I can understand Industry mumbling and fumbling. Canadian industry is generally not innovative in this area nor are they stockpiling military hardware. However, if the government indicates 'widgets are apriority for the Cdn Army then many companies will go out to widget makers worldwide and align themselves with a widget-maker. Only then will they then start lobbying the government or submit a reply to a government inquiry saying that they have the best widget in the world.
“I get that many in Ottawa will be up in arms about, say, paying a military lawyer more than a Department of Justice lawyer.”
Of course (and I’m preaching to the choir), the DoJ lawyer isn’t going to be deployed to Kandahar at zero notice…or posted… or forbidden from having a public political opinion, or….
This discussion is rather opaque in the absence of some theory of what Canadian defence is supposed to defend against. Taking the term literally, the most pressing requirement would appear to be a minefield running the length of the 49th parallel, patrolled by drones.
It is very sad to hear that the F35 program may proceed intact. This is throwing good money after bad. I'm no defense expert but if the US is going to stalk Canada, why would we cosy up to them? If they can see our intel on their screens, what value do we place on trust? It appears that there is no coordinated architecture of how to make defense great again. Is there a repository of information on defense architecture, policy, programs, and personnel that a voter could digest? Do we have the strength to make a target of 5%, and what are the repercussions of not making 5%? The latter is what keeps me up at night.
I can understand Industry mumbling and fumbling. Canadian industry is generally not innovative in this area nor are they stockpiling military hardware. However, if the government indicates 'widgets are apriority for the Cdn Army then many companies will go out to widget makers worldwide and align themselves with a widget-maker. Only then will they then start lobbying the government or submit a reply to a government inquiry saying that they have the best widget in the world.
“I get that many in Ottawa will be up in arms about, say, paying a military lawyer more than a Department of Justice lawyer.”
Of course (and I’m preaching to the choir), the DoJ lawyer isn’t going to be deployed to Kandahar at zero notice…or posted… or forbidden from having a public political opinion, or….
This discussion is rather opaque in the absence of some theory of what Canadian defence is supposed to defend against. Taking the term literally, the most pressing requirement would appear to be a minefield running the length of the 49th parallel, patrolled by drones.
It is very sad to hear that the F35 program may proceed intact. This is throwing good money after bad. I'm no defense expert but if the US is going to stalk Canada, why would we cosy up to them? If they can see our intel on their screens, what value do we place on trust? It appears that there is no coordinated architecture of how to make defense great again. Is there a repository of information on defense architecture, policy, programs, and personnel that a voter could digest? Do we have the strength to make a target of 5%, and what are the repercussions of not making 5%? The latter is what keeps me up at night.