[bootlegga]

ziggy ziggy:

I dont understand how heavy icebreakers will show our soveriegnity.Busting through ten feet of ice for what?
Your not going to keep a channel open for very long.

How does this instead of boots on the ground make sense?
Theres also a reason the deep port isnt being built right now and you ask the greedy mining companies about that,when they heard the govt. was thinking of building a port they dropped all of their part of the funding,seeing how they were to benefit the most the govt. held off.
I cant see how an arctic base would be worse then heavy icebreakers,it would be cheaper,keep our supply lines open to the north and could supplement the DEW line which is getting a major workover on it as I type.Them we have a permanent presence,instead of an icebreaker that would come by once a month looking for what I dont know.

We already have an Arctic base...CFS Alert, the northernmost permanent settlement on the entire planet. Look it up if you don't believe me. There's nothing wrong with setting up drilling platforms, but the military needs to be there too. Economics are not the only reason to open up the North. I guarantee the USA, Russia and Danes would press their claims even faster if we found 10 billion barrels of oil off the coast of our archipeliago.

No, we need to be able to patrol it 24/7, and then we can develop it too. contrary to your belief, icebreakers do far more than just break ice. They survey, take research teams all over the Arctic and resupply towns and bases up north. You said it more expensive to ship than air, but I can't believe a plane can carry more than a 37,000 ton icebreaker can for cheaper, especially given that the stuff that does go air frieght up north costs a bloody fortune and the stuff moved over land routes (like ice bridges) is the preferred method for moving heavy equipment.

BTW, icebreakers also escort CF ships up north when they head up there for exercises (Nanook '07 and '08), as none of our ships can handle anything larger than an ice cube.

[ziggy]

I know about the base,I was asked to work there last year.
I spent many hours in airports with guys going in for operation nanook,I didnt know an icebreaker was taking some destroyers up there.The only part of that operation I saw was the week long survival trips they took with the rangers so I never heard about the naval part of the exercises.
As for surveys that go's on all the time without icebreakers,way cheaper to fly in and dogsled teams out their,same with patrolling,if you have many small resupply camps then you have way more eyes able to patrol then a few ships could do.
Not much to patrol for anyways and barges resupply allmost all the communities,when they freeze in the ice in mid september they are there untill next june.No icebreakers come to help them out.

As far as land routes and ice bridges their is none,heavy equipment is allmost allways barged up the year before unless you got the bucks to charter a herc or it gets sent in pieces on regular small charters.

I know what icebreakers do,I have a bud on one that sends me videos of his travels.

we have the people,supply lines,infrastructure and connections to literally have a few more remote bases within weeks up there.
Drilling to map out geological features is the kind of drilling I was talking about,most underground survey work for uranium and platinum are done with a huge airborne magnetometer.

[mustang7617]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Russian equipment is old,it's only numbers that would cause a problem. Our frigates were designed to counter Russian Ships and Subs, and since that time the Russians haven't created new ships that could upsurp ours. It's not like the Russian's would have an easy time, and they wouldn't be able to amass their whole fleet into the artic anyways. They'd be constantly pounded by fighters and Aurora's out of Alert and Resolute, aswell as having to deal with our surface and subsurface ships (if we could ever get the damned subs running). They wouldn't have air support, and are outclassed. We'd be in a pickle when we run out of munitions.

Russia outclassed? No air support? The russian Tupolev 95 bomber has the range as well as payload 2 give some of the needed air support. If you top a flight of Tu-95 over moscow it has the range 2 fire cruise missiles @ any country in NATO with the exception of the US and Canada. If u switch the fueling point 2 Siberia they can strike anyone anywhere with just 1 refueling. Also stageing out of Siberia will allow the Tupolev 22m, 140c, as well as long range fighters 2 get involved with only 1 maybe 2 additional refuelings depending on particular aircraft and specific mission in question. All soviet combat aircraft have the ability 2 strike air land and sea targets on the same mission. Thats 2 say nothing bout their land and sea forces. They still have bout 16 carriers total that they can send. While most may not be as large or new as the US carrier fleet keep in mind that they would be accompanied by least 200+ major warships and several hundred minor and support vessels with many more in reserve. The Canadian military may hav a slight "techical edge" but the sheer size of the Russian forces will likely be enough 2 render the conflict even if not in their faver. Also russian equipment is not nearly so bad as yall seem 2 think. It would be a relatively fair fight but 1 in which Canadian defeat is virtually inevitable if the US doesnt step in. Even then it wont go easy and victory for niether assured. If such a conflict were 2 escalate and get out of hand than anything could including the worst could happen. While i have confidence in the US military and speaking as a member of the US military it is my belief that we should let politics have this 1 and if ONLY IF politics fail do we force the issue.

[martin14]

You boys need to stop thinking the Russian armed forces are somehow substandard.

Putin has had money for quite a few years, and he has been spending it.
Even if he hadn't, the Russians have always used
quantity over quality, and its been effective.

The only positive from the current financial crisis is that it may actually
slow the Russians down a bit.

Overall, I think boots on the ground will be the best bet,
and to start using the resources of the area. A strong naval
presence would be important as well.

I can't see the political will to refit Esquimalt or Halifax,
but surely even buying some older US or Brit stuff would help in the short term.

Its just too bad none of us are in the government.

[ziggy]

I dont know much about their iron but I definately would not underestimate them.

Tanks would be useless up there in the summer.