I'll believe it when I see it.
Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending
- Thread starter Maxman1
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 5,412
- Points
- 1,140
I was thinking 12 billion over the next 30 years, with 11.9 billion in the last year...
I hope the extra money is for UORs like GBAD, ATGMs, as well as recruiting/retention, and infrastructure.
If things get kinetic for NATO, Canada should have some GBAD, and ATGM capability, even if they aren't the "best". A Spike SR/Starstreak/Stinger/Panzerfaust 3 in the hand is better than a project to buy ATGM/MANPADS in the next 15 years.
Prairie canuck
Member
- Reaction score
- 163
- Points
- 780
Just curious but are the equipment requirements/specifications already determined? If so why take 10yrs?
- Reaction score
- 5,412
- Points
- 1,140
Because the war in Ukraine will be over by then, or at the very least Canadians will go back to not caring about defence. Leaves more money to buy votes with...
- Reaction score
- 1,288
- Points
- 1,140
The best statement I’ve read in years. About sums up my thoughts as well.
- Reaction score
- 1,288
- Points
- 1,140
I sometimes wish that the US would just come right out and say, ‘Fuck you Canada for being such cheap bastards, you’re on your own now.’ And they lived happily ever after.
Prairie canuck
Member
- Reaction score
- 163
- Points
- 780
Canada is not alone on this project and if the senior partner says it needs to hurry up then can Canada have much of a choice? Would not doing so have consequences from not helping to ensure US continental defence?
- Reaction score
- 5,412
- Points
- 1,140
We've been pretty bad at holding up our end of the bargain for some time now, why change?
Kidding aside, I suspect there will be big money for NORAD, simply because we have neglected it for so long we can no longer ignore it. Much like recruiting/retention, GBAD, etc..
We could likely spend billions just getting what we have up to speed, without even adding anything new or required. The CAF is dying because of, politics, bad management of our people, and byzantine procurement processes. It's a slow death, but it is inevitable at this stage without intervention.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 7,050
- Points
- 1,040
I suppose the part of the money intended to buy weapons for Ukraine is not (relatively) large, but obviously munitions expended by Ukraine or bought to replace the ones already given over don't "add" anything.
- Reaction score
- 1,288
- Points
- 1,140
Maybe we can buy the Ukkies 10,000 pistols but only deliver 5,000 and keep the other 5,000 for testing/training purposes here.
Fabius
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 701
- Points
- 810
My guess on $12 Billion CAD over 10 years on NORAD is little more than an guess informed by years of watching Cdn defence spending decisions or lack there of. Its an item that is coming due no matter what but it is a convenient time to announce as it might play well domestically while not mattering internationally really but it can be played as such.
As to it actually solving any of the CAF problems, not really but oh well. Impacting NATO and the increased focus on the Russians not really relevant either but it still counts. So overall win win for the government.
As to it actually solving any of the CAF problems, not really but oh well. Impacting NATO and the increased focus on the Russians not really relevant either but it still counts. So overall win win for the government.
- Reaction score
- 1,288
- Points
- 1,140
House calls for Canada to meet NATO defence spending target on eve of budget
The motion was carried 303 to 27, with the Conservatives, Liberals, and Bloc Quebecois all voting in favour of it. The NDP and the Green Party’s two MPs voted against it. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has long called the target “arbitrary.”
House calls for Canada to meet NATO defence spending target on eve of budget
On the eve of the federal budget, the House of Commons passed a motion calling for the federal government to increase its national defence spending to 'at least' meet the NATO target of two per cent gross domestic product (GDP).
Warm, fuzzy, feel good story with no substance at all. It does call out where the Socialists stand in all this.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 12,619
- Points
- 1,140
FTFY
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 9,722
- Points
- 1,260
House calls for Canada to meet NATO defence spending target on eve of budget
The motion was carried 303 to 27, with the Conservatives, Liberals, and Bloc Quebecois all voting in favour of it. The NDP and the Green Party’s two MPs voted against it. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has long called the target “arbitrary.”
House calls for Canada to meet NATO defence spending target on eve of budget
On the eve of the federal budget, the House of Commons passed a motion calling for the federal government to increase its national defence spending to 'at least' meet the NATO target of two per cent gross domestic product (GDP).www.ctvnews.ca
Warm, fuzzy, feel good story with no substance at all. It does call out where the Socialists stand in all this.
Is their irony that votes for equalled 303 ?
Weinie
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,349
- Points
- 1,140
It's not a question of how long we have ignored it, it is an easy hit. Not offensive in nature, not in anyones' backyard, not something that most Canadians think about. Win/Win/Win.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 12,619
- Points
- 1,140
And that is the issue - Canada's existence has never been seriously threatened so defense matters don't matter to most Canadians.
- Reaction score
- 1,288
- Points
- 1,140
It’s a Colony mentality that we’ve never shed, rely on someone else.
Prairie canuck
Member
- Reaction score
- 163
- Points
- 780
If the Canadian public requires to be educated on why the CAF is so dilapidated, can't meet its NATO commitments, etc and why it should instead be a high priority why do we not see that in the media? (Just to be clear I am in the high priority camp) All these retired generals and all retired members should be making a forceful push for change at every opportunity through whatever media is available. It's the way it's done by any group pushing their agenda. (I mention retired members as I imagine current serving members are muzzled.)
I know more about the plight of a seal pup, what it means to be "woke" or how I'm killing the planet with my gas powered tools because that's what is fed to me. I guess those groups have a better marketing department.
- Reaction score
- 1,288
- Points
- 1,140
The media doesn’t care.
Current, serving military officers can’t (won’t?) openly speak about the current dire situation because they worry about the repercussions to their careers.
What the US should do is kick us to the curb and force us to shoulder our true burdens, this may wake up the public.
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,377
- Points
- 1,210
How about the US just starts sending us the bill to cover the slack till we get our butts in gear
Similar threads
- Article
