CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia

[The Bread Guy]

AH!  Statistics.  We all know what "statistics" are.

Like bikinis:  interesting in what they reveal, but vital in what they conceal.

... A progressive solution would be for those countries in good financial shape to give more than those in poor shape.  In which case Canada would be contributing more to the collective defence than, for example, Poland ...

THAT would be an interesting way to see the real commitment to "The Club" by the big spenders helping out the littler spenders ...

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Canada is actually in the top 25% of NATO spending, if you look at dollars and not percentage of GDP.

Great.  BUT...the 'agreement' is 2% of GDP.  Which we aren't doing.  So.  Thats' the point.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

If I read this thread correctly (and I probably won't bother again), all of the usual suspects who complained about lack of deployments, rust out, Prime Minister <insert childish name-calling here> not willing to step up etc are now complaining that we are incapable of deploying, that doing the job that we are paid to do is somehow demeaning and that the military is only used to score political points?

:facepalm:

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I might have missed it;  is there an official announcement about the ATF composition and tanks being part of the ORBAT?

 

[PuckChaser]

I might have missed it;  is there an official announcement about the ATF composition and tanks being part of the ORBAT?

I don't think there's been an official ORBAT for anything yet, just ambiguous press releases.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

It seems to be that a country that DOESN'T spend 2% of GDP on defence, but pulls its weight and shows up for operations -- is far more valuable than a country that DOES spend the 2%, but won't allow its forces to deploy.  Or, if they do deploy, are constrained to the point where it is difficult to accomplish their objective.

Canada doesn't spend 2%, we all know that.  BUT...we constantly have ships deployed, aircraft deployed, soldiers deployed, in support of NATO objectives.  Whether it is combating ISIL, supporting the Ukraine military, training the Afghans, or providing naval vessels to standing task forces, or helping out the UK with LRP aircraft in times of need - we, as an organization, pull more than our fair share.

I would actually be okay with us spending less than 2% -- ON THE CONDITION that capital procurement was done in a more streamlined manner that didn't affect the DND budget.

On the other side of the coin, maybe Latvia + UN blue beret bullshit + OP IMPACT means we are spreading our butter too thin.  We are far too fat on tail and not big enough on tail (IMO).  We've known this for years, of course, but the # and size of HQs and the way we do Ops (example, the size of JTFSC in Camp Canada for what it supported) with inflated amounts of, specifically, Snr Officers on the ground for no good reason has not and seemingly will never change (for the better). 

There was no room on the CFTPO for SERE SMEs in theatre, but there was Official Visits Officers.  Don't care what anyone says, that is fucked.

If the SME expertise we can offer is HQs and not bayonets...that's indicative of 'what' we specialize in;  inflated HQ orgs.

More tooth.  Less tail.  We are too small to be able to afford more fat for less muscle.

 

[daftandbarmy]

On the other side of the coin, maybe Latvia + UN blue beret bullshit + OP IMPACT means we are spreading our butter too thin.  We are far too fat on tail and not big enough on tail (IMO).  We've known this for years, of course, but the # and size of HQs and the way we do Ops (example, the size of JTFSC in Camp Canada for what it supported) with inflated amounts of, specifically, Snr Officers on the ground for no good reason has not and seemingly will never change (for the better). 

There was no room on the CFTPO for SERE SMEs in theatre, but there was Official Visits Officers.  Don't care what anyone says, that is ****ed.

If the SME expertise we can offer is HQs and not bayonets...that's indicative of 'what' we specialize in;  inflated HQ orgs.

More tooth.  Less tail.  We are too small to be able to afford more fat for less muscle.

I'm guessing that if you freed up the Class C contracts you can fill just about any formation, up to Division size, from the Royal Canadian Temp Agency (a.k.a: the Reserves).

 

[dapaterson]

If I read this thread correctly (and I probably won't bother again), all of the usual suspects who complained about lack of deployments, rust out, Prime Minister <insert childish name-calling here> not willing to step up etc are now complaining that we are incapable of deploying, that doing the job that we are paid to do is somehow demeaning and that the military is only used to score political points?

:facepalm:

I see a recruiting slogan out of this:  The Canadian Armed Forces: We're not happy unless we're not happy.

 

[dapaterson]

I'm guessing that if you freed up the Class C contracts you can fill just about any formation, up to Division size, from the Royal Canadian Temp Agency (a.k.a: the Reserves).

Why?  If the Reg F can manage the tempo, then have then do what they're paid to do... but at the same time, increase readiness for the Reserves so they are better prepared in the event that the scope of what's requested grows.


As for filling a Division with Reservists: The Army mandates the Reserves to train platoons in a company context.  You'd likely be hard-pressed to find company-grade and above leadership of sufficient quality for such a task.  (Quality defined by training, knowledge and experience - "Two weeks in Aldershot one summer in the 1990s" does not, to me, qualify as sufficient experience to command a Brigade in operations in the field)

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I'm guessing that if you freed up the Class C contracts you can fill just about any formation, up to Division size, from the Royal Canadian Temp Agency (a.k.a: the Reserves).

An actual division or one of our 'Divisions'.  >

 

[jmt18325]

I don't think there's been an official ORBAT for anything yet, just ambiguous press releases.

I would assume that what we bring will depend on who we can get to agree to go with us (the other 550 people).

 

[Colin Parkinson]

We can establish a Zulu Battery again over there, except with no gunners and no guns, but it will look good on a power point slide.

 

[Altair]

I see a recruiting slogan out of this:  The Canadian Armed Forces: We're not happy unless we're not happy.

I'm ridiculously happy.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I am personally excited by this.  I think it's a great opportunity for the Army to sharpen the conventional warfighting blade while conducting some quality training we would never be able to replicate in Canada.

Will we have issues at first?  Sure but what new operation doesn't?

 

[Altair]

I am personally excited by this.  I think it's a great opportunitu for the Army to sharpen the conventional warfighting blade while conducting some quality training we would never be able to replicate in Canada.

Will we have issues at first?  Sure but what new operation doesn't?

And given the small size of the deployment ( I was expecting 600) it leads me to believe the the liberals do in fact plan to do UN peacekeeping at the same time.

 

[George Wallace]

I am personally excited by this.  I think it's a great opportunitu for the Army to sharpen the conventional warfighting blade while conducting some quality training we would never be able to replicate in Canada.

Will we have issues at first?  Sure but what new operation doesn't?

Agreed.

That was one of the main reasons that I hated Mulroney for closing down CFE: the no cost experience that we, the individual soldiers, got from working in a foreign land with our allies and becoming intimately familiar with their uniforms, rank, equipment, ORBATS and SOPs and tactics.  PRICELESS!

Of course maintaining a CMBG and air Wing in Europe was expensive.  At the same time it provided a convenient Airhead to operate other missions out of.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I don't think there's been an official ORBAT for anything yet, just ambiguous press releases.

My read on the press release maybe vaguely intended this- there will be a battalion of 450 soldiers with armoured vehicles as a component in a battle group. I'm guessing the armoured vehicles are LAV 6.0, so this sounds like a mech inf BN to me? There must also be a plan for support element, I cannot see how this group could function properly by relying on other NATO partners for the basic supports- engineers, supply, maintenance, sigs, medical, etc. Rely on NATO partners for other things,- yes, but surely not the basics??? The CF 18's are a bonus, hopefully the role will not just be air defence but also training for air-ground operations.

What would be really cool is if the Army had way better EW gear to send over. This would be a great opportunity to come close to Ivan and start fingerprinting and cataloging some of their units, equipment and emitters into our own drives. You can  bet the Reds will be doing the same to us, right down to the IMEI and IMSI of your smartphone....

 

[PuckChaser]

The Arny's EW gear is what happens when you have cold war dinosaurs in civilian positions you can't fire them from, who haven't collected on a real enemy since early 1990s Bosnia. Would be awesome to have a sensor or 2 there, but everyone and their uncle will be trying to bolt their capabilities on, and a small battle group has enough to worry about than trying to bring a 50 person EW Sqn that really can't achieve goals in training environments.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

No TAC SIGINT in Afghanistan? 

 

[dapaterson]

No TAC SIGINT in Afghanistan?

I'm guessing that discussion on that sort of topic is frowned upon on public message boards.