Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fatty
Canada's foreign policy leaves no point for nuclear boats. Our submarines are mainly used for fishery and sovereignty patrols, things for which a nuclear boat would be expensive overkill.
A white paper was put forth in 1987 which did suggest the purchase of 10-12 nuclear subs. This paper was not very forward-thinking IIRC and took an archaic [even for that time] cold war adversarial stance. Needless to say the subs didn't get the green light.
To me, the cost of procurement, training, construction of facilities, and hiring of support staff outweighs the advantage of being able to piddle around underwater in the Persian Gulf all day doing interdictions. Our world-class FFHs already serve in that role impeccably.
|
I understand the limitations of current popular support for the military
but its my subjective opinion that more force capability is necessary
whether or not it would include SSN's vs SSk's
the new york city police dept has more personell and could make a good
argument for some armour.
with forces strength under 70,000 now all branches I feel there are smaller less developed nations that are able and willing to support a more capable soveriegnty force. as far as it goes the trouble people have with the economics of it is that they think of the military as a pricey burden on the
economy not an actual part of it. the truth is that the value of a dollar isnt just based on the resources of country and that countries ability to develop and utilize those resources the strength of a dollar is also based on the security of that country in those capacities and the investment in the military industrial complex is just that an investment not a burden.
to my mind force levels for Canada should be pushed up to 100.000 standing reg forces + 150,000 reservists all branches minimum.
(oops someone got me started.)
MM