Canada's options: fight in Afghanistan or secure 2010 Olympics ?

[wannabe SF member]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/canada_security_military

This report says that Canada can't do both personally i disagree but well... read for yourself.


Cheers.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

No problem, just make security a PPP project and charge extra on admission (why should taxpayers pay?). I am sure I-6 can figure out a decent bid and doing security in Whistler might be a lot of fun.

 

[safeboy43]

I disagree as well. The CF has at least 40-50 thousand troops (Regs) that are currently not on deployment. We have more than enough to sustain security in 2010. The only drawback is that troops would have to be moved in from other provinces as some of our Reserve companies in BC are on tour.

Cheers

 

[wannabe SF member]

I am sure I-6 can figure out a decent bid and doing security in Whistler might be a lot of fun.

What is I-6?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Super secret specialist who presence occasionally graces this forum, You will know him by his G19.

if I say anything more I will have to kill you and then myself, or is it the other way around? I keep forgetting. 

 

[rmacqueen]

sssh, even mentioning I6 can get you in trouble (looking over shoulder)

 

[armyvern]

OK I-6,

Where's your plan? I volunteer for TD!!

 

[wannabe SF member]

LOL

but okay seriously can we have some comments about the starting quote please!

 

[KevinB]

IF the CF follows the same overkill method from G8...

It will still have assets to send to Afghan.

G8 2002 was accomplished while:
3VP was in/returning from Afghanstan.
1VP was in run up for Roto 11 Bosnia
Roto 10 was still occupying a BN Btl Gp

Theoretically we have lowered our commitments - and with CSOR increased our numbers

and

"There's no doubt. It's impossible to protect the 2010 Olympics and maintain forces elsewhere in the world, whether it's Afghanistan or somewhere else," retired colonel Michel Drapeau told the newspaper. "We're already squeezed

D is a talking asshat -- out of his depth on operation deployments and utterly lost on security.

Security is not troops numbers.  - at least not inside a permissive environment.


The Olympics are a security issue - however other than NLI CT and NBCD responces the CF do not have anything specific beyond what the RCMP and municpal LE can do -- in a more environment fitting role.

IMHO is a nation is worried about specific athletes and want to take preemtive action in the form of secuirty details - that can be covered by the private sector - or by their host nation security services.

 

[armyvern]

OK,

We can do both. I volunteer. I volunteer for the roto to Afgh, or failing to get a position on that (if we go to 2010 - current mission expires in 2009), I volunteer to go to BC for the Olympics. I've never been to BC.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that we could pull both of these these off.

Look to Montreal - 1976 where the Canadian Airborne Regt ran with the task.
And we were supporting Ops to
UNTSO
UNMOGIP
UNIFICYP
UNEFME
UNDOF
At that time we did have more troops but then again, a whole Brigade full of them were overseas in Germany.

Proper planning, it can happen.

 

[wannabe SF member]

I disagree as well. The CF has at least 40-50 thousand troops (Regs) that are currently not on deployment.

That's without counting the police force and eventual security contractors, you can add up to that the local reserve units, maybe I'm wrong but i hardly see how Olympic security could hamper a contingent of 2500 men.

Just my 2 cent.

 

[armyvern]

Again,

Proper planning and this shouldn't be a problem.

 

[armyvern]

I just re-read this article and quite frankly, this quote scares me once again. Is it just a typo or is there some move to indicate to the masses that our CF is a hell of a lot smaller than it actually is?

As well, officials worried that Canada's small military could not deploy elsewhere as long as a quarter of its forces remained in Afghanistan. The remainder are support staff or are undergoing training at various levels.

Since when are 2500 troops 1/4 of our military? Has my 18 year career just passed me by and I've missed this great reduction in strength?

So how accurate exactly is the statement that our officials are worried about this when the size of the CF which is indicated, is so grossly inaccurate?
BIG innaccuracies in the media once again.

 

[rmacqueen]

First strike against that article is

"There's no doubt. It's impossible to protect the 2010 Olympics and maintain forces elsewhere in the world, whether it's Afghanistan or somewhere else," retired colonel Michel Drapeau told the newspaper. "We're already squeezed."

When is this logistics officer going to learn to keep his mouth shut on operational matters? (If only I live so long)

Now, let's have a realistic look at this.  Even if we deployed the

15,000 soldiers and police

like they did in Turin, the real question is, so what?  The deployment for security would be for what, a month?  What effect would that be on our commitment to Afghanistan?  It is not like the troops who return from Afghanistan then get to sit around doing nothing and the deployment to provide security would be no longer than going on an exercise...and I don't see that interfering with overseas commitments.  The larger problem will be to come up with the personnel to actually fill the positions needed due to the size of the forces in general.  But, as was pointed out earlier, they don't have to come from combat arms trades.

I love this one though,

As well, officials worried that Canada's small military could not deploy elsewhere as long as a quarter of its forces remained in Afghanistan. The remainder are support staff or are undergoing training at various levels.

.  I didn't realize we had reduced the entire military to just 10,000.  No wonder people are overworked. ;D

 

[aesop081]

OK,

We can do both. I volunteer. I volunteer for the roto to Afgh, or failing to get a position on that (if we go to 2010 - current mission expires in 2009), I volunteer to go to BC for the Olympics. I've never been to BC.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that we could pull both of these these off.

Look to Montreal - 1976 where the Canadian Airborne Regt ran with the task.
And we were supporting Ops to
UNTSO
UNMOGIP
UNIFICYP
UNEFME
UNDOF
At that time we did have more troops but then again, a whole Brigade full of them were overseas in Germany.

Proper planning, it can happen.

Dont forget that a large portion of 5 GBMC was in Montreal as well doing security, Not just the CAR.

 

[armyvern]

Dont forget that a large portion of 5 GBMC was in Montreal as well doing security, Not just the CAR.

Oh yes, and not just them. My father was also tasked to the 76 games....from his Navy Base in Halifax. 

 

[KevinB]

I will re-iterate that the CF is not the tool -- beyond units that have a in Canada role already -- for this mission

 

[Michael OLeary]

First strike against that article is

When is this logistics officer going to learn to keep his mouth shut on operational matters? (If only I live so long)

Pardon the small sidetrack, and personal opinons of M. Drapeau aside, but I assume you did know that even Logistics officers attend Command and Staff College?

 

[rmacqueen]

Pardon the small sidetrack, and personal opinons of M. Drapeau aside, but I assume you did know that even Logistics officers attend Command and Staff College?

Point taken, I stand chastised, my opinion of said person over rode my common dog.

 

[armyvern]

I will re-iterate that the CF is not the tool -- beyond units that have a in Canada role already -- for this mission

OK I-6, I'll give you this one on second thought.

So, perhaps the answer is....;

"Yes we can do both, but should we?"