Thanos Thanos:
(1) we're becoming quasi-isolationist
(2) that isn't a bad thing
(3) we need to be a lot more like Germany, Japan, and Scandinavia, and a lot less like the US & UK
(4) we don't have the strength to get involved in direct conflicts, as shown by our military being degraded so badly by our assignments in Afghanistan
(5) we don't have the money to build the kind of military that can get involved in direct conflicts
(6) it's long overdue for us to withdraw from participation in things where our involvement is either wasted or ineffective
(7) double-down on the soft-power type of things like humanitarian assistance and disaster relief in some of the less media-photogenic hellholes across this miserable planet, the ones where what we can do will actually help make things better
(8) I'm really fucking sick and tired of the cheap nationalism that only sees rushing off to conflict with all our flags a-waving as the sole valuable contribution; not participating in the new US/UK/Australian alliance isn't a slap across the face or an embarrassment, it's a reflection of reality because we don't have (and never will have either) the kind of strength to participate to any valuable degree
Enough is enough with the urges to engage in conflict. Didn't anyone learn anything at all over the last twenty fucking years? Quit thinking it's like some World War Two propaganda film with the "brave boys and their magnificent equipment" rushing off to glory. And don't be so quick to want to see Canadian personnel shoved into another overseas meat grinder, especially if none of us are going to do to some murderous shithole ourselves.
Bury the myths and the "we gotta do something!" panic-mongering. This crap is at least three decades overdue to finally go away and not come back.
I can agree with a fair bit of that, but Japan recently signalled that if China invades Taiwan, they will come to Taiwan's defence. They've also recently double-downed on the Quad, the US, India, Japan, Australia security agreement. You also said we shouldn't be operating in "overseas meat grinders" to fight US wars. So I don't think Japan is a good example of your position.
And I'd argue that we are very much like Germany, a formerly strong and effective nation, trumpeting the past instead of investing for the future.
I would have no problem being like Scandinavia, because they all take their own defence and sovereignty very seriously and invest in foreign affairs and their militaries. Norway and especially Sweden are great examples of the role Canada should take going forward IMHO.
Thanos Thanos:
That's a false canard. The US isn't going to abandon the concept of total continental security for North America and dissolve NORAD just because they're allegedly pissed off at Canada for not being able to participate in something on the other side of the planet. It was false when Bart kept saying the same things and it remains false today.
Any rebuilding of our military, should such a thing happen, should concentrate ONLY on continental security. That means better fighter jets, better long range patrol aircraft for the arctic regions, more icebreakers, new submarines, and the adoption of drone surveillance aircraft. No new tanks, no helicopters that are meant for "air cavalry" purposes, no cargo planes with global range, no more artillery, and infantry trained for domestic defense (and disaster relief) only. This delusion of being able to cast Canadian power across the breadth of the planet has to be dropped altogether. It costs far too much and we can't contribute to it to any significant degree to make it worthwhile.
Again, mostly agreed - buy a bunch of 212 AIP subs, add more AOPVs (building 6 for the navy nd 2 for the coast guard right now), buy a couple dozen C-295 Maritime Patrol Aircraft (commonality with the Kingfishers, our new SAR plane), and instead of buying 15 destroyer-sized frigates, we should buy a couple dozen smaller FREMM frigates, which cost about $800 million USD, instead of the $3 billion Type 26 we're planning to build. FYI, the US, along with France and Italy, is adopting this design.
If Canada wants to play a role in "humanitarian assistance and disaster relief", we'll need more long range strategic airlift, not less. While I'm not a fan of helicopter carriers for the RCN, they also play a huge role in disaster relief, as evidenced by the USN's role in the 2004 tsunami, the RCN role after Hurricane Katrina, etc. Without those assets, we have to rely on leased planes and ships at time when everyone wants to rent them for the same role.
Thanos Thanos:
You have to acknowledge the costs of all this though. I'm hardly a proponent of austerity but the price of most modern military equipment is beyond our resources, even moreso when we have a clique inside of DOD Procurement that goes out of their way to triple the cost of the most basic items in order to have it meet the specifications of "Canadian kit". We're the country where multiple PM's in a row have promised new ships at a set price only to find later on that the cost will be anywhere from quintuple to quadruple what they said it would be. And that the capabilities of the vessels will be about half of what was promised because the grossly overestimated their range or the armaments they were designed for either became obsolete or the US supplier made them prohibitively expensive. Or that the ships were so crappily built that we get an embarrassment of having them with a permanent list to one side because the engineers screwed up so badly and didn't bother to ensure that both sides of the ships were more-or-less evenly balanced in weight.
What's been done to the military over the last fifty years is so endemic and built into the bones of the command structure that it would almost be preferable to collapse the forces altogether and just send the Americans $20 or $30 billion per year to take over the entire defense system for us. Putting more public dollars into an entity that is entirely resistant to oversight or reform is insanity when the restructuring needed to put a permanent stop to the endless boondoggles will never occur.
The problem is military contracts provide massive amounts of political pork to shovel out to voters, and that is the case whether it's a Liberal or Conservative government.
We could have had AORs in the water already if we ordered them from South Korea like New Zealand - and they would have cost about HALF as much! We could have a much larger and effective navy if we were willing to go with ships like the FREMM, but our admirals want to hang with the big boys and only want the biggest, shiniest, most expensive toys. We could afford far more Gripens then we can F-35s or Super Hornets, but we won't go that way because our air force generals will go to the press and say the government is trying to get our pilots killed by giving them 'inferior' equipment. Again, they want the biggest bad boy on the block and won't settle for more modest capabilities, but with a lot more airframes.
If we want to get the biggest bang for our bucks, we should be leveraging every opportunity to build them overseas/elsewhere to take advantage of economies of scale.
But you and I know that won't ever happen.
CKA Moderator 
