MIL Canadian Military 'Bankrupt'; May shut 5 bases

Discussion in 'On Topic' started by soccerbud, Feb 29, 2004.

  1. soccerbud

    soccerbud OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2002
    Messages:
    62,601
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    by the girl's bathroom collecting s
    well so much for canadians taking over the world :/


    cliffnotes: canandian military sucks :/

    http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=97f7dbbe-981a-4085-9686-e87fab611fbb

    'Bankrupt' Forces may shut 5 bases
    Internal reports say $500M shortfall may cause closures from Winnipeg to Labrador

    Chris Wattie
    National Post

    Tuesday, February 24, 2004

    Canada's army, navy and air force are facing a funding shortfall of up to half a billion dollars, defence sources told the National Post, and the military is recommending drastic measures to make up the difference, including closing some of the largest bases in the country.

    The federal government is stalling the release of internal documents that outline the looming financial crisis, but military sources said the reports indicate that in the fiscal year beginning on April 1, the air force expects to be $150-million short of funds needed to fulfill its commitments, the navy will be $150-million shy of its needs and the army will be as much as $200-million short.

    The figures were submitted to General Ray Henault, the Chief of Defence Staff, last month by the heads of the land staff, the maritime staff and the air staff in anticipation of this year's defence budget.

    The military sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the reports foresee a situation so dire that they recommend curtailing operations, dry-docking ships and mothballing vehicles or aircraft and closing at least four Canadian Forces bases.

    Unless additional funding is awarded by the government, the air force is suggesting closing bases at Goose Bay, Nfld., Bagotville, Que., North Bay and Winnipeg, the sources said.

    Further, the air force report says that unless its fleet of ageing CC-130 Hercules transport planes is replaced or modernized, the main transport base at Trenton should be closed within 10 years. "There won't be enough Hercs flying by then to justify keeping that base open," one air force source said.

    The navy predicts it will not be able to live up to treaty obligations to NATO and other alliances and cannot carry out enough patrols of Canadian waters to comply with agreements with other government departments such as Immigration Canada or Fisheries and Oceans.

    "We will not be able to meet our domestic defence obligations," one naval officer said.

    The army is said to be in the worst financial state of all three branches of the Canadian Forces. "Everyone knows that the army's broke and has been for a couple of years," said one military source familiar with the reports.

    Colonel Howard Marsh, a former senior army staff officer now working as an analyst for the Conference of Defence Associations, said he was not surprised by the size of the shortfall.

    "This is a look forward ... at what they need in order to keep the army going," he said. "Nobody has ever seen a bankrupt military in a developed country.... This year I predict we will see that in Canada."

    Col. Marsh said the military is saddled with ageing bases and increasingly dilapidated buildings that are fast reaching the point of collapse. "What they've been doing, year in and year out ... is not replace or repair those buildings, or buy new equipment," he said.

    "The average age of the equipment in the Canadian Forces is over 20 years and it hasn't been well-maintained."

    The Liberal government reduced defence spending by 23% and cut the number of regular military personnel to approximately 60,000 from 80,000 between 1993 and 2000. There were 120,000 people in the Canadian military in 1958.

    In 2003, the defence budget was increased $800-million to $12.7-billion, the single largest increase since the Liberals came to power. But that still left the total below that of 1991, when the Mulroney Conservatives committed troops to the Gulf War and the defence budget stood at $12.8-billion.

    Jay Hill, the Conservative defence critic, said the reports outline the result of more than a decade of Liberal cuts to the Canadian Forces.

    "They shouldn't even be in this position," he said. "They shouldn't be having to look for nickel and dime savings when the government is blowing hundreds of millions on sponsorship programs."

    Mr. Hill called on the government to make the three reports available immediately. "This flies in the face of this Prime Minister's stated commitment to being open and transparent," he said.

    The Department of National Defence has refused to make public the annual reports, known as command impact assessments.

    Defence officials this week turned down a request by the National Post and the influential defence publication Jane's Defence Weekly to see the reports under access to information legislation.

    Judith Mooney, the director of access to information for the Department of National Defence, said the reports will not be made public for another three to five weeks because they are considered "draft" documents.

    "I exercised my discretion to withhold the documents until the [Defence] Department's business-planning process is complete, at which time they will be released," she said.

    Ms. Mooney could not say when exactly the reports would be released, but indicated they would be available by the end of March.

    Although that would delay them until after the release of the federal budget, which is expected on March 23, she said David Pratt, the Defence Minister, was not involved in the decision to withhold the reports until then. Mr. Pratt did not reply to repeated requests for comment on the reports.

    In previous years, the assessments have been made public.

    This year's reports paint a picture even more bleak than last year's, which said the military would be unable to sustain itself without additional resources or a reduced workload.

    They were the basis for a story last year in Jane's Defence Weekly, the prestigious London-based magazine, which caused a furor in Canadian and NATO defence circles. Under the headline "Running on Empty," the story said the army, navy and air force did not receive the money they needed.

    The article said the navy asked for an additional $50-million to bridge the funding gap, but received only $6.7-million. The air force expected a $104-million shortfall but received about $7-million. The army had a larger gap between what was expected of it and the funding available, and received $85-million in extra money.

    Major-General Terry Hearn, the chief of finance for the Canadian Forces, acknowledged the military has had "issues" with funding over the past four years.

    But he said the department is implementing a long-term plan to stabilize its finances. "We'll become sustainable over the next couple of years," he said. "We have long-term strategies to deal with these issues ... [but] we're not going to solve them next year."

    Peter Stoffer, a New Democrat MP whose Nova Scotia riding includes a large military base, called the government's refusal to release the reports "very suspicious."

    "If anyone out there honestly believes that access to information will be any easier under this government, they are fooling themselves," he said. "They say one thing and do another."
     
  2. SBrooks1

    SBrooks1 GOAT OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2002
    Messages:
    57,625
    Likes Received:
    406
    The inevitable result of a massive social wealfare system. You know the argument that you hear all the time from liberals about military spending, something along the lines that the cost of one stealth bomber could feed thousands of people? Well, this is the logical end result of that line of thinking. A cut here, a cut there, and pretty soon your military is bankrupt.
     
  3. Booya

    Booya New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
    the inevitable result??? lol, thats funny. Do you know that over the last several years that Canada has had the best performing economy of the G7 countries?? They were able to pay off substantial portions of the national debt although things have gotten tighter in the last year or so. They could give more money to the military, they just chose not to.
     
  4. 91LS-VTAK

    91LS-VTAK Guest

    Our military has had problems for a long, long time. It is a sad that we as a Country, who bravely fought along-side America and Britain for the liberation of Europe, have let our military become the laughing-stock of NATO. We disgrace ourselves by not treating our soldiers with the respect they deserve and derpriving them of the resources they need.
     
  5. multiplexor

    multiplexor Intellectual

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2001
    Messages:
    5,038
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Montreal Quebec Canada
    Who will take over canada and for what reason? Can't the human race stop fearing this???

    If Canada gets overrun, i'm sure we'll have alot of help getting it back, from everyone else we've helped...
     
  6. multiplexor

    multiplexor Intellectual

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2001
    Messages:
    5,038
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Montreal Quebec Canada
    And this is the reason why our planet is retarded... why should people have to fear invasion?

    who would bother to invade canada anyways? We haven't pissed off anyone that i can think of....
     
  7. one.nine

    one.nine OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2002
    Messages:
    19,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Name one industrialized nation that has been invaded and annexed within the last 20 years.
     
  8. Technik

    Technik OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2003
    Messages:
    20,471
    Likes Received:
    109
    I almost agree with you,
     
  9. logikbomb

    logikbomb Who's there? Cuz you're gonna get nothin but holes

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    5,286
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    the interweb
    The invasion of an industrialized nation does not happen all the time, especially one bordering the U.S. Canada realized that it doesn't matter how weak their defenses are, nobody is going to invade them because of their proximity to the U.S. and thus decided to spend the money elsewhere.
     
  10. Technik

    Technik OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2003
    Messages:
    20,471
    Likes Received:
    109
    Iraq
     
  11. logikbomb

    logikbomb Who's there? Cuz you're gonna get nothin but holes

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    5,286
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    the interweb
    ^ None of those border the U.S. Canada can have an army consisting of girl scouts selling cookies and national defenses consisting of a white picket fence and it doesn't matter. Nobody is invading a country that borders the U.S.
     
  12. one.nine

    one.nine OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2002
    Messages:
    19,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some of you need to look up annexed.

    Iraq wasn't annexed.

    Kuwait wasn't annexed.

    Being engulfed in war != Being taken over and annexed.
     
  13. TheRemains

    TheRemains If I sound disrespectful, it's only because you're

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    40,803
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Boston
    I wish I lived in a country where my military was bankrupt. I question the motives of governments that spend more money on means of destruction rather than means of education.
     
  14. one.nine

    one.nine OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2002
    Messages:
    19,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    The UN disagrees with you.

     
  15. logikbomb

    logikbomb Who's there? Cuz you're gonna get nothin but holes

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    5,286
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    the interweb
    Annexed... invaded... who cares. Point is that Canada knew that neither one would happen to them so they decided to spend the money elsewhere. It was a smart choice.
     
  16. demigod_2

    demigod_2 Guest

    First, you have a very small population compared to the Sq miles of your country. You have a huge amount of natural resources that are just sitting there. If i was any country, that was close, (even a russian country on the other side of the artic) i would take you over, exterminate your population, cut down all your trees, and turn your country into a gigantic strip mine. My country would profit, and thats all i care about. The us might help protect you , but not for free, we would make you sign treaties and eventualy you would have a puppet govt controled by the us. And your country would ahve the same fate, it would only take a bit longer.
     
  17. ASav

    ASav New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2002
    Messages:
    2,395
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Queens, NY
    Why don't they just borrow to the hilt and debase their currency? Oh wait wrong country.
     
  18. Needmorefunds007

    Needmorefunds007 Where do we go from herE?

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2002
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KANADA
    :ugh:

    I hope most people in the U.S don't think like this.
    With your logic, if a poor kid was running around with a 100 dollar bill, you would just throw him to the ground and take the 100$. You are 100 dollars richer, you benefited, and like you said, that's all you care about. :rolleyes:
     
  19. mover

    mover and shaker OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2002
    Messages:
    40,847
    Likes Received:
    27
    Canada is far too large to take over. It just wouldn't work. Look at the problem the US is having with Iraq, and look at the difference in size. And beyond that, the majority of the Iraqi people welcomed the US.
     
  20. demigod_2

    demigod_2 Guest

    True, canada is way to big to take over all at once. And the lack of logistics make it even more dificult. Canada is a lot like siberia in its undevelopment. But what if a country wanted to take over say a 500 sq mile area of the north western portion and declare it their provence. Would the united states really care? Canada would care, but they dont really populate that area. What really matters and what has saved canda for so long is the fact that their climate is undesireable, except along the coasts, and all if its northern ports freeze in the winter cutting them off from the rest of the world. If a country was going to try to take over canada, they would need a fleet of icebreakers for logistics alone to come in from a direction that would not scare the us into action. But times may change and it may eventualy be in a countries economic interest (including the United States) to plunder canadas resources. Remember that as the US becomes more socialist, we get closer to becoming the people that we hated the most in the 1970's and 80's. you may in your life see a Red US and canada has all the resources necessary for the us to overrun the entire north and south american contenents. History repeats itself, and this wouldnt be much unlike Japan invading manchuria in the 1930's. Your biggest threat is the USA, you just dont realize it yet.
     
  21. TheRemains

    TheRemains If I sound disrespectful, it's only because you're

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    40,803
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Boston
    Unfortunatly many people in America think like this. America is still pretty conservative. They don't understand why you wouldn't give as much money as you possibly can to your army. Especially during times when you don't know where the enemy is going to be coming from (i.e. peace time). I think it's part of their whole slippery-slope philosophy where you must assume the worst of everything. Or maybe the fact that they themselves will readily take advantage of someone less powerful.
     
  22. demigod_2

    demigod_2 Guest

    :ugh:

    Countries act like little kids, if a six year old saw a weaker 5 year old with a 100 dollar bill he wanted, he would beat the kid up in a heart beat and take it. If he didnt, one of his classmates would.:rolleyes:

    Kids fight over worthless toys, of cource they would fight over something of actual value.
     
  23. civicmon

    civicmon got all my game from the streets of california.

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    25,647
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    dca -> nyc -> sfo -> san -> phl
    you're joking, right?

    The US was responsible for 67% of the economic growth FOR THE PLANET.

    On top of that, if Canada's economy is doing so good, how come one million - that's 1 in every 32 people in Canada, live in the US?

    I have friends from Canada, aside from the cold, what was their biggest complaint? The lack of opportunities.
     
  24. demigod_2

    demigod_2 Guest

    The later is correct. Even the us doesnt have a large enough army to take on the us civilian populaion. Who has an army that can take on 100 million armed citizens with out useing weapons of mass destruction? Nobody. All of the countries in europe combined dont have an army thats large enough to attack the armed citizens of the us. It would be a guerilla warfare nighmare, far worse than any seen to date.
     
  25. Needmorefunds007

    Needmorefunds007 Where do we go from herE?

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2002
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KANADA
    Ok you win :slap:. It seems like you support beating up the kid and stealing the 100 dollars, and from your post above where you're talking about different strategies to take over Canada, I guess you support that as well. All I can say is that I wish you luck in your ethics class. :o
     

Share This Page