• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
9,037
Points
1,140
Wowa… hold the phone there Kev…

I usually agree with you on about 99% of all things thus far. But on this one, I have to come to a dead stop…


Our PM has demonstrated absolutely zero, and I mean truly zero, foresight or forethought when it comes to anything related to ‘him as PM.’

Situations in which the average person would say “This is a bad idea, I probably shouldn’t do this…” or “Ya know, what are the realistic consequences of this choice compared to this other choice?”

Nadda. Zip. Zilch.


He ‘may’ see some war clouds forming on the horizon. Like waaaayyyyyy off in the horizon, above someone else’s country.

But putting together a plan to deal with those clouds? Not until it starts making HIM look bad, my friend - only when the adults start whispering about him and chuckling does he seem primed to do much of anything.

He has seen how bare the cupboard is when it came time to donate kit to Ukraine. Has there been any effort at all to stock that cupboard since then? Nope.


My point is… I think you may be giving him too much credit
I give him less credit than my left shoe…

He’s a weak person by his very nature, which is why I don’t see him arguing against it. NATO has said ‘okay Canada, we need your commitment’ and he’s going to demurely default to “okay” and ‘CDS make it happen’ so any blame then gets punted downstream to Gen E, and the MND.
 

MarkOttawa

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
140
Points
710
I suspect US will take over lead role in Latvia (we could send Leopards but not much else):

Latvian Minister of Defence asks US to provide more military aid​

...

During talks the minister affirmed Latvia’s readiness to defend itself and also stressed the need to strengthen NATO’s eastern flank’s defence. Pabriks invited US to support the increase of NATO’s expanded battalion to brigade-level units and expand US military aid to Latvia by increasing military presence and providing financing to develop Latvia’s defence capabilities.


According to data provided by Ministry of Defence, US congressmen agreed with Pabriks and said work is being put into providing Baltic States with additional aid...

Mark
Ottawa
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
12,785
Points
1,160
I give him less credit than my left shoe…

He’s a weak person by his very nature, which is why I don’t see him arguing against it. NATO has said ‘okay Canada, we need your commitment’ and he’s going to demurely default to “okay” and ‘CDS make it happen’ so any blame then gets punted downstream to Gen E, and the MND.

The CAF: that's a bigger threat to Trudeau than the Russians.

The purge of the CAF will likely be his primary goal for the defence file, until the next election, to ensure that his government isn't slammed by (even more) vote killing scandals.

It will be a good idea to keep a hull down, turret down posture for most CAF members over the next couple of years, if they haven't already figured that out.
 

rmc_wannabe

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
2,330
Points
1,310
The CAF: that's a bigger threat to Trudeau than the Russians.
The reason its a threat to him is that he hasn't learned in 8 years of office that we are as important a tool of his foreign policy as GAC or IRCC. Even during Op PROVISION, we were "along for the ride", regardless of the fact GAC and IRCC couldn't do any of the heavy lifting required to make sure the cheque Trudeau wrote with his mouth didn't bounce.

The purge of the CAF will likely be his primary goal for the defence file, until the next election, to ensure that his government isn't slammed by (even more) vote killing scandals.
We do need to clean house, yes. But we're not torpedoing Trudeau's credibility... he is.

His grandstanding at the G7, the UN, NATO, etc. have now become tiresome to most world leaders. "Canada's Back" isn't a thing, and hasn't been a thing, for the past 5 years. Even less so since COVID and still less since the Russo-Ukraine Conflict went off. You can wag a finger all you want, but when you shaming isn't backed up with substance, no one takes you seriously.

It will be a good idea to keep a hull down, turret down posture for most CAF members over the next couple of years, if they haven't already figured that out.
The same can be said for most of his caucus, but I don't think that's going to last long. the CPC is it's own hot mess, but so is the NDP. A lot of the Orange side of the house feel betrayed by the concessions Singh has made to prop up this government. I can see the LPC puppet masters taking it as an opportunity to change the narrative in the middle of Act II; the NDP and CPC will come out swinging at Le Dauphin, might as well change the punching bag to soften the impact.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,133
Points
1,040
Unfortunately I can't find the article where I read it, but it noted that in expanding the existing eFP Battle Groups to Brigades they are looking in particular for deployments of Anti-Tank and Air Defence units to strengthen the formations. Two things which the Canadian Army is notably lacking.

How do we justify stepping into a multinational Brigade command role when we are unable to provide the key enablers that make the Brigade combat effective? Perhaps it would be more appropriate to hand off command to one of the better equipped eFP Latvia contributors and simply upping our contribution to a complete LAV Battalion which would be a more honest representation of our capabilities (and political will).
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
9,245
Points
1,360
The reason its a threat to him is that he hasn't learned in 8 years of office that we are as important a tool of his foreign policy as GAC or IRCC. Even during Op PROVISION, we were "along for the ride", regardless of the fact GAC and IRCC couldn't do any of the heavy lifting required to make sure the cheque Trudeau wrote with his mouth didn't bounce.


We do need to clean house, yes. But we're not torpedoing Trudeau's credibility... he is.

His grandstanding at the G7, the UN, NATO, etc. have now become tiresome to most world leaders. "Canada's Back" isn't a thing, and hasn't been a thing, for the past 5 years. Even less so since COVID and still less since the Russo-Ukraine Conflict went off. You can wag a finger all you want, but when you shaming isn't backed up with substance, no one takes you seriously.


The same can be said for most of his caucus, but I don't think that's going to last long. the CPC is it's own hot mess, but so is the NDP. A lot of the Orange side of the house feel betrayed by the concessions Singh has made to prop up this government. I can see the LPC puppet masters taking it as an opportunity to change the narrative in the middle of Act II; the NDP and CPC will come out swinging at Le Dauphin, might as well change the punching bag to soften the impact.
Interestingly, one could consider the NDP doing exactly the same thing as the CPC is doing, but on the left. Team Orange is risking fracture (whatever an Orange PPC would look like) and the Grits will see the results of their ‘pit and split’ strategy on the left come to fruition as well and pull more of the Red Dippers and Red Tories into the cult following…
 
Last edited:

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
9,037
Points
1,140
Unfortunately I can't find the article where I read it, but it noted that in expanding the existing eFP Battle Groups to Brigades they are looking in particular for deployments of Anti-Tank and Air Defence units to strengthen the formations. Two things which the Canadian Army is notably lacking.

How do we justify stepping into a multinational Brigade command role when we are unable to provide the key enablers that make the Brigade combat effective? Perhaps it would be more appropriate to hand off command to one of the better equipped eFP Latvia contributors and simply upping our contribution to a complete LAV Battalion which would be a more honest representation of our capabilities (and political will).
Honestly Canada should probably approach the US and say, ‘hey, we can field a Bde in Latvia - if you give us equipment for an ABCT, and we will give 1 CMBG equipment to Ukraine.

It’s a big win, win, win, Ukraine gets equipment, Canada gets a credible Bde and we don’t need to send more troops.
 

RangerRay

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
845
Points
1,110
Honestly Canada should probably approach the US and say, ‘hey, we can field a Bde in Latvia - if you give us equipment for an ABCT, and we will give 1 CMBG equipment to Ukraine.

It’s a big win, win, win, Ukraine gets equipment, Canada gets a credible Bde and we don’t need to send more troops.
That makes sense…which is why it won’t happen. :(
 

rmc_wannabe

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
2,330
Points
1,310
Honestly Canada should probably approach the US and say, ‘hey, we can field a Bde in Latvia - if you give us equipment for an ABCT, and we will give 1 CMBG equipment to Ukraine.

It’s a big win, win, win, Ukraine gets equipment, Canada gets a credible Bde and we don’t need to send more troops.
Whoa whoa whoa.... which Canadian industry would benefit from this? Where are we making M1A2s? Did we hold a proper competition on this?

We have lobbyists voters that will want these questions answered...
 

Spencer100

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
815
Points
1,040
Honestly Canada should probably approach the US and say, ‘hey, we can field a Bde in Latvia - if you give us equipment for an ABCT, and we will give 1 CMBG equipment to Ukraine.

It’s a big win, win, win, Ukraine gets equipment, Canada gets a credible Bde and we don’t need to send more troops.
Plus the CAF would not be caught dead in all the US kit. The reason we buy stuff for our ground forces is to look different than Americans. LEO's not M-1 when is makes more sense that the plant is 2 hours away from the border. G wagons, Ilits, MAN trucks, The Mack badged, Provost final assembled, Volvo AB's Renault Defence Russian Kerax truck. ETC.
 
Last edited:

rmc_wannabe

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
2,330
Points
1,310
Plus the CAF would not be caught dead in all the US kit. The reason we buy stuff for our ground forces is to look different that Americans. LEO's not M-1 when is makes more sense that the plant is 2 hours away from the boarder. G wagons, Ilits, MAN trucks, The Mack badged, Provost final assembled, Volvo AB's Renault Defence Russian Kerax truck. ETC.
This is possibly why we have abandoned all logic and developed CADPAT (MT), when it would make absolute sense to develop a Multicam derivative like the rest of NATO, including the former Soviet Bloc members.
"We can't be mistaken for Americans" No, but you're sure as shit going to be mistaken for someone else when you're in the gunsights of some poorly trained Albanian.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,189
Points
1,040
This is possibly why we have abandoned all logic and developed CADPAT (MT), when it would make absolute sense to develop a Multicam derivative
It had nothing to do with what you said. It's about IP control to put our own camo pattern on whatever the hell we want and not have to run back to the owners of Multicam. And to be fair CADPAT(MT) is basically a Multicam derivative as it was heavily analyzed in the development of the pattern.

Plus the CAF would not be caught dead in all the US kit. The reason we buy stuff for our ground forces is to look different than Americans. LEO's not M-1 when is makes more sense that the plant is 2 hours away from the border. G wagons, Ilits, MAN trucks, The Mack badged, Provost final assembled, Volvo AB's Renault Defence Russian Kerax truck. ETC.
This has zero to do with why we have what kit we have.
 

Spencer100

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
815
Points
1,040
This is possibly why we have abandoned all logic and developed CADPAT (MT), when it would make absolute sense to develop a Multicam derivative like the rest of NATO, including the former Soviet Bloc members.
"We can't be mistaken for Americans" No, but you're sure as shit going to be mistaken for someone else when you're in the gunsights of some poorly trained Albanian.
Never underestimate the "We are peacekeepers" and not Americans in the deep ethos of the Canadian body politic. It runs very much at the center of the current administration. Not in reality but as a feeling. That feeling is not backed up with resources or the like. I would have love to have seen the first meeting when the Trudeau gov asked for a peacekeeping mission for the CAF. It must have been...well first peacekeeping is not like Cyprus today, You need equipment and troops and money and way way more. And it is also dangerous. OK they say how about some nice helicopters and transports to Africa then? OK but we need to protect them, and armed escorts too.....NO I mean medical pick up helicopters.....urgh!
 

McG

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
2,166
Points
1,160
How do we justify stepping into a multinational Brigade command role when we are unable to provide the key enablers that make the Brigade combat effective? Perhaps it would be more appropriate to hand off command to one of the better equipped eFP Latvia contributors and simply upping our contribution to a complete LAV Battalion which would be a more honest representation of our capabilities (and political will).
The threshold to be a framework nation does not need to be the key enablers nor even the majority of enablers (though, that is how we have all seen the US do it). The threshold is to provide a plurality of the enablers ... which could mean that some CS units are also Canadian framework with Canadian and allied sub-units.
 

Spencer100

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
815
Points
1,040
It had nothing to do with what you said. It's about IP control to put our own camo pattern on whatever the hell we want and not have to run back to the owners of Multicam. And to be fair CADPAT(MT) is basically a Multicam derivative as it was heavily analyzed in the development of the pattern.


This has zero to do with why we have what kit we have.
I was being simple. But it does figure into it. (get not dealing with ITAR is a part too) Why do we not use a tank build and maintained two hours away with the HQ of the company and the RD centre 15 minutes from tunnel to Warren ave?

Why do we use a MB G Wagon? (yes it was assembled by a CDN owned company in Austria.) The Humvee has more Canadian content in it being manufactured in Indiana.
 

rmc_wannabe

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
2,330
Points
1,310
It had nothing to do with what you said. It's about IP control to put our own camo pattern on whatever the hell we want and not have to run back to the owners of Multicam. And to be fair CADPAT(MT) is basically a Multicam derivative as it was heavily analyzed in the development of the pattern.
I will grant you that CADPAT (MT) is a derivative. So is British DPM(MT). So is Scorpion. So is the newest variation the French, Belgians, etc. are using.
None of them are a digitized camouflage pattern. All of them look far more similar to Multicam than MT ever will. This opens the door for sourcing kit from a variety of vendors around the world; CADPAT(MT) will ensure we are under the thumb of whatever Canadian manufacturer is awarded the contract, even if we are the license holder.

The derail aside, this is a bigger issue when we talk about what we can put on the table when the chips are down (i.e. "So hey, Justin.... that Heavy Bde you promised us..."). We have turned our defence procurement into economic stimulus to our grave detriment. We don't have the industry in Canada to shit out a Brigade's worth of kit, let alone the pers to crew any of it, at the drop of a hat. The "anything but American kit..." mentality has hooped us.
If we do provide anything of substance, its going to be far more expensive and take longer to hit the ground in Adazi than if we proceed with what @KevinB suggested.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,189
Points
1,040
I will grant you that CADPAT (MT) is a derivative. So is British DPM(MT). So is Scorpion. So is the newest variation the French, Belgians, etc. are using.
None of them are a digitized camouflage pattern. All of them look far more similar to Multicam than MT ever will. This opens the door for sourcing kit from a variety of vendors around the world; CADPAT(MT) will ensure we are under the thumb of whatever Canadian manufacturer is awarded the contract, even if we are the license holder.

The derail aside, this is a bigger issue when we talk about what we can put on the table when the chips are down (i.e. "So hey, Justin.... that Heavy Bde you promised us..."). We have turned our defence procurement into economic stimulus to our grave detriment. We don't have the industry in Canada to shit out a Brigade's worth of kit, let alone the pers to crew any of it, at the drop of a hat. The "anything but American kit..." mentality has hooped us.
If we do provide anything of substance, its going to be far more expensive and take longer to hit the ground in Adazi than if we proceed with what @KevinB suggested.
There are a few good advantages to using a digital pattern. I'll leave it at that.

If you spent some time thinking about what kit we actually have I think you'll realize that we have quite a lot of US kit, or US derivative equipment.
 

rmc_wannabe

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
2,330
Points
1,310
If you spent some time thinking about what kit we actually have I think you'll realize that we have quite a lot of US kit, or US derivative equipment.
I work in a realm that is loaded with US kit, and a lot of that is so we can maintain FVEY status. We're lucky to be given that grace. I will leave it at that.

We do use a lot of US equipment in the name of interoperability. As we should. We share the largest land border and shared airspace in the world. We would be fools to not use the same or similar systems in mutual defence. The RCAF and RCN are starting to catch on to this, but barely.

The CA on the other hand...
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
12,785
Points
1,160
I work in a realm that is loaded with US kit, and a lot of that is so we can maintain FVEY status. We're lucky to be given that grace. I will leave it at that.

We do use a lot of US equipment in the name of interoperability. As we should. We share the largest land border and shared airspace in the world. We would be fools to not use the same or similar systems in mutual defence. The RCAF and RCN are starting to catch on to this, but barely.

The CA on the other hand...

1656450823407.png
 
Top