• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

More Than Half (56%) of Canadians Consider Canada’s Armed Forces to be Old and Antiquated

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
29,112
Points
1,160
Stuffy old farts, all of 'em ... even the young ones ;)

More Than Half (56%) of Canadians Consider Canada’s Armed Forces to be Old and Antiquated​

Three-quarters (75%) think Canada should increase its military spending, but six in ten (59%) still consider them among the best in the world.
4 August 2023

Toronto, ON, August 4, 2023 – With the recent NATO summit in Vilnius all wrapped up, Canada’s Armed Forces and the current geopolitical tensions are on the front burner for the moment. However, over half of Canadians (56%) consider their armed forces old and antiquated, according to a recent Ipsos poll conducted for Global News.

Prime Minister Trudeau and his government cut military spending in the 2023 budget. However, Canadians disagree with him about the direction of military spending. Three-quarters (75%) of Canadian’s believe that Canada should increase its defense spending to ensure it can protect Canadian territory and sovereignty, while seven in ten (71%) want that increased spending to allow the Canadian Forces to contribute to global peace and stability. Overall, half of Canadians think the military is adequately funded to defend Canada’s interests at home (51%) and abroad (50%). Though half believe it is adequately funded, seven in ten (69%) feel that the modernization of Canada’s military is held back by mismanagement and political interference.

There are a number of reasons why Canadians are concerned about their military’s current state of readiness. Seven in ten Canadians feel that their concerns about defending Canada are directly related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (71%) and China’s recent actions in the Taiwan Strait (69%). While the former dominated the Vilnius summit with NATO pledging more support to Ukraine and acknowledging Russia as the most significant and direct threat to NATO, China’s growing presence as a strategic threat also made the summit’s communique. Combined with Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy and the American Department of Defense’s 2022 Strategic Review both highlighting the threat of China, it is clear that Canada and it’s allies are moving to solidify their defenses. Canadians don’t just want to rely on their allies though as they aren’t supportive of leaving the nation’s defense up to the United States with 78% disagreeing with the sentiment. Instead, Canadians appear to want their country to take on a bigger role in the current escalating geopolitical tensions and to shore up its own defenses.

Canadians Feel Strongly About Monitoring and Defending the Arctic​

One area where Canadians believe the military should play a larger role is in the Artic. The far north is rapidly becoming a new frontier of the current East-West tensions as newly opened shipping routes from melting ice packs and increased demand for the region’s natural resources draw more traffic. The threat from Russia in the Artic has loomed large since the Cold War, but China’s declaration of itself as a near Arctic state adds new fuel to the fire.

Increasingly, Canadians are viewing the Artic as a key area of interest for monitoring and defending. Over eight in ten (83%) Canadians want Canada’s military to monitor all who sail through the Northwest Passage, which passes through Canadian territorial waters. Canadians are also in favour of an increased presence in the North with 73% agreeing that more military bases should be built in the far North to protect Canada’s Arctic territories and half (51%) in favour of Canada acquiring nuclear submarines to defend the region.

 
Who would have thought that the majority of Canadians, unlike their political masters, understand the concept of sovereignty.
…up until the follow-on question of “what would you cut to spend more on the CAF” comes up.

Reverse Fran Healy GIF by Travis


Also, farther down the article, it says that the younger generation does not generally share that sentiment. Not super-surprised, since they think housing, etc take precedence. The majority among the below-55s that think that the CAF is adequately funded is a bit surprising though.
 
…up until the follow-on question of “what would you cut to spend more on the CAF” comes up.
Why cut anything? Our governments already deficit spend like drunken sailors.

Our GDP is good and the economy still seems to be rising which means future incomes and tax bases will grow. Don't cut existing services (alright - the CBC - cut that), just don't grow those programs or don't renew them when they expire and have done their job. Oh, and why not redirect some of those education spending programs for Forces members going into trade related or professional jobs by way of community colleges. Or assistance to defence manufacturers instead of foreign battery plants ($15 + 3.8 billion FFS).

Together we could probably come up with a hundred ways of redirecting existing spending to provide for more directed defence spending that achieves the same goals as existing programs.

🍻
 
supportive of increased military funding to ensure the Canadian Armed Forces can defend the nation’s sovereignty
(83% vs.
71% of 35-54 years old and
68% of 18-34 years old)

If "only" 68% of youngsters are supportive of increased spending, despite their concerns about health, education and housing I suggest that an increased emphasis on defence would win more votes than it lost.
 
Personally, I think that the reason so many Canadians support spending on defending our sovereignty is because, unlike their political masters again, they don't see Canada as a "post national" state. And if I was a certain American foul mouthed comedian, I would tell the first politician trying to tell me we are "post national" to "SHUT UP, YOU HOCKEY PUCK!
 
supportive of increased military funding to ensure the Canadian Armed Forces can defend the nation’s sovereignty
(83% vs.
71% of 35-54 years old and
68% of 18-34 years old)

If "only" 68% of youngsters are supportive of increased spending, despite their concerns about health, education and housing I suggest that an increased emphasis on defence would win more votes than it lost.
And this is the time to do it while ordinary Canadians - including the youth - have graphic examples of just how destructive and unforgiving an authoritarian state run by assholes can be.

Its a matter of messaging. The current leadership does not have much messaging depth beyond the usual virtue signalling. I'm still amazed that we sent tanks and guns amongst all the "protective" stuff. Someone did a good sales job in Cabinet.

🍻
 
…up until the follow-on question of “what would you cut to spend more on the CAF” comes up.
Agreed with the question of "But why??" Since government spends like drunken sailors whether we have the money or not...

But if we are taking suggestions... I just read today we sent Niger $2.1M this year, and were on track to send them $10M annually by 2025.

I would start there.


______________________


Legitimate question for those who are better able to see through the fog of bulls**t than myself...

I got out in 2011 - I have no idea what our budget was at that time (approx $20B??)

Is our budget not larger now than it was back then?
 
We are still driving around in LSVWs, G-Wagons and MilCOTs that are mostly rusted out and a fleet of Leopard 2 tanks that are rarely ever seen due to most of them not being operable in a consistent manner, all with no real replacement on hand as of yet.

Remember that the army is one of the most visible elements of the CAF regarding the local civilian population, seeing all that I have mentioned above with your own eyes while driving along a highway or anywhere near a base.

It's no surprise that many see the military with a dim view and hold those opinions.
 
Agreed with the question of "But why??" Since government spends like drunken sailors whether we have the money or not...

But if we are taking suggestions... I just read today we sent Niger $2.1M this year, and were on track to send them $10M annually by 2025.

I would start there.


______________________


Legitimate question for those who are better able to see through the fog of bulls**t than myself...

I got out in 2011 - I have no idea what our budget was at that time (approx $20B??)

Is our budget not larger now than it was back then?
Increase in salary. And an inability to procure anything.
 
... If "only" 68% of youngsters are supportive of increased spending, despite their concerns about health, education and housing I suggest that an increased emphasis on defence would win more votes than it lost.
Depending on how many people who respond to surveys vote - something like 1/3 of eligible voters in the past few federal elections didn't cast a ballot, so who's saying "something's not right" and not getting out to vote?
 
Agreed with the question of "But why??" Since government spends like drunken sailors whether we have the money or not...

But if we are taking suggestions... I just read today we sent Niger $2.1M this year, and were on track to send them $10M annually by 2025.

I would start there.


______________________


Legitimate question for those who are better able to see through the fog of bulls**t than myself...

I got out in 2011 - I have no idea what our budget was at that time (approx $20B??)

Is our budget not larger now than it was back then?
how about doing it in one shot and cancelling the subsidy (bribe) to VW. There is 17 billion in one shot
 
We are still driving around in LSVWs, G-Wagons and MilCOTs that are mostly rusted out and a fleet of Leopard 2 tanks that are rarely ever seen due to most of them not being operable in a consistent manner, all with no real replacement on hand as of yet.

Remember that the army is one of the most visible elements of the CAF regarding the local civilian population, seeing all that I have mentioned above with your own eyes while driving along a highway or anywhere near a base.

It's no surprise that many see the military with a dim view and hold those opinions.

Good Lord... who hates you that much? ;)
 
Good Lord... who hates you that much? ;)
Given that's the best that most Reserve units can hope for, the broad scope answer is probably best summed up as "the Reg Force".

Yes I completely understand they also have these vehicles to work with, but that's ALL some of us have to work with...
 
Those 3 are positively new compared to what we had when I was in. keeping in mind the C3 is just a new barrel on a gun as old as I am.
 
Given that's the best that most Reserve units can hope for, the broad scope answer is probably best summed up as "the Reg Force".

Yes I completely understand they also have these vehicles to work with, but that's ALL some of us have to work with...

Too bad you can't trade them back for some MLVWs ;)
 
We are still driving around in LSVWs, G-Wagons and MilCOTs that are mostly rusted out and a fleet of Leopard 2 tanks that are rarely ever seen due to most of them not being operable in a consistent manner, all with no real replacement on hand as of yet.

Remember that the army is one of the most visible elements of the CAF regarding the local civilian population, seeing all that I have mentioned above with your own eyes while driving along a highway or anywhere near a base.

It's no surprise that many see the military with a dim view and hold those opinions.
What about LAV 6's, and TAPV's? (The general public won't know much about vehicles being top heavy, or their respective limitations...but they will see modern looking armoured vehicles & think it's pretty cool...)

The LSVW's should have been taken out back and shot 2 decades ago when I first got in. They were absolute junk then ... I have no idea how they can still be in working order



If the public is seeing LSVW's & Milcots on the roads, no wonder their impression is that we are old and decrepit 😕

What's the word on the LSVW replacement anyway?
 
What about LAV 6's, and TAPV's? (The general public won't know much about vehicles being top heavy, or their respective limitations...but they will see modern looking armoured vehicles & think it's pretty cool...)

The LSVW's should have been taken out back and shot 2 decades ago when I first got in. They were absolute junk then ... I have no idea how they can still be in working order



If the public is seeing LSVW's & Milcots on the roads, no wonder their impression is that we are old and decrepit 😕

What's the word on the LSVW replacement anyway?
what, no deux and a half's?
 
Back
Top