Forces need moore good people

[Robert Bickle]

After watching our Prime minister talk last night on TV and hinting that we will probably have troops in Iraq with the U.S. when they make the expected move is going to be very hard on our forces.With our peace keepers in the Balkans, and our troops in Afghanistan I think we need another 6 to 8 thousand well trained troops to save the great ones we have from complete burn out.
Come on Parliament smarten up and loosen up the purse strings...

 

[Spanky]

According to what I read in the paper this morning, that is not all he said. He also stated that we can rent planes to get the forces to where they need to go, and that we (the Forces) do not need anymore equipment or money.

 

[Sharpey]

What an a**. Let‘s send good ol‘ Jean to Afghanistan, right into the mix with the PPCLI, and tell him to leave his rifle at home. How does it feel now buddy!
To harsh? Aaaaah so what. Just throw us a couple of bones and we‘ll be happy.
What an embarrasent, I‘m proud of our Army, but man, we must come of as the welfare guys/gals in green!
How many times has Jean been infront of the chicken cannon anyway...

 

[Korus]

Better yet, Sharpey, give him an old rifle that‘s outlived it‘s service life.. We got anything that needs an hour of maintenance per round fired? (kinda like the sea-kings)

 

[Pikache]

I got those WW1 vintage Ross Rifle for Jean‘s use.

 

[cagomez]

I heard that they were going to wait for proof before sending our guys into Iraq. It will be interesting to see our country‘s reaction though. With US operations in Afghanistan, the Philippines, and possible Iraq, Iran, and Korea (Axis of Evil) and our commitments in the Balkans, we could see ourselves being spread pretty thin, even more so !!!! :skull:

 

[rceme_rat]

My other posts should make it clear that I‘m not a fan of the PM or the current Minister. My bias is towards increased manning and budget, and I‘m clearly in favour of an open analysis of our military requirements.

That being said, it is not unreasonable to suggest that it might be better to rent heavy transport when we need it rather than paying to maintain it when we don‘t.

The real test of the concept is whether it would:

a. be available when we do need it, and

b. be combat-effective where we need it to land.

The first point hinges around cost - ow much surplus capability is out there, and at what cost? If everyone needs it to move their troops, will the cost outweigh the savings of not maintaining a fleet. (elsewhere, I suggested that perhaps we should own the fleet and rent it out with a "call back" provision).

The second point is of greater concern. If we are renting, we will either need to rent planes our pilots are familiar with, train pilots on planes we don‘t own, or hire pilots. The third of these options is the scariest - will hired pilots be physically and mentally capable of landing under fire? Will the soldiers flying in the back trust them impicitly as they do our own pilots?

Contracting out is a solid business concept. I favour solid business concepts -- but to be solid for any particular application, effectiveness is critical, while efficiency is only preferable.

In any case, I doubt the PM was thinking so far ahead - and the comments in the above posts indicate that he was taken as being flip and uncaring. Again, not a real surprise.

 

[John Nayduk]

I have to agree with the Rceme Rat. The pm maybe a ******* but he isn‘t stupid. Funny that these comments (and an apparent flip-flop on Iraq) come right after a visit to Washington.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Typical liberal shmuck. Always saying we can borrow. Someday, unfortunately for the guys on the ground, the borrowee is going to say he‘s to heavily tasked and Canada will have to walk home.

 

[centurion]

The Great Wizard, the almighty Cretin will not allow for more people in the military. After he has everybody grab their ankles, sans lube and sidewaysof course, he‘ll put the fix in on the new study, Defence Minister and current potentates of the tower of babble on Col Bye Drive. Plain and simple, for every new person in the forces, it‘s one more vote (like they count anyway) against the sitting dictatorship. And he has the cojones to look down his reptilian probiscus at Mugabe. Two snakes in the same nest.

 

[Marauder]

Hmmmmmmmm. Am I the only one who remembers a little while the Forces renting a sealift vessel form some foreign-own company to transport some of our vehs across the pond back from Bosnia? The one where some Navy lads had to BOARD AND SEIZE the vessel because the owner upped the price he had agreed to in mid-transit and then refused to dock until the gov aquised to his extortion?

Hey Johhny, no worries; I‘m sure some rent-a-pilot merc would never leave our boys in the lurch in the middle of some Third World sh!t hole that you put them into to prove some esoteric liberal ideological point. Especially when the LZ‘s hot. They wouldn‘t try to extort more cash to land, keeping our guys under fire longer than absolutely neccessary.

Someone REALLY needs to take Cretin, slam his commie *** into a chair, and learn him good.

 

[enfield]

Renting works fine for golf junkets, not for combat operations.
Considering we have several aircraft sitting on the tarmac purely for the purpose of ferrying ministers around, and have to rent aircraft to get troops around, the fat and the muscle seem pretty obvious.
If we need to rent, a LearJet for Jean and Company can‘t be that much.

However, there is a middle grpound betwen buyoing and renting. The UK recently began leasing several C-17‘s, pehaps this is something we can look into.

Also, I think it would be a good investment. The Hercs are certainly busy enough, and I don‘t see how having a couple more heavy-lift planes could be a bad thing in the long run.
I‘m more than willing to fire 30 generals and admirals to pay for it.

Publicly admitting that we rely on renting foreign aircraft to conduct combat operations is the biggest strike to soverignty I‘ve ever seen. We might as well start giving our defense budget directly to the Pentagon.
What the PPCLI has been doing these past weeks has made me so proud - and now Jean brings it all back to reality. Thank-you, Jean, I was almost beginning to think we had a kick-*** , high-speed, professional, respected and deadly military.

 

[Korus]

I‘ll agree that the PM is smart, but he‘s got the wrong priorities and goals... I get the (correct?) impression that he cares more about power than the country.. He prefers to ignore issues that need to be dealt with (i.e. the whole 9-11 thing, and him avoiding the issue..) becasue he‘s too afraid of doing something that might be a ‘mistake‘

Ah well... looks like we‘ll have to ride this one out...

:bullet: :bullet:

 

[Shrapnel]

Originally posted by Korus:
[qb]I‘ll agree that the PM is smart, but he‘s got the wrong priorities and goals... I get the (correct?) impression that he cares more about power than the country.. He prefers to ignore issues that need to be dealt with (i.e. the whole 9-11 thing, and him avoiding the issue..) becasue he‘s too afraid of doing something that might be a ‘mistake‘

Ah well... looks like we‘ll have to ride this one out...

:bullet: :bullet: [/qb]

The Prime Minister is only concerned about his career.

That‘s the sad state of most politicians these days.

The only mistake he‘s worried about making is one that would lose votes.