NATO
- Thread starter gf0012-aust
- Start date
France and Germany are meeting today to "discuss" the election. And not the governments in general, but the ministers of defense in particular.
SolarisKenzo
Well-Known Member
Eu Parliament is now auditioning the new defence commisioner Andrius Kubilius.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Junior is probably stocking up on toilet paper. The only positive, from a Canadian perspective, is the Liberal party must finally realize junior has to go. The Trump-Junior relationship is toxic.
I don't disagree with that sentiment. It won't be long however before P.P finds himself in the same situation as he won't commit to meeting the NATO spending targets either, Oh Canada.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Don’t have a lot of expectations for P.P. but he will be better than junior for no other reason than junior has set the bar at zero. As for 2% GDP on defence, a tough sell to the electorate but doable if Trump threatens trade to force the issue. There is also the possibility Trump follows through with his tariffs which will damage our economy to the point where defence spending goes down.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Another article suggesting the obvious but it fails to mention a couple of key points. First, Canada’s economic situation sucks. Massive cuts will be needed on junior’s questionable socialist programs, politically difficult, even for P.P. should he become PM. Who can realistically deliver the kit we need fast enough to get to 2%. State-of-Art missiles, F-35s, P-8s, and frigates take time. SKorean SSKs, probably require even more time. Hopefully we don’t end up buying useless and/or unnecessary kit in response to trade threats by Trump in order to reach 2%.
According to the PBO, spending would have to rise substantially, but is doable while still staying within the current government's debt-to-ratio goals. So, it can be done, if the will is there. The current stated goal is to get to 2% by 2032. Realistically, I can't see how we could ramp up defence spending much faster given the current constraints around procurement.
I think it is also important to counter the narrative that Canada is somehow not contributing to collective defence that some on this forum seem to delight in doing. Here is a list of current operations:
www.canada.ca
The best bang for the buck, given we can't buy stuff fast enough, is to boost the O&M budget to increase training, and address maintenance and spare parts shortages. However, that would still be nowhere enough to get us to 2% in the short term.
I think it is also important to counter the narrative that Canada is somehow not contributing to collective defence that some on this forum seem to delight in doing. Here is a list of current operations:
Current Operations list - Canada.ca
Discover where the Canadian Armed Forces are currently deployed on operations in Canada, North America and around the world.
The best bang for the buck, given we can't buy stuff fast enough, is to boost the O&M budget to increase training, and address maintenance and spare parts shortages. However, that would still be nowhere enough to get us to 2% in the short term.
Last edited:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
GDP predictions may well have been low-balled for ONSAF but with Trump's tariff threats, the numbers may actually become more realistic if he follows through. Future interest rates on our debt, WTF knows but it will likely become an even bigger expenditure in the budget. While maintenance and spares are very important, don't really want to see this being applied to old close to obsolete kit. Better to spend money on new infrastructure for future new kit needed for the Arctic .
Absolutely - I don't disagree. My comment was in light of getting to 2% rapidly. Infrastructure takes time.