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

CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia

Eye In The Sky said:
3 missions;  don't forget about OP IMPACT.

The forgotten mission...  I actually had several family members look at me in awe when I was talking about the work tempo on the wing and I mentioned how this Op was wearing guys out.  They had no idea we were still there.

Fact remains that the LRP community is very small and people don't realize it is the same people going over, again and again.  Yet not one of us has received any sort of recognition, not that we do it for recognition, but when guys are going over on their 3rd adventure it can be a bit demoralizing.

This Latvia mission will definitely put any useless U.N. mission on hold.
 
Dolphin_Hunter said:
The forgotten mission...  I actually had several family members look at me in awe when I was talking about the work tempo on the wing and I mentioned how this Op was wearing guys out.  They had no idea we were still there.

Fact remains that the LRP community is very small and people don't realize it is the same people going over, again and again.  Yet not one of us has received any sort of recognition, not that we do it for recognition, but when guys are going over on their 3rd adventure it can be a bit demoralizing.

This Latvia mission will definitely put any useless U.N. mission on hold.

We have pers in the Regiment slated for Roto 4....plus the TAV for the MTT.... A lot of these guys it's their 3rd kick at the cat for IMPACT. We feel your pain in the Comms world :(
 
rmc_wannabe said:
We have pers in the Regiment slated for Roto 4....plus the TAV for the MTT.... A lot of these guys it's their 3rd kick at the cat for IMPACT. We feel your pain in the Comms world :(

With a huge number of Sigs pers posted to JSR, that's more likely a DAG issue, than being overtasked. If its the same guys constantly going, in a unit that big, people are dodging tours or the CoC isn't getting enough people qualified for those spots.

Very different from the LRP guys who have extremely limited crews and have to cover both domestic and IMPACT.
 
I'll be curious to see how this plays out.  The transport guys are going to be driven into the ground trying to support the Middle East, Latvia, Ukraine and not to mention all the domestic operations and international exercises they support as well.  Throw in a UN mission in Africa and we will have to go on a "mental health professional" hiring spree.
 
Like Chretien, Trudeau will run the CAF into the ground while bleeding money from the budget to make himself look good. The only available mission in West Africa is Mali (MINUSMA), which has seen UN peacekeepers targeted by al-Qaeda/ISIL recently. The rose coloured glasses are going to shatter when we take our first casualty there wearing blue berets. MINUSMA has lost 68 peacekeepers to malicious actions since it started 3 years ago.
 
Dolphin_Hunter said:
I'll be curious to see how this plays out.  The transport guys are going to be driven into the ground trying to support the Middle East, Latvia, Ukraine and not to mention all the domestic operations and international exercises they support as well.  Throw in a UN mission in Africa and we will have to go on a "mental health professional" hiring spree.

Once again, I wonder what happened to that facility that was supposed to be set up in Bonn as an Airhead, with just under thirty pers manning it?
 
PuckChaser said:
With a huge number of Sigs pers posted to JSR, that's more likely a DAG issue, than being overtasked. If its the same guys constantly going, in a unit that big, people are dodging tours or the CoC isn't getting enough people qualified for those spots.

Very different from the LRP guys who have extremely limited crews and have to cover both domestic and IMPACT.

The JSR may be a big organization, but the pers required on these deployments all come from a small segment of the unit.  Your LRP guys are one such example.
 
Our minister, who should have some experience in these matters, should be pointing out to the Dauphin and his handlers (Mr. Butts) terms like op tempo, burn out, equipment issues, etc. But will they care? Or has he succumbed to the media whoring like his boss and concentrating more on the photo-op?
image.jpg


http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/sajjan-takes-his-tiniest-fan-on-a-tour-of-parliament-1.2977234
 
FSTO said:
But will they care?
No. 

Trudeau and his puppeteers are focused on a two year stint as a useless member of the UNSC, and they'll burn out as many troops as they have to, so long as it gets them there.  The CAF isn't so much an instrument of national policy as it is one of party politics.  :P
 
PuckChaser said:
Like Chretien, Trudeau will run the CAF into the ground while bleeding money from the budget to make himself look good.

Proof.


Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Trudeau Defends Canada's Military Spending Record By Pointing To New Mission
CP  |  By Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press
Posted: 07/05/2016 3:33 pm EDT Updated: 07/05/2016 3:59 pm EDT

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau defended Canada's record on military spending Tuesday by pointing out that the country has consistently done more than many allies in other ways — most recently in Eastern Europe.

NATO reported this week that Canadian defence spending hit record lows last year, falling to 0.98 per cent of gross domestic product. That is less than half the two per cent target that all NATO members, including Canada, agreed to in 2014.

Asked during a press conference in Montreal on Tuesday whether he would commit to the two per cent target when he travels to Poland later this week, Trudeau instead referenced the Liberal government's decision to have Canada lead a 1,000-strong NATO force in Eastern Europe.

"We have always stepped up well above many other NATO partners to engage, and that's actually highlighted by our engagement around Operation Reassurance," Trudeau said.

"We continue to be a valued and valuable partner in NATO," he added, "and I look forward to productive discussions in Warsaw with our NATO partners about how Canada can continue to contribute to peace and security in the world."

Trudeau will travel to the Polish capital later this week for meetings with the 27 other NATO leaders. Allied defence spending is expected to be one of the major topics of discussion, alongside the threat posed by Russia and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

All NATO countries, including Canada, agreed in 2014 to stop cutting military budgets and work towards spending two per cent of GDP on defence. The goal was intended to ensure all alliance members were doing their fair share, which includes investing enough to field a modern military.

The target has taken on added importance thanks to Russia's own military buildup, as well as criticisms in the U.S. from senators and Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump about some members not pulling their weight.

Obama was also seen to have gently rebuked Canada on the issue in his address to Parliament last week, saying: "As your ally and as your friend, let me say that we'll be more secure when every NATO member, including Canada, contributes its full share to our common security."

The alliance does estimate that Canadian defence spending will increase slightly this year, to 0.99 per cent of GDP. However, that will still leave Canada 23rd out of 28 NATO members.

More on LINK.
 
The sleeping bear is waking up;  politicians can try to ignore it and do things like the UK did, sacking their Nimrod fleet.  For the past several years, they've had to call up their friends to come over when Ivan decides to play.  They won't see their own MPA again until at least 2019...

Or they can be responsible and make informed, forward-looking decisions.  Unfortunately, in Canada, the average person cares more about their next hair appointment and "insert reality TV show name" than they do about national and international security and our political masters know it.  Our political masters care first and foremost about getting re-elected.  This reality tells me the MLCOA means "status quo" for equipment and the like.

23rd in NATO;  embarrassing.  Don't get me wrong, I am a proud Canadian...but not about that fact.

 
Eye In The Sky said:
23rd in NATO;  embarrassing.  Don't get me wrong, I am a proud Canadian...but not about that fact.

Back in the day, apparently Luxemburg and even Iceland (which really has NO military to speak of) spent relatively higher on defence than we did/do...and I bet it hasn't changed.  It's pretty apathetic actually.

MM
 
Eye In The Sky said:
23rd in NATO;  embarrassing.  Don't get me wrong, I am a proud Canadian...but not about that fact.

We're a G7 country. I'd be happy if we were Top 10. At least that'd put us ahead of Croatia. Good on Croatia though. It was only 20 years ago we were there stopping ethnic cleansing. Now look at them! Better than us!
 
PuckChaser said:
We're a G7 country. I'd be happy if we were Top 10. At least that'd put us ahead of Croatia. Good on Croatia though. It was only 20 years ago we were there stopping ethnic cleansing. Now look at them! Better than us!

I'd love for us to at least spend the 2% baseline, but part of me questions whether just $ allocated to Defence is a good indication of a nation's military.  If a nation spends 3% but 1.5% of it is on frivolous "buttons/bows" stuff, is it any better than another nation that just spends 1.5% but on more concrete aspects?
 
Eye In The Sky said:
23rd in NATO;  embarrassing.  Don't get me wrong, I am a proud Canadian...but not about that fact.

We're a a founding f@&king member too!

I agree with your sentiment.
 
Dimsum said:
I'd love for us to at least spend the 2% baseline, but part of me questions whether just $ allocated to Defence is a good indication of a nation's military.  If a nation spends 3% but 1.5% of it is on frivolous "buttons/bows" stuff, is it any better than another nation that just spends 1.5% but on more concrete aspects?

Come on, when was the last time Canada's military spent money on frivolities like rank changes for DEUs and stuff... :rofl:

I did hear that the current 'Canadian average green rank slip-on with blue thread' the AF uses is changing to "Canadian average green with pearl grey [same thread as our new DEU slip-ons] for CADPAT and flight suits.  Awesome!  Because that was one of my FIRST concerns.  8)
 
FSTO said:
Our minister, who should have some experience in these matters, should be pointing out to the Dauphin and his handlers (Mr. Butts) terms like op tempo, burn out, equipment issues, etc. But will they care?
1)  We don't know how much or how little he's said to Prince Valiant and/or his cabinet colleagues about the issue, or what he's doing to bring them on side.
2)  That said, if he is pushing one way, and the PM/cabinet only wants to move the other way, he has the option of stepping down.  And according to this list, resigning because of disagreement doesn't happen veeeeeeeery often - 10 times since 1867 (including 2 x Def Min's in 1944 for "Disagree(ing) with the government's policy concerning the National Resources Mobilization Act" and "Advised the Prime Minister to depart from the policy of the voluntary system because of a shortage of reinforcements overseas. Advice rejected.")
medicineman said:
Back in the day, apparently Luxemburg and even Iceland (which really has NO military to speak of) spent relatively higher on defence than we did/do...and I bet it hasn't changed.  It's pretty apathetic actually.

MM
Recent NATO figures (source) attached - we appear to have been running ~1.2% GDP in the mid-late 1990's, and now down to ~1% - World Bank data also attached, showing peak of 2% in 1988 and down, down, down, then 2005-2009 increases, followed by mo' drops.
Eye In The Sky said:
... in Canada, the average person cares more about their next hair appointment and "insert reality TV show name" than they do about national and international security and our political masters know it.  Our political masters care first and foremost about getting re-elected ...
This.  Right.  Here.  And this applies no matter what colour jersey they wear - voters or politicians.
PuckChaser said:
... At least that'd put us ahead of Croatia. Good on Croatia though. It was only 20 years ago we were there stopping ethnic cleansing. Now look at them! Better than us!
Does their spending more on their military make it better than ours -- or even 40% better than ours (based on the difference between GDP % spending)?
 

Attachments

  • 20150622_PR_CP_2015_093-v2.p6-page-001b.jpg
    20150622_PR_CP_2015_093-v2.p6-page-001b.jpg
    343.2 KB · Views: 142
  • WorldBankCANDefGDP.jpg
    WorldBankCANDefGDP.jpg
    28.5 KB · Views: 150
milnews.ca said:
Does their spending more on their military make it better than ours -- or even 40% better than ours (based on the difference between GDP % spending)?

Obviously not, but at least they are making the effort that is ostensibly a requisite behaviour for members of the Alliance. There are a great many issues that would be resolved by having the cash necessary to conduct training, recruit the right amount of people, procure the right equipment and have a healthy contingency reserve.

AND some leftover for the "bows", as this forum is fond of deriding them. Fortunately, in the context of the military these cost very little.
 
And a few more broad-stroke details from the Info-machine (also attached in case link doesn't work for you) - highlights mine...
Canada is a leading member of NATO that has always deployed our troops and equipment when and where they are needed most. The Government of Canada is committed to taking concrete action so that Canadians – and people around the world – can feel safe and secure in their communities.

Today, the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, announced Canada’s largest sustained military presence in Europe in more than a decade. Canada will lead a robust multinational NATO battlegroup in Latvia, becoming one of four Framework Nations, as part of the Alliance’s enhanced Forward Presence in Eastern Europe.

Additionally,  the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) will deploy a frigate that will undertake operational tasks with NATO’s maritime forces in the region. Canada will also deploy an Air Task Force – which will include up to six CF-18 fighter aircraft – to conduct periodic surveillance and air policing activities in Europe.

The land, maritime and air initiatives announced today form Canada’s renewed mandate under Operation REASSURANCE
and demonstrate Canada’s unwavering commitment to NATO, to the protection of Alliance territories, and to the ultimate goal of protecting the safety and security of our citizens.

Quote

“Canada is a playing a strong and constructive role in the world. We are ready to respond to support NATO with some of the most effective soldiers, sailors, and airmen and airwomen in the world. We will continue to work closely with our Allies and partners to create a safer and more prosperous world for everyone.”

- Rt. Hon. Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada

Quick Facts

    Since 2014, Canada has actively participated alongside our NATO Allies in measures to maintain security and stability in Central and Eastern Europe, including through training, exercises and other operational tasks.
    Operation REASSURANCE refers to the military activities undertaken by the Canadian Armed Forces to support NATO assurance and deterrence measures in Eastern and Central Europe. It includes operational and tactical level demonstrations, manoeuvres and enhanced interoperability activities with Allies and partners.
    As part of NATO’s enhanced Forward Presence, Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany, will constitute the four Framework Nations responsible for establishing separate NATO battlegroups. 
    Canada, along with 11 other countries, founded NATO in 1949 on the fundamental values of democracy, individual liberty, human rights, and the rule of law. Over the past 67 years, NATO has proven itself to be a major contributor to international peace and security.
More on Op REASSURANCE here.
 

Attachments

medicineman said:
Back in the day, apparently Luxemburg and even Iceland (which really has NO military to speak of) spent relatively higher on defence than we did/do...and I bet it hasn't changed.  It's pretty apathetic actually.

MM

We were always ahead of Luxemburg and Iceland only counted ahead of use when you throw in their fisheries patrol.  This is Canada and it has always been Canada, almost everyone within 50 miles of me is on some form of government assistance and that is a huge national bill.  There simply isn't enough money to have our social safety net and a military.
 
Back
Top