land-attack missiles, has specified a main gun system that features precision long-range guided land attack projectiles, and a radar installation that has anti-ballistic missile capability.
I do love how you attack the liberals but ignore the issues they inherited from Harper's lack of ACTUAL spending on the armed forces. Nine years of conservative rule thru two minority and one majority governments led to nothing other than a handful of sole sourced deals as a matter of urgent needs during our Afghan mission. The Hawk advanced trainers were leased by the government and not used exclusively by the RCAF pilots. They were a component of the NATO flight training program and as such other NATO members had pilots trained on them also here in Canada. Alberta is a BIG province with lots of airspace and ground space to conduct training that isn't possible to many small NATO countries. While the chronological age of the planes was low, the actual time on the airframes and engines was quite high, and the engines were obsolete and proving difficult and expensive to maintain. Britain has also recently grounded and retired a number of similar age Hawk trainers for the same reasons. And the need to replace those trainers has been known since Harper had a majority and yet nothing was done about it. The other aircraft used is the CT-156 Harvard II and both them and the Hawk's replacement will actually be a much more advanced and capable turboprop , the Pilatus PC-21 thru the new Future Air Crew Training program run by SkyLynne which is a new partnership of the two companies who ran the NATO flying program, CAE and KF Aerospace.
Of course why would you report on publically available information that doesn't suit your editorial narrative. A PC-21 was actually in the RCAF Air Parade near the end on July 1st, painted red, and likely the official Pilatus demonstrator airframe. And because a significant portion of Canada's CF-18 fleet are two seaters, we don't strictly speaking need a lead-in jet trainer for the operational squadrons. We can have CF-18 instructors doing the transitional training in actual CF-18s for the new pilots going to the Hornet squadrons. As to the F-35, their primary training is done in advanced flight simulators in the USA until countries buying them get similar simulator setups operational in their own countries (which is btw included in that 19 billion dollar purchase agreement between Canada and Lockheed-Martin). Oh also in the air parade was a USN Boeing P-8 Poseidon, another of the new aircraft purchases for the RCAF announced this year.
But Trudeau hasn’t paid for any of his purchases yet, he’s broke as he has a rubber cheque book. He’s going to have to cut all his woke programs etc.
Amen. I do not attribute the better F35s / contract the Liberals got over what Harper wanted to any "genius" on their part. More like the luck of waiting while the F35 was forced to get some much-needed improvements. And as you say, they could have opted to get a mixed or interim fleet of two fighter types in the meantime, be it super hornets, rafales, gripens, typhoons. However, from the days of the legacy hornets onward, the brass wanted only 1 type of (multi-role) aircraft, for efficiency on things like commonality of training, parts, and so on. However, yes, the side effect of this "efficiency" might be that in the end they lose more than they would have ever saved.
The "River" class ships, same deal - each of the 3 countries had a different idea of what they wanted, and that's fair, given their different situations. In the end, by the type these "type 26" ships are on the water, there might be a need for an upgrade or new generation of them anyway, so if they are flexible, it could be the case where we get three tranches or 4 or 5 ships, then an evolution to the newer tech fr the next 4 or 5, and so on, on and on in a more constant evolutionary process of shipbuilding, rather than one big chunk of 15 ships where ship #1 is great for its time3 but ship #15 is obsolete by the time is is operational. To do that, you have to have a Canadian shipbuilding industry that is robust and permanent, and some of these same politicians are the ones who would rather die than see Canada building anything for itself or competing on an equal footing with military technology. It took something like 20-30 years of deliberate neglect to almost destroy Canadian shipbuilding, and only recently did politicians start to realize what a mistake that was.
I HOPE the submarines issue will be decided and put to contract quickly and competently, not fumbled around while different major defense firms unleash some "political sponsored content" as they jockey for the billions of dollars in potential revenue, that delays it for a decade or so.
Never trust an enemy or an ALLY who's selling you THEIR equipment and pressuring your government through the media to spend more so they profit more. The estimates and the cost overruns are a constant in the universe. Especially don't trust an ally that has officially attacked you in the past or made official plans to invade at a government level. If we really need to spend more, let's make it ourselves and keep those billions North of the border instead of making american tech companies richer and richer. I mean imagine the powerhouse we'd be if Deifenbaker hadn't axed the Avro Arrow due to pressure from down south, eh? That plane would have been relevant even today!
100 % exact, and the white paper fir defense should be redone
Real talk.... we need major infrastructure repair and maintenance not new shit.
Canada backing out on the F-35 Program and then jumping back in will cost the Canadian taxpayer twice as much for fewer fighters that will arrive years later.
The money was spent day one as usual, to experts, engineering firms, consultants flying to dinner parties to small islands and filling their own pockets with taxpayers cash, meanwhile Our military has been sifting through foreign trash bins for scraps ,recyclables and bandades to defend Ourselves since WW2. Maybe there is some extra cash in the Trudeau Foundation vault.
Since when has Esprit de Corps become a mouthpiece for the F Trudeau crowd? I used to read the magazine when I was a reservist in the 90s and got excited when I saw it here. Too bad it seems to have become partisan.
This government is spending far more than the previous government did. As well your pick for PM has already declared he will not abide by 2% of GDP.
Furthermore, we spend approximately as much as Israel or Poland yet our forces are about 15% the size of theirs. Where does all the money go? We know it's not going to our servicepeople, so where is it? What do we have to show for it?
J'ai pris ma retraite juste avant que l'acte final du "shit show" tire le rideau...
As the grandson of a Vandoo, I thank you for your service.
So the only way out is to spend ...spend....spend, and be told how poorly they spent..., I challenge all folks to write a letter to gov.ca and tell them where to buy....I on the other hand would like to see more of that 2% spent on training...from that where to spend will become evident....which ever branch trains up personel, regular or reserve to standard the most efficient gets the first ask at the cabinet table. Secondly stop canceling procurement of previous administrations this only fractures continuity and wastes money by training people for things that don't come to exist.
Simple.
Summary
Decide on 2%
Let the branches decide on what they need.
First proven and trained up gets first dibs.
Don't tell the CAF which tools they require, let them tell you.
Don't cancel programs deemed fit by people who know what they are talking about for political capital and votes.
Seems so straight forward.
Journalists and TV personalities know squat about this subject same as me. So....
Ahh, the memories of being out in the field on Ex in Shilo and Wainwright … literally saying; … _”bullet, bullet”_ … during section attacks. 🙄 We switched it up saying bullet to; … _”budget cuts, budget cuts”_ … fact!
Can buy all the shiny toys they want to get to 2%, but if they don't have the people to crew them, it makes no difference.
Recruitment is the #1 thing they need to solve, or everything else means zip.
We can just pay or rent the United States to protect us.
I spent 15 years in the CF and it is a shit show from the top down.
A rental agreement with the US would be very cost effective and a bonus for the US would be Canadian educated personnel being recruited to their military. We share a border and have similar interests around the world. We would be protected by the best armed forces on the planet!
Turdo needs a permanent box... treason is a crime, and he's good at it
Absolute embarrassment. I remember watching a sub come into Victoria on the deck of a Dockwise heavy transport ship. Eyebrows were raised among us.
We NEED air defense systems, Artillery, millions of Drones, and ... Storm trooper suits .. Why don't we have those yet? 😊
And the best part is towed artillery no longer is adequate and we need mobile artillery.
@@dennis2376 Yep, those Wheeled platforms with the auto loaders have some survivability.
I m good morning and hope all of the sea salt is good 😂
Can you not report on military matters without injecting your personal bias against the liberals? Anybody that's studied our military knows that neither party has done much in the way of keeping our Armed Forces viable, something you seem loathe to admit. I'm sure you can comment on military issues without editorializing, if I want political opinions I'll watch the news.
Both the CONS and LIBS record for the armed forces is a joke. If anyone thinks the CONS and PP as the future PM will make a difference give your head a shake!
When JT runs a scorched earth budget and salts the earth like Carthage....
The CPC will have a tough first couple of years, like the US and Japan in the 1980s.
Honestly its hard even for new potential recruits to join the military when all they see is how poor our armed forces are upkept
Ty. Shared.
Our Military was almost ruined during father Pierre Trudeau's time . Now the Baby Blunder . The old saying THE NUT DOES NOT FALL FAR FROM THE TREE, is so true C A McLean
When you need to do a PO for socks and you get 8 rounds for live fire exercises. Ya your F’ed
CAF writting a check that the Lieberals know will bounce back !!!
Dont give them the means to fight a war BUT they can have new John Deere tractors and Gators Nice work Liberals
It's alway been too little too late. And half the time, crap the CF didn't want. Nobody asked for Griffins, nobody asked for the Challengers and nobody asked for the Airbus. Nobody asked for discard Brit subs.
Not submarines, but submersibles. Double use them for research and defense... Can be operated semi autonomous and reduce the lack off personnel and the qualifications required.
Just throw the controller at a kid.
Parental control strictly required.*
As potential N War looms😡
no war industry and lack of public interest.
just make a mercenary FFL lol
Who will our military stand with? The government that does not want you or the Canadian public who does?
That makes no sense at all what you just said there. Your metaphorical rhetoric is quite unclear.
Buy Gripens to fill the gap. Build them here. Then push them into fighter pilot training with modifications. I bet my idea is better then what were going to end up with.
You can only build them here if Saab and the Swedish government license it.
The main thing I see about your video is the cost of dithering.
The CSC project was started long ago, under Harper, but they just kept announcing and re-announcing the same things. The same photo ops for the same local Conservative MP's (multiple times at the same shipyard), and meanwhile nothing was actually going on that the public could see. It's worth noting that the new CSC frigate/destroyer project had to wait until Harper's other big navy project, the AOPS, was completed. While I think there was some merit in plotting out the future of naval & coast guard shipbuilding in Canada and making sure the work was done in Canada, let's not kid ourselves that the Cons and Libs have used it the way yutube inserts ads into videos - just a useless interruption of what people really came the see. 😉
The fighter project is another one that shows the real enemy is the procurement process. The Cons decided to buy the F35 sight-unseen and cost-unknown because Washington told them to; then it turned out to be several times more expensive than they had claimed, and have a lot more performance issues too. (Following bad ideas as long as they are American ideas = what the Conservatives excel at.)
The Liberals vowed to never buy it, but in the end they were so slow to make a decision on what else to buy, the military brass snookered them into never considering any other planes beyond what Boeing or Lockheed could provide; no real chance for the Typhoon, Rafale, or Gripen, which if they had chosen, the RCAF might be flying on missions already. Of course, the Liberals were done in by their usual indecisiveness, and that led to the embarrassing years-long 360 turn from the F35 to the ... F35. (Dithering in endless circles = what the Liberals excel at.)
The truth is equipment gets old, new technology constantly evolves, and by the time such long-term projects get done, their shelf life as useful in combat might be less than the time it took to develop and build them. Flexibility in defense design & procurement would help matters stretgically, but for that you'd need a clear idea of Canada's unique strategic needs - the kind that is not tainted by partisan nonsense, alliance nonsense, media nonsense, or corporate profiteering nonsense.
Has caf put forward a diversity inclusion equity woke trudeau medal yet for non binary recruits?🇨🇦
Why do you ask?
@@chamiltonart3319 Because DEI and wokism will be the next reason the CAF remains the laughing stock of NATO.
"cut to the bone" is referencing the budget!
The F15 advanced Eagle would if been more useful to Canada than those expensive F35s.
How is a cop cheif a defense minister
That's why you need to spend a minimum of 2%+
Just keep sending money to Ukraine.
I m 46 i service guantanamo and the water rag auestiionary 😂
You want the war on the front page 😂
We went to 4th largest navy to well, canada has a navy? like its a joke at this point.
What was the story on the new defense cheifs deployment in Iraq ?
How can Ukraine turn Canadian taxpayer money into "war winning equipment" in an instant, yet the CAF will be waiting a LOOOONG time to get basic replacements for already well past best before date equipment?!
Didn’t they cut the budget by one billion dollars!
While we wait impatiently for F35s and Type 26 destroyers our littoral fleet is in dismal low firepower posture. And we have not fielded mobile misslie launchers since 2004. WTF
After wasting 10 years Soxs is now going to purchase the plane he said he will never buy. First warship another decade out.
Justin this Justin that this story old as the hills so what are we going to do about it cry some more we lack industrial base in this area need investment not guns per se look at Sweden couple years back they were making those boxy cars and apartment furniture not any more they taking the Japan route, We need to build our own same as the others no more running around at the rummage sales.
What a joke. I use to have great pride in the service and now it is a joke. It was bad when I was in the Reserves, 1979-1985, but is way worse now.
Seems Canada buys other countries rubbish and calls refurbishing work in progress 😢.
The country has got to implement mandatory conscription to build the forces back up. One year service must be completed between 18-26 years old like other countries around the world do. Will give the younger generation skills and work ethic to either continue on in a military career or op out after 1 year services to continue on their on path but with disciple, skills and work ethic. If they decide not to go, off to jail. Freedom isn’t cheap, sacrifices must be made during these times of uncertainty. Hell I’m 40 and I would go for a year!
lol new equipment with no soldiers to field it
😂 they dont hire russia to contract nato 😂
Cut to the bone? They are a pile of bone shards already thanks to JT.
Building the war ships takes too much times !!!! Not respond to the situation of today. !!!!
Why does the narrator sound like AI?
I assure you I'm not a robot my friend
@@espritdecorpsmagazineI’m reading a lot of comments on here,but I would like to hear from you as to what is the best solution to fix all this on a go forward basis. We have such a proud past and we need to mirror that image again.
Does it matter? The forces are filled with DEI and the trans. I can protect myself better than they can protect me.
Too bad their previous ships build for the navy by Irving try to sink themselves at sea
Better luck this time eh 🤞
Did anyone else see how bad those troops looked. They can't even blouse their boots correctly in front of the Prime minister. They don't deserve shiny new toys. Don't get me started on the grooming standard either. Orange hair and the foot long biker goatee wouldn't be able to get a mask on, let alone the rest with full beards. I'm ashamed.
The redone dress regs remove footlong goatees. 1 inch in bulk or length is the maximum. In fact no more super curly mustaches as their max length is also 1 inch.
@@klassensj2 ok. I figured it was older stock footage being used. How about the scene where PM was walking past a rank of troops and curly mustache (with the weeklong scruff) had his pants around his ankles? Much to improve upon. especially in front of the top of the top.
So when it comes to individual's personal habits having to take a back set to the greater good, you're in favour of that?
Someone please tell this to those "freedom convoy" assholes, that their personal bullshit does not matter.
You can have your pants down up to the ankle now. And saying we dont deserve new equipment its so stupid. Your not the one using the crap equipment we have, we def deserve better.
The Korean submarines are NOT "Fit for Purpose". The f-35 is a "Hanger Queen" that will lead to maintenance cost overruns that will absolutely blow your mind. It's a shame that Canada is incapable of designing and manufacturing her own long range interceptor aircraft. Remember that old Company .... I think it was called "Avro" or something like that. They produced a few prototype aircraft that still have many attributes that rival planes of today. A modernized "Arrow" would at least be on par with the Russian Mig-31. But no ...... the Canadian Govt once again gets cowed into purchasing a single engine ground attack aircraft that is in no way shape or form suited for the massive size of Canada nor with the cold weather functionality required. Don't even get me started on the Type-26 Frigates.
Canada has the capacity just not the desire.
@@derek89273 Capability? Yes. Capacity. No Desire? No
All the equipment you listed is absolutely top of the line and will be great additions for Canada. The issue is that we waste so much time thinking about acquiring new kit that by the time we get it it's already obsolete. If Canada is going to have a small military it should be using cutting edge tech to offset the balance of our limited available man power.
@@derek89273 We do not have a manufacturer of combat aircraft. To build up the expertise and capability would easily double or triple the cost of any acquisition, especially because of the low numbers that Canada would buy, and we certainly could not compete in the world market. As for ships, yes, we can build ships in Canada, but take a close look at all the issues wrt the AOPS. For Canada to design, develop and build any vehicle from scratch would be prohibitively expensive, and so lengthy a process, that whatever we built would probably be obsolete at IOC.
@@hyperboreanesoterica6588 Further to your comment -- the acquisition process is also stretched out soooo far, to amortize the spending, that the last unit is even more obsolete before our military even gets it. The whole acquisition process is an administrative nightmare, that wastes money and is not effective in providing what the CAF requires, when it is required.