[bootlegga]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Have to disagree with you Boots. The Russians are very much capable of dropping 20 000 troops on our shores over a 24 hour period, 50 000 over a week. We do not have the capabilities to prevent them from making it here, nor do we have the manpower to repulse them once they've landed. Nevermind China.

50,000 in a week - are you sure about that? The old USSR could have done that, but not the Russian Federation today.

Everything I've seen says the Russians have the ability to lift maybe 10,000 at one time - and that means leaving tanks and all their vehicles behind. I don't know how they would be able to make five runs back and forth in one week given the distance between our major ports and theirs.

I suppose they could pull a Tom Clancy and stash some troops in cargo ships or something, but that's pushing it for such a long trip and I doubt troops would arrive combat ready after spending a week or two in a cramped cargo hold.

I could see them getting a foothold if we didn't know they were coming and they launched a sneak attack on us, but if we did know they were coming, we'd meet them off the coast with Harpoons, smart bombs dropped from CF-18s and they'd lose a significant chunk of their force at sea.

Think about the Falklands War - little old Argentina almost did enough damage to the RN to stop the invasion - and our air force and navy is far better equipped and trained they the Argentinians were.

And China - they don't even have the ability to lift a couple divisions across the Taiwan Strait, nevermind the Pacific Ocean.

Sure these things may change in 20 or 30 or 40 years, but between the general lack of sealift and the huge oceans off our coasts, we have little to fear from a seaborne invasion right in the near future.

Does that mean I don't think we need more ships and planes - of course not. I'd like to see a much larger naval and air capability, but the fact is most Canadians would prefer national daycare and shorter wait times when they go to see a specialist at the hospital.

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Yes, we still have the USA as an ally. But I believe we should be questioning whether or not the USA will exist in it's current form 20 years from now.

That's true, but who knows what the future will bring?

There is no conceivable way for us to plan for every crazy scenario that might happen.

Planners have to look at what is at somewhat possible and go from there. Worrying about things like zombie apocalypses and alien invasions and the total collapse of the US are way beyond the scope of our capabilities.

[BartSimpson]

desertdude desertdude:

My question is why (does Canada) need a large military in the first place

Canada doesn't need a large military. Canada needs an effective military that punches above its weight by leveraging force multipliers.

There are a number of ways to do this and I'll list them here in order of ease to implement factored against cost efficiency and deterrent value:

1. Nukes. Not many are needed for a deterrent. Probably ten land based ICBM and a small assortment of IMR ship-based missiles would do the trick. I'd have all of the ICBM devices in the 1.5Mt range as their maintenance costs are virtually identical to smaller devices.

2. A diversified air force composed of well-armed and easy-to-maintain patrol craft complemented by theatre deniability capabilities like in-depth SAM and ABM defenses. Add to this a small but robust force of generation five fighters to project force beyond the SAM umbrella and you can hit an enemy naval force bad enough to deter an aggressors' territorial ambitions.

3. Increase the number of the reserve. Following the Israeli/Swiss model require mandatory basic service and basic training for all able citizens and school them on the proper use of small arms and person-portable arms (anti-tank weapons and etc.). Then have qualified 'graduates' of the program maintain their weapons and ammunition at home until they muster out at age 45 or when they can no longer satisfy the physical requirements of the job. This should get your reserve numbers into the 3-6 million range or about 200 reserve divisions. Even the Chinese would be reluctant to take you on.

4. Following the Australian model invest in a very effective submarine force and dispense with destroyers, frigates, and etc. Your surface navy will be a committed littoral force and your submarines will be used to attack your enemy well out to sea. It's cost effective for Australia and the silence from Dalian with regards to Australia speaks to the deterrent value of this model.

[BartSimpson]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

You have to wonder if the US is going to hold together.

Whether it does or it doesn't, it's power is going to decline.

Don't forget that the same thing was said when Jimmy Carter was President and Ronald Reagan came along and turned it around. I expect that the next President will be a Republican whose focus will be on defense.

In eight years you two might be complaining that the US has too much power, not that it's declining.

If so, then a degraded Canadian military posture will require an even greater dependence on US military force.

Imagine US ships based at Halifax and Esquimalt and imagine whole CAFB converted to USAFB. I guarantee you that the US will want to return to Gander.

[Jabberwalker]

bootlegga bootlegga:

martin14 martin14:

bootlegga bootlegga:

The military we have is capable of defending it from everyone but the States (admittedly due in large part to the oceans and most everyone else's lack of sealift)

I'm sorry, but this is just nonsense.

The only thing stopping the Russians or Chinese from walking right into Canada is not
the Canadian military; It's the U.S.A.

That, by the way, is an hilariously funny look at our neighbours. Only a Canadian (Norman Jewison) could have made that movie. The Americans can't and don't laugh at themselves, like that.