Warfare is fast becoming more lethal and decisive. Modern armies must be able to respond to those changes as quickly as they occur. That cannot occur in an organization that is continually starved for funding like the Canadian Armed Forces is today.
The Trudeau woke the best that chinese money can buy.
3rd November 2023 at 10:31 am
Michael F
What does this even mean? Aside from a baseless attack on the current government.
3rd November 2023 at 2:38 pm
A. Chezzi
“More effort must be spent on creating a much more resilient industrial base that has the capacity to ramp up production to meet the needs of modern war. This requires significant front-end investment by governments in capacity building as no private firm is willing to spend money in that fashion without any guarantee of a return.”
What a sad commentary! One would think and hope that in this century more time, effort, and money would be spent on developing connections and relationships between people. War produces war. What we need in our schools is a better education which helps the future generations to realize that we are all connected. We all share the same hopes and aspirations for a better life. As nations, we have the capability to develop a better world but it means giving up our old world view of nationalism, competition, technological superiority, all the elements which drive the capitalist world and the world of dictators who strive for personal power and wealth. We have the ability but not the will power to eradicate poverty, ignorance, poor health and environmental disasters. Instead of building lethal capabilities, we need to be building life giving relationships.
Pope Francis has issued an encyclical, Laudate Deum, which the western world will never embrace because it calls for a change in our world view. He says that we suffer from “relational amnesia”. He urges us to close the gap between what is and what can. He says our house is on fire but sadly a prophet is scorned, sneered, and rejected by those whom he is addressing.
Why do we, human beings, always have to face the brink of destruction before we change?
3rd November 2023 at 8:35 am
Rob Tyrrell
TLDR: A twist on the well known Latin saying…“If You Want Peace, Prepare For War, While Investing In Peace.”
Yes, another cheeky agreement.
3rd November 2023 at 9:30 am
Rob Tyrrell
TLDR: Active battlefields spur innovation. As such, Canada should explicitly adapt to these new realities and spend more resources on our military capability, including the equipment supply chain.
Although this response is cheeky, I agree with the conclusions.
3rd November 2023 at 8:03 am
Paul Haliburton
Once, long before 911, I asked the Finnish Ambassador why his neutral country had such heavy security at his embassy in Ottawa and why his country maintained such formidable armed forces. His answer was quite simple, “We require the capacity to defend ourselves if we wish to remain neutral”.
3rd November 2023 at 3:55 pm
MP Martin
When an important economic sector is based on war machines industries, there is definitely something deranged in people’s head. They go as far as producing wars when there is none, to insure continuity in there bottom line. We keep repeating one war after another, creating them if there is too much peace. Too bad these wars do not happen on the front porch of this tycoons. That might change their mind.
3rd November 2023 at 12:47 pm
Steve
The war also shows an old technology that the Canadian army is not allowed to use remains remarkably effective: mines. Our enemies will use mines, we should reconsider.
3rd November 2023 at 1:37 pm
Michael F
If the war in Ukraine has taught us anything it is that drones and unmanned weapons are the future. Having large, expensive armed forces and conventional weapons will become a thing of the past. Cybe warfare, drones and robots will replace soldiers, tanks, ships and fighters. Conventional hot wars will become rare.
3rd November 2023 at 12:12 pm
Rob Tyrrell
Regardless of the technology on the battlefield, engagement in warfare is ultimately achieving objectives by causing your opponent as much pain and destruction as possible until they are effectively destroyed or capitulate.
The technology may change but ‘pain and destruction’ will remain as long as warfare remains. I’m not sure how advanced battlefield technology in itself reduces the likelihood of hot wars, with the exception of wars involving mutually assured destruction technologies.
Rather, mutual economic well-being achieved through reliable and low-friction international trade has made large scale conventional hot wars rare.
3rd November 2023 at 1:41 pm
Michael F
By less hot wars I mean the majority of conflicts in the past few decades have been with or ended up being with irregular forces. Inflicting ‘pain and destruction’ in the future may involve more cutting off the eyes and ears of an opponent and attacking them in cyberspace.
Comments (11)
The Trudeau woke the best that chinese money can buy.
What does this even mean? Aside from a baseless attack on the current government.
“More effort must be spent on creating a much more resilient industrial base that has the capacity to ramp up production to meet the needs of modern war. This requires significant front-end investment by governments in capacity building as no private firm is willing to spend money in that fashion without any guarantee of a return.”
What a sad commentary! One would think and hope that in this century more time, effort, and money would be spent on developing connections and relationships between people. War produces war. What we need in our schools is a better education which helps the future generations to realize that we are all connected. We all share the same hopes and aspirations for a better life. As nations, we have the capability to develop a better world but it means giving up our old world view of nationalism, competition, technological superiority, all the elements which drive the capitalist world and the world of dictators who strive for personal power and wealth. We have the ability but not the will power to eradicate poverty, ignorance, poor health and environmental disasters. Instead of building lethal capabilities, we need to be building life giving relationships.
Pope Francis has issued an encyclical, Laudate Deum, which the western world will never embrace because it calls for a change in our world view. He says that we suffer from “relational amnesia”. He urges us to close the gap between what is and what can. He says our house is on fire but sadly a prophet is scorned, sneered, and rejected by those whom he is addressing.
Why do we, human beings, always have to face the brink of destruction before we change?
TLDR: A twist on the well known Latin saying…“If You Want Peace, Prepare For War, While Investing In Peace.”
Yes, another cheeky agreement.
TLDR: Active battlefields spur innovation. As such, Canada should explicitly adapt to these new realities and spend more resources on our military capability, including the equipment supply chain.
Although this response is cheeky, I agree with the conclusions.
Once, long before 911, I asked the Finnish Ambassador why his neutral country had such heavy security at his embassy in Ottawa and why his country maintained such formidable armed forces. His answer was quite simple, “We require the capacity to defend ourselves if we wish to remain neutral”.
When an important economic sector is based on war machines industries, there is definitely something deranged in people’s head. They go as far as producing wars when there is none, to insure continuity in there bottom line. We keep repeating one war after another, creating them if there is too much peace. Too bad these wars do not happen on the front porch of this tycoons. That might change their mind.
The war also shows an old technology that the Canadian army is not allowed to use remains remarkably effective: mines. Our enemies will use mines, we should reconsider.
If the war in Ukraine has taught us anything it is that drones and unmanned weapons are the future. Having large, expensive armed forces and conventional weapons will become a thing of the past. Cybe warfare, drones and robots will replace soldiers, tanks, ships and fighters. Conventional hot wars will become rare.
Regardless of the technology on the battlefield, engagement in warfare is ultimately achieving objectives by causing your opponent as much pain and destruction as possible until they are effectively destroyed or capitulate.
The technology may change but ‘pain and destruction’ will remain as long as warfare remains. I’m not sure how advanced battlefield technology in itself reduces the likelihood of hot wars, with the exception of wars involving mutually assured destruction technologies.
Rather, mutual economic well-being achieved through reliable and low-friction international trade has made large scale conventional hot wars rare.
By less hot wars I mean the majority of conflicts in the past few decades have been with or ended up being with irregular forces. Inflicting ‘pain and destruction’ in the future may involve more cutting off the eyes and ears of an opponent and attacking them in cyberspace.