Great piece, Mark. I am reminded of a line I learned in a writing class in college, "If you write the gun in the first act, it better get shot in the third."
It’s not that we can’t afford more, it’s that we choose to spend less than you’d like us to. So, imagine you decide that, what’s the number and what’s our run rate over last several years? I
f we spent the amount required to meet our NATO commitment, would that get you what you want?
Rather than increasing funding poured into Afghanistan, seems like we should’ve declined.
Whatever budget you want, it will be a rounding error compared to what the Americans spend. Like other countries (Australia?) we should go deep with a few types of what’s required, rather than 3 of everything. Maybe equipment and expertise to get a Ukraine up and running during the onslaught and when It’s finally over.
Anyway, along the same lines as you suggested for the CBC, we need to define a focus for Canadian military and be world class in it. Three of everything is not a strategy. The US has 910 attack helicopters, Japan has 119 and we have 0. You want 3?
And why not be world class about emergency infrastructure repair and rebuild (water, power etc). This would be mobilised not just for Ukraine like scenarios, it would also be brought to bear on natural disasters anywhere in the world.
Great piece, Mark. I am reminded of a line I learned in a writing class in college, "If you write the gun in the first act, it better get shot in the third."
It’s not that we can’t afford more, it’s that we choose to spend less than you’d like us to. So, imagine you decide that, what’s the number and what’s our run rate over last several years? I
f we spent the amount required to meet our NATO commitment, would that get you what you want?
Rather than increasing funding poured into Afghanistan, seems like we should’ve declined.
Whatever budget you want, it will be a rounding error compared to what the Americans spend. Like other countries (Australia?) we should go deep with a few types of what’s required, rather than 3 of everything. Maybe equipment and expertise to get a Ukraine up and running during the onslaught and when It’s finally over.
Canada’s military doesn’t have 3 types of anything. It’s lucky if it has 3 anything.
It's a good thing you left the Canadian forces if you couldn't locate the 380 military aircraft we have. https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.php?country_id=canada
Anyway, along the same lines as you suggested for the CBC, we need to define a focus for Canadian military and be world class in it. Three of everything is not a strategy. The US has 910 attack helicopters, Japan has 119 and we have 0. You want 3?
And why not be world class about emergency infrastructure repair and rebuild (water, power etc). This would be mobilised not just for Ukraine like scenarios, it would also be brought to bear on natural disasters anywhere in the world.