Canadian Politics

1669941439196.png
 

Zonker

Super Anarchist
10,126
6,309
Canada
I think both US and Canada want nothing to do with Haiti. Yeah it's in the backyard and it's essentially a failed state. But sending soldiers there (again) would be a never ending mission. Hard to keep the peace when there isn't a functional government. I don't have a solution to Haiti either.
 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
45,271
10,100
Eastern NC
I think both US and Canada want nothing to do with Haiti. Yeah it's in the backyard and it's essentially a failed state. But sending soldiers there (again) would be a never ending mission. Hard to keep the peace when there isn't a functional government. I don't have a solution to Haiti either.

This is how I know that zombies aren't real. If they were, then Haiti, the geographic origin of zombies, would not have this long time drastic overpopulation problem.
 

spankoka

Super Anarchist
It's the US that wants Canada to invade Haiti. At one time there were Antonovs available for charter for the heavy lifting-so much for that. Now it would be down to the three RCAF Globemasters.
 

Tax Man

Super Anarchist
2,026
361
Toronto
Both? How about not capable of doing either one.

Europe - we have half an infantry battalion, 6 cannons and a handful of tanks.
Zero air defense weapons, and almost no anti-tank capability.
The army would be sitting ducks to anything more sophisticated than leg infantry.
Naval back up is two fishing boats with .50 machine guns, no frigates available.
It took 6 months to get a half squadron of F18's into Romania for 4 months, but they are scheduled to rotate home.

Haiti - we have no sealift capability and very little airlift capacity to invade a country with bad roads and more bad guys than we could field in a full mobilization.
It would make the US in Vietnam look like a cake walk.
 

Rain Man

Super Anarchist
7,371
2,175
Wet coast.
Canada is the poster child for fervently hoping we didn't need a military anymore other than for SAR, civil emergencies and token NATO support, and set our military budget accordingly. Sadly, we were wrong, and now we are scrounging around looking for ways to help Ukraine, but the cupboards are bare. We can't fix this in the short term, but perhaps there will be public support for fixing it in the long term now. I have certainly changed my views - take my tax dollars please but spend them wisely.

Invade Haiti? Sure, give us 10 years to get our shit together.
 
Last edited:

Zonker

Super Anarchist
10,126
6,309
Canada
take my tax dollars please but spend them wisely.
That is the tricky bit. I know boats pretty well.

Canada is building 4 new tugs for the Navy. $101M, built in Canada. If purchased overseas they would be around $40M.

New Canadian built oiler/supply ships, 2 x 20,000T - $4.1B and counting.

https://www.canada.ca/en/department...e-cost-of-the-joint-support-ship-project.html

The Brits bought 4 x 39,000 tons ships from Korea for $562M USD (so about $750M CDN).

That is a HUGE premium for "buying locally". Lots of it goes back into the economy as wages/taxes/purchases from suppliers so there is a multiplier effect. But when you are talking Billions that's a huge part of the defense budget (22.7B in 2020).

I guess the cost of the ships are spread out over so many years it's not as bad. But that's only because our shipbuilders are so slow!
 

Tax Man

Super Anarchist
2,026
361
Toronto
Better example is the new warships.

Arleigh Burke:
9500 tons
30+ knots (undisclosed but need to keep up with 33 knot carriers)
96 VLS missile cells
2 helicopters
Price 2.2B per hull CDN
https://www.navaltoday.com/2021/12/...for-three-new-arleigh-burke-class-destroyers/

Canadian surface combatant
8000 tons
27 knots
24 VLS missile cells plus 8 anti-ship and 6 short range 4pack tubes. 38 total.
1 helicopter
Price 5.6M per hull CDN

Canadian VLS will be medium range SAM only.
US VLS - medium and extended range SAM, ABM's and Tomahawks

Two and a half times the price for smaller, slower and less than half the hitting power.
 

Ishmael

53,922
13,266
Fuctifino
Gotta keep shoveling money at the Irvings. I'm not sure why, but it seems all the parties have signed contracts to keep the cash pouring in.
 

spankoka

Super Anarchist
This is why the Liberal reluctance to even look into exporting natural gas from the east coast is mystifying. Usually the Liberal Party and the Irving group march in lockstep. At one time the Irvings wanted to build a second refinery at Saint John, but then the Trans-Canada pipeline got cancelled. I guess Trudeau likes that people have to get their energy from Russia and Saudi Arabia.
 

Latest posts




Top