# "Canada First" Defence Procurement



## 102first_hussars (Jun 29, 2006)

DND/CF : Canada First - Defence Procurement :


This is a long waited breath of fresh air, it may not seem like much but its a step, were buying equipment at the rate of the new recruits come in so we dont get ahead of ourselves, but its such a good feeling, I have been in the military long enough to see the Liberals dissect our fighting ability before my eyes.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jun 29, 2006)

102first_hussars said:


> I have been in the military long enough to see the Liberals dissect our fighting ability before my eyes.


So have I.



102first_hussars said:


> This is a long waited breath of fresh air


Yes it is. It's the first real commitment to procurement since the Mulroney years. Like you said, it may not seem like much, but it's something. It's actually _something_.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Jun 30, 2006)

However what happened to the new Ice Breaker idea? I hear that now you guys are getting used ones


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jun 30, 2006)

I haven't heard or read a thing about it. To be honest with you, I couldn't really care less about ice breakers at this point. That was a purely political issue anyway, so I don't really put too much stock in it. There are so many more important things we (the Navy) need right now, like new destroyers, new oilers, and maybe better subs. I don't think we'll be seeing new subs anytime soon though. Not even with Harper.

These new transport ships are a good idea, and something we've always lacked. Same goes for the heavy lift transport planes. No more hitching a ride with the Americans, or hiring Ukrainians. 
We had heavy lift helicopters in the past, but they fell under the Liberal axe.

These things are all sorely needed and wonderful and everything, but there's really something we all need that's just as vital to a smoothly running military: an adequate supply system and support facilities. They've gone straight into the shItter over the last bunch of years, and must be addressed. It doesn't matter what kind of toys you have if you can't keep them in service where they belong.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Jun 30, 2006)

> No more hitching a ride with the Americans, or hiring Ukrainians



Yeah those damn Ukraniuns  we got enough of those down here, thats why they call it Edmonchuck

anyway im just concerned about all the branches of service, in order for us Mud Monkey's to do our jobs every branch needs to be tip-top


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 6, 2006)




----------



## 102first_hussars (Sep 7, 2006)

Thats an old picture, weve upgraded from catapaults to cannon balls now.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Sep 7, 2006)

there're hundreds of funny pictures like that around, a number were posted on here a while back and i wish i could find them again......


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 8, 2006)

Boy, I can't wait for the new gear to start rollin' in.  

I'll bet you think I'm joking, don't you?


----------



## Hunter368 (Sep 8, 2006)

lol Wayne don't you ever defend Canada's military ability? You always slam us. Yes we are weak but does that national pride ever kick in for you?


Are you proud of your sub? Of the Navy?


Just wondering b/c you slam us bad all the time. I know you are right but still. Some part of you must be proud to be in the navy or why would you be there.

Just wondering, not trying to start anything with you just wondering.

It was a funny pic by the way.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 8, 2006)

Hunter368 said:


> Are you proud of your sub? Of the Navy?


Of course, the Navy! Damn, almost forgot.  

Can't neglect the senior service.


----------



## Hunter368 (Sep 8, 2006)

Ahhhhh Wayne!!!! 



Senior service?????? lol


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 8, 2006)

Hunter368 said:


> Senior service?????? lol



We're the oldest (in general terms), proudest, and the best o' the bunch!


----------



## Hunter368 (Sep 8, 2006)

Nonskimmer said:


> We're the oldest (in general terms), proudest, and the best o' the bunch!





Careful Wayne its almost like you are insinuating you (navy) are good.... or that you are proud of the navy.......lol


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 8, 2006)

I _am_ proud to serve, and I always have been. That pride, unfortunately, isn't shared by our very own politicians or enough of the civil population, and it's been reflected in the state of the Armed Forces for too many years. I love this country and I'll continue to serve in any way I can, but we need to face facts. Besides, no one pokes fun at the military quite like it's members. It's an old tri-service tradition.


----------



## timshatz (Sep 8, 2006)

Didn't you guys have a sub, that you bought from somewhere in Europe, catch fire on the way to Canada? A couple of years back or something like that?


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 8, 2006)

Yup.


----------



## Maestro (Sep 8, 2006)

The HCMS Chicoutimi... As I heard of it.

I don't know what happened with the remains of the sub... May be they'll try to use the undamaged parts in the "newer" subs. If that floating cigare is still at sea, I think the Canadian Army will lose all the respect I had for it... And I didn't had much.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 8, 2006)

I think I'd be a little concerned too, if the Army was operating submarines. 

About your lack of respect for the military; is it because you find the state of things embarrassing, or because you have little respect for service personnel in general? I'm wondering if I should take it personally or not. 

By the way, it isn't HCMS, it's HMCS for Her Majesty's Canadian Ship/Submarine. The official French acronym is NCSM for "Navire canadien de Sa Majesté".


----------



## 102first_hussars (Sep 8, 2006)

> I think I'd be a little concerned too, if the Army was operating submarines.



And im a little concerned about the navy using helicopters right now


----------



## Maestro (Sep 8, 2006)

Nonskimmer said:


> About your lack of respect for the military; is it because you find the state of things embarrassing, or because you have little respect for service personnel in general? I'm wondering if I should take it personally or not.



Don't worry, I respect service personnel. But as I stated many times earlier, our equipment is so cheap, that if we were not allied to the US any crappy African militia could crush the Canadian Army.



Nonskimmer said:


> By the way, it isn't HCMS, it's HMCS for Her Majesty's Canadian Ship/Submarine. The official French acronym is NCSM for "Navire canadien de Sa Majesté".



Oh... I thought HCMS because "Her Canadian Majesty's Service" sounded better for me. But if you say it is HMCS then, I won't argue.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 8, 2006)

Maestro said:


> ...as I stated many times earlier, our equipment is so cheap, that if we were not allied to the US any crappy African militia could crush the Canadian Army.


Oh c'mon now, we're not _that_ bad. I wish people wouldn't think that every bit of equipment we have is crap. Admittedly a lot of it could really use replacing, but Jesus Christ...African militias? 

There _is_ a little something to be said for training and mindset too y'know. Believe it or not Maestro, we're not the worst in the world.


----------



## Hunter368 (Sep 8, 2006)

Nonskimmer said:


> Oh c'mon now, we're not _that_ bad. I wish people wouldn't think that every bit of equipment we have is crap. Admittedly a lot of it could really use replacing, but Jesus Christ...African militias?
> 
> There _is_ a little something to be said for training and mindset too y'know. Believe it or not Maestro, we're not the worst in the world.




Now thats what I am talking about!!!!!!!!!!! Wayne sticking up for our Military. Sweet


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 8, 2006)

Any chance I get. 

Unfortunately though, I don't get too many chances.


----------



## Maestro (Sep 9, 2006)

Nonskimmer said:


> Believe it or not Maestro, we're not the worst in the world.



You're right... France is worst.


----------



## timshatz (Sep 9, 2006)

Nonskimmer said:


> Oh c'mon now, we're not _that_ bad. I wish people wouldn't think that every bit of equipment we have is crap. Admittedly a lot of it could really use replacing, but Jesus Christ...African militias?
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 9, 2006)

Yes, they're still at "it". "It" never went away.


I am _not_ getting involved in yet another Québec separation thread. 
If someone wants to start one up in the Politics forum feel free, but not here please.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Sep 9, 2006)

Nonskimmer said:


> Yes, they're still at "it". "It" never went away.
> 
> 
> I am _not_ getting involved in yet another Québec separation thread.
> If someone wants to start one up in the Politics forum feel free, but not here please.




Well then lets talk about the SPA then


----------



## timshatz (Sep 9, 2006)

Sorry guys, didn't want to jump in on it. I think Canada is much better off together than with a seperated province. As they said about South Carolina when it succeeded from the US in the civil war, "It's too small for a country and too large for an insane asylum". 

Hope they snap out of it but doubt they will.


----------



## plan_D (Sep 10, 2006)

The French military is one of the most powerful in the world, on paper. But France had the largest army in Europe, which would translate to the most powerful, in 1940... 

I don't think it would be wise to compare Canada with countries like Great Britain, U.S.A, France and Russia. These countries all own and operate aircraft carriers which instantly makes them superior to the Canadian Navy in the object of projection of power. 

There's three things that create a power, the aircraft carrier, tank and air force. Canada has two out of the three, but not in large numbers and not up to date. It's not a super-power and doesn't claim to be. 

The Canadians are trained just as good as any other military in the world. The military equipment Canada operates is for small scale conflict and supporting arms. 

Basically, while this may sound stupid, you can could create a league of military power and there'd be several divisions where each status of power was placed. For example, U.S.A would be in League One (Super-Power) whereas Somalia would be in League Five (No National Military). Most Western Nations would be in League Two (Power), with effective armoured units and effective air force, but no real projection of naval power because they lack the aircraft carrier. I'd say Canada would be in League Two or Three ... I don't know the state of Canada's armoured force to put a solid idea, but ... the point of this pathetic rant is , Canada can't be compared to the Super-Powers ... but should be compared to the other powers in it's own "division" ... and it's superior to the African militias ... who don't own tanks, planes or heavy weapons.


----------



## Maestro (Sep 10, 2006)

plan_D said:


> Canada can't be compared to the Super-Powers ... but should be compared to the other powers in it's own "division" ...



Okay... So now we are between Ukraine and Iran... Big deal !


----------



## 102first_hussars (Sep 10, 2006)

Iran is way ahead of us, in terms of supply and manpower


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 11, 2006)

Like Plan_D indicated boys, we're hardly a superpower, and he's quite right of course. We should, however, be able to at least adequately defend our own borders by ourselves. _That's_ the key here, and we can't really even do that. Yet we want to be out there on the world stage with the big boys. Ridiculous under the circumstances. We need to concentrate our meager resources where they belong: home defence. As I've said in the past, I'm really surprised that we're still in NATO, given what we _don't_ bring to the party. World coalitions are beyond our scope. We haven't got the manpower or, as of yet, enough properly updated equipment.


----------



## timshatz (Sep 11, 2006)

Nonskimmer said:


> We should, however, be able to at least adequately defend our own borders by ourselves.



Gotta cut yourselves some slack there. We have something like 10 times the population and can't even defend one border south of us. And you guys have a lot more border to cover. 

The solution for Canada is to arm Polar bears. What they hell, they're out there anyway...


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 11, 2006)

timshatz said:


> The solution for Canada is to arm Polar bears. What they hell, they're out there anyway...


Yeah, we already tried that. It didn't work out too well.


----------



## timshatz (Sep 12, 2006)

Lol! Great!


----------



## pbfoot (Sep 12, 2006)

Well the only reason it didn't work was because the polar bear eats seals and supplying rations was tough and well you know how everyone feels about seal hunt


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 12, 2006)

Let's face it gents. If some fool of a nation spooled up on Canada, you would have 350 million pissed off friends below the border. I only wish our politicians could establish a more focused path towards our mutual defense based upon our common security needs. Our militaries are actually well synched up.


----------



## timshatz (Sep 12, 2006)

Most of it is political in nature. I have never heard anyone in the lower 48 badmouth Canada. It may happen further north, but the opinion far and away is that Canada is a good neighbor. No problems more than the odd pissing match for the last 200 years. 

Most countries in the world have a long history of fighting with their closest neighbors. Not the case on our common border.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Sep 13, 2006)

We only had a war that burnt down the presidents house, no bid deal


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 13, 2006)

102first_hussars said:


> We only had a war that burnt down the presidents house, no bid deal


No I believe the *British* could take credit for that....


----------



## Hunter368 (Sep 13, 2006)

timshatz said:


> Most of it is political in nature. I have never heard anyone in the lower 48 badmouth Canada. It may happen further north, but the opinion far and away is that Canada is a good neighbor. No problems more than the odd pissing match for the last 200 years.
> 
> Most countries in the world have a long history of fighting with their closest neighbors. Not the case on our common border.




Very true I think on both sides of the border that we both think very much the same way. Both countries and people are good, the only negitive feels I think either way (for the most part) are very very small funny things. Much like comments you would say about your brother or cousin. As a whole I think both countries should be very happy with the relationship, we both could have a heck of alot worst neighbor.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 13, 2006)

Hunter368 said:


> Much like comments you would say about your brother or cousin. As a whole I think both countries should be very happy with the relationship, we both could have a heck of alot worst neighbor.


VERY COOL!
This hit home to me when I used to live in Southern Ontario. Besides it seemed half the people there had brothers or cousins on each side of the border!!!


----------



## Hunter368 (Sep 13, 2006)

FLYBOYJ said:


> VERY COOL!
> This hit home to me when I used to live in Southern Ontario. Besides it seemed half the people there had brothers or cousins on each side of the border!!!



Exactly. The odd time we ***** about one thing or another about each other or poke fun at each other but it is much like family members do or old old friends do. I would not want any other neighbor more than USA next to Canada.

Having thee world super power beside you has its small negatives but all the positives waaaay out weight the few negatives.

IMHO


----------



## timshatz (Sep 13, 2006)

Am not sure about it but have heard that most of the world doesn't even bother differing between Americans and Canadians. Calls us all "North Americans". 

Probably not the same with the English speaking countries but I could see that being the case with other languaged or countries in Africa, Asia or the middle east. Kind of like "Europeans".


----------



## timshatz (Sep 13, 2006)

Hunter368 said:


> Exactly. The odd time we ***** about one thing or another about each other or poke fun at each other but it is much like family members do or old old friends do. I would not want any other neighbor more than USA next to Canada.
> 
> Having thee world super power beside you has its small negatives but all the positives waaaay out weight the few negatives.
> 
> IMHO



And all that was around 200 years ago. After the Revolution, a lot of the Tory Colonist went north to Canada to live. Not by choice in some cases but it was better than being hanged. The end of the Revolution brought more displacement in the Colonies than deaths. It was touch and go for both sides until after the War of 1812 (which a lot of Americans saw as an opportunity to invade Canada-which is where the small American Army was when the British burned Washington) when it kind of settled down. Things got testy again when the boundries were being set (almost had a fight out on an island near Vancouver right before the American Civil War) but once the borders were set, nobody seemed to bother with it again. No tossing this province or that state back and forth. 

For a long time, it was the longest non-fortified border in the world. Still might be.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Sep 14, 2006)

FLYBOYJ said:


> No I believe the *British* could take credit for that....



Cant hear you *alalalalalalaala*


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 18, 2006)

Sheila: Times have changed.
Our kids are getting worse.
They won't obey their parents;
They just want to fart and curse!

Sharon: Should we blame the government?
Liane: Or blame society?
Randy, Gerald, Stuart: Or should we blame the images on TV?

Sheila: NO! Blame Canada!
All: Blame Canada!
Sheila: With all their beady little eyes
And flappin' heads so full o' lies!

All: Blame Canada!
Blame Canada!
Sheila: We need to form a full assault!
All: It's Canada's fault!

Sharon: Don't blame me
For my son Stan.
He saw the darned cartoon
And now he's off to join the Klan!

Liane: And my boy Eric once
Had my picture on his shelf,
But now when I see him he tells me to **** myself.

Sheila: Well? Blame Canada!
All: Blame Canada!
Sheila: It seems that everything's gone wrong
Since Canada came along!

All: Blame Canada!
Blame Canada!
Man: They're not even a real country anyway!

Ms. McCormick: My son could've been a doctor or a lawyer, rich and true.
Instead he burned up like a piggy on a barbecue.
Men: Should we blame the matches?
Man: Should we blame the fire?
All: Or the doctors who allowed him to expire?
Sheila: Heck, no!

All: Blame Canada!
Blame Canada!
Sheila: With all their hockey hullabaloo
Liane: And that *****, Anne Murray, too.

All: [slowing] Blame Canada!
Shame on Canada!

For the
[normal] Smut we must stop, the trash we must smash.
The laughter and fun must all be undone.
We must blame them and cause a fuss
Before somebody thinks of blaming
Us!


----------



## timshatz (Sep 19, 2006)

Can we get 'em to say "about" a few times...


----------



## pbfoot (Sep 19, 2006)

only if I can get you to say U hauls


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 20, 2006)

C'mon PB. It's "Use Guys". No what I'm sayin'?


----------



## timshatz (Sep 21, 2006)

Thought it was "Use Guys, Eh"?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 21, 2006)

102first_hussars said:


> Cant hear you *alalalalalalaala*


NO!


----------



## Hunter368 (Sep 21, 2006)




----------



## 102first_hussars (Sep 23, 2006)

Thanks for copying my sig Hunter


----------



## Hunter368 (Sep 23, 2006)

102first_hussars said:


> Thanks for copying my sig Hunter




What??? Other than being a RCAF P-51 nothing is the same about it. Not even close to the same. Mine is from my home town, Winnipeg. Notice the "402 Winnipeg Bears", thats where I live. You own the rights for all RCAF planes or what? lol


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 23, 2006)

Hunter368 said:


> ...a RCAF P-51...


Don't you mean a Mustang Mk.IV? 

Great sig by the way.


----------



## Hunter368 (Sep 23, 2006)

Nonskimmer said:


> Don't you mean a Mustang Mk.IV?
> 
> Great sig by the way.




 


Thanks Wayne, I tired for a home town feel. I tired for the more style / classic feeling vs the glitz pretty sigs (mostly b/c I can't do the glitz pretty sig  )


----------



## pbfoot (Feb 2, 2007)

We jumped ahead of a few people as we orderd the 4 C17's today with the first 2 deliveries slated for fall 2007 the photo for you hunter


----------



## Bernhart (Feb 2, 2007)

you do google earth for halifax harbour and you can see our sub in dry dock


----------



## Nonskimmer (Feb 2, 2007)

That same image of the harbour has been on Google Earth for months. I know, I've checked back every now and then. Everything is in exactly the same position in the image as it was five months ago.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Feb 12, 2007)

Its huge!!!!!!, and i thought Vancouver Harbour was big


----------

