jmt18325 said:I tend to agree - it's better to keep what we have here to push back. We're there as a trip wire and a deterrence, not to actually fight.
Welcome to the only profession where you can be ordered to do something that will get you killed because that is what the mission requires.Cdn Blackshirt said:I don't think it is reasonable to ask our acting serving men and women, their spouses and children to accept that should a conflict break out, we have planned that the force to be wiped out in it's entirety. But good news we've held back forces to eventually re-take that land later.
MCG said:Welcome to the only profession where you can be ordered to do something that will get you killed because that is what the mission requires.
Dimsum said:I agree with the sentiment, but I thought police and fire services were obligated to do the same?
MarkOttawa said:MilEME09: Any more than any other "assets", including people, that "we can afford to lose"?
MilEME09 said:Given the size and equipment the CF does have, we can't afford any loses in a peer to peer engagement, and I fear if we get into a shooting war thats serious, by the time the government actually gets into it's usually reactionary action when it comes to defense, it may be too late.
Lightguns said:its a political show, there is no intent to make a defense of it or even to reply right away if the balloon goes up, just a NATO national sized pinky swear. Russia says "I want Latvia but I got to shoot up Yanks, Canucks, and Poles, do I want that?" Pinky swear.
Cdn Blackshirt said:Kind of like Hong Kong with the Japanese....
Hmmmm....I wonder if there was a lesson that should've been learned from that?