DFAIT logo partnership The logo for the by design elab, an independent research development and production think tank specializing in online forums for policy development, incubated in 1997 at the McLuhan Program at the University of Toronto
DFAIT Home Site Map Help Policies Partners Feedback Netcast Français
 
Welcome
Message from the Minister
Dialogue Paper
Answer Questions
View Answers
Discussion Forum
 

The Three Pillars

Thank you for participating in the Dialogue on Foreign Policy. The interactive web site is now closed. The Minister's report will appear on this web site once it is released.

This Forum is bilingual, and participants post messages in their language of choice.

Military Funding???

Contributor: navieboy

Date: 2003-02-04 00:57:56


Ok, simple question for all of you out there, and yes, I am sure you have all heard it before, but what is goiong on with our military budget??? In the last 5 years alone, on average (every year) we have decreased our military spending by 1.55%. Granted this number doesn't seem like a lot, however, over the years, it adds up. For example, in the year 1993, Canada spent $10.3 billion (USD); however, in 1998, Canada spent only $7.77 billion (USD). These figures may seem large and adequate for our military, yet with the global tensions, such as Iraq and Terrorism, military spending shouldn't be cut... I feel it should be increased. And with inflation, how can our government possibly justify cutting DND spending??? I am still looking for an answer. And then, our CF is crying for people to join, but with what incentives? Poor pay? No guarantee of deployment due to lack of funds? Hello!!! is it not time for the Canadian people to finally speak out? We rely too much on the Americans for support - but one day that support will not be there, and as it stands, it seems to me that we are losing US support - and the sad part, the CF can not defend themselves on home land... how are we expected to defend ourselves abroad???

Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: virgio

Date: 2003-02-05 23:01:27


Can you please explain why we need to increase military funding? That's what I don't understand. How is a military going to stop terrorism? The US has the largest/best-funded military in the world and that didn't stop a terrorist attack. So it is purely for peacekeeping reasons?

Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: cfallon

Date: 2003-02-06 13:44:31


Military Funding Increases would allow us to:

1) Continue to push frontiers of science (e.g., materials engineering as an example)

2) Patrol the Northwest Passage which will open up thanks to all the minivans and SUVs guzzling gas.

3) Develop an expanded JTF2 - which will be an extremely effective counter-terrorism unit.

4) Allow Canada to contribute to peacekeeping in the manner in which it pretends to be contributing.

5) Increase our weight in international affairs to push our agenda of peace, liberty and justice.

Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: logger

Date: 2003-02-13 15:11:57


The greatest threat to the United States is outlaw nations that possess weapons of mass destruction. These regimes could use such weapons for blackmail, terror, and mass murder. They could also give or sell those weapons to terrorist allies who would use them without the least bit of hesitation. Saddam Hussein has chemical and biological weapons and is harboring members of al Qaeda. If force becomes necessary to secure the U.S., and to keep the peace, America will act deliberately, America will act decisively, and America will act victoriously with the world's greatest military. The terrorists brought this war to us, now we're taking it back to them. This enemy reaches across oceans; it targets the innocent. There are no rules of war for these cold-blooded killers.
Unlike the cowardly French.... America will act!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: jimlyn

Date: 2003-04-25 07:52:50







get your facts right.Iraq has no WMD's and the French are not cowards,rather the were brave to stand up to nimble minded hawks who not only threatened Iraq but any one who posses WMD in order to protect themselves against the nation who has them all.

Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: cell

Date: 2003-02-08 15:36:31


The reason that it is important to increse military funding is that:
1) It provides tax payers (you and me) a leg to stand on when negotiating with large multinationals accumulating their own armies.
2) It allows for research into highly technical areas that otherwise would not receive funding based on their unapproachability to the common invividual.
3) Increased military funding creates a sense of belonging to a global community that is well armed and holds credence in military power as a basis for negotiation.
4) Increased military funding creates scientific discovering that are useful for everyday consumers (the Internet for instance)
5) Increased military funding protects Canadians from becoming indebted to their creditors, enabling our nation to achieve stability in times when our economy may not be bourgeoning.
y-wis there are indeed others, as wel as valuable counter points.

Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: Chris_Fleming

Date: 2003-02-06 02:49:19


I agree intirely. If you look at millitary and diplomatic alliances historically very few last longer than a hundred years. Most alliances rareley last twenty years. I believe it is time for Canada to beef up it's military not only to "protect ourselves from the Yankee devils" but to ensure our place in the world as not only a diplomatic and economic power but as a military power as well. Agreed this might cut into other social programs but I believe it neccesary due to consistant military cutbacks.

Most canadians believe we do not have a need for a strong military because we can rely on multilateralism and diplomacy to avoid confrontation. This might be true for the present but what about the future of the world order? Believing that states will very soon resolve conflicts through international organizations or avoid them due to economic interdependance is a fallacy of modern political thinking. It's more a theory than practice. So by estabolishing a strong economy, (much like we have), accompanied by a strong military we will give ourselves a stronger voice as a much needed necessity in the coming world order.

Many poeple would then ask, "what is it about the current world order that makes me so pesimistic?". It's not that the UN is inept, much like it's predecessor the league of nations. My opinion is much on the contrary. I feel that the UN is a powerful political and economic force but I believe it is guided by selfish states making it inefficient as a governing body. Furthermore, other international organizatios such as the IMF also finction according to certain state's policies, especially concerning the USA.

In conclusion Canada needs a stronger military to assert itself in a future that is both uncertain and anarchic, (in the realist's definition of the word). I would have loved to give support for my arguments but this would have made my comment far to long when I'm only trying to convey an opinion. To hear more detailed arguments or to comment directly to me please contact me.

Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: surrealist

Date: 2003-03-22 11:16:29


With the US claim to itself the role of supercop, we don't even need to have a military anymore. Outside China and Russia, there aren't many countries that have the will to face the greatest threat to human kind, the USA. They already have offices of FBI and CIA in Toronto and Vancouver and I don't know where else. Chretien play the perception that he is tough with the US, but being Paul Demarais front men, he is bound to be doing things to help the USA, just like canadian governemnt did in the Vietnam war. See Victor Levant Quiet complicity.
Look at this quote from a Ubersite (chat site) in the internet:
Submitted by [email protected] at 2002-08-23 14:54:41
Ranking: 1
the only reason why the united states lets canada remain a country is because we haven't decided to expand north...yet."
As you can see, even US citizens admit that we existe as a nation because there is no decision yet made to invade. This is not the first time I see this discussions.
What is the point of having an army, if the greatest "possible invader" the USA has already:
1-bought out all our manufacturing sector,
2-all our energy concerns are in their hands,
3-agreements like NAFTA, that has made more and more difficult to get out of it, because canadian business elite has intertwined financial interests with the USA financial elite and the people in our soil are just "high paid minions", in the opinion of this same elite,
4- "bought" the canadian elite who has never had allegiance to anything but profit, even when they do philantropy and other "social responsible acts".
Money on the military is a waste. Canadian military is a "virtual reality" military. A make pretend group of people that is costing us too much money for the "pretending function that they fulfill".
In an order hand I am of the opinion, that the real way to deal with the conumdrum we find ourselves in is to have a very strong peace culture. In order to obliterate any claims of the US to our territories, we need to make our culture very distinct from the US culture. We need to define and implement conflict resolutions techniques in every step of our society relations. Peaceful means to create co-operation and nurture os plans to make possible for people to enjoy life, feel respect and dignity. One can only do that if one has a stake in the society.
The first act of peace is to honestly create a truth commission to restore the faith and hope in our First Nations and give them their rightful ownership to land and where possible and settle their claims in fairness and good faith. Then institue self governance in the traditional way that they are used to and not in an imposed way. Following protocol, listening to the people in the reservations and in urban areas. Make all persons that claim and can prove they are aboriginals, to hold their rights to nationahood. With DNA test this can be ascertained.
We cannot talk about foreign policy without resolving the first and foremost "foreign policy issues we have: First Nation Sovereigty issues, problem created by Britain".
Isn't it "funny" the Iraq problem has also been created by Britain.
And as far as the canadian army is concerned, put them to do civilian duties, while they pretend to be an army.

Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: cougyr

Date: 2003-03-22 18:15:26


Even though I believe that Canada should increase military funding, I hesitate. Every time the military gets its hands on spare funds, they blow it on useless toys like those submarines. Why does Canada need subs?

Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: codc01

Date: 2003-03-23 10:20:51


I also think Canada needs increased military funding... I think we should invest in having a very good navy (I'm quite impressed that our Navy is so modern... I never believed it possible for Canada!), as well as in very modern ground troops (with very modern equipment) so that we need less people do to the same job. I don't understand why we don't have drones... I'm sure they cost less money than having manned planes(?)....

As for the submarines, this is my personal opinion, but it may be for patrolling Northern Canada, isn't it easier for submarines than boats??

Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: fatmomma

Date: 2003-03-23 17:39:34


I do believe Canada needs a bigger military. Not only for national security but also in time of natural disasters. We lost a large portion of our military on the west coast. Vancouver and Vancouver Island are on a fault line. If we were to have a large earthquake; a well trained military would be our best hope. We, also, have a large coastland to be protected.

Reply to this message

Military Funding???

Contributor: cfallon

Date: 2003-03-24 13:47:06


The good part of not funding our military is that when we make poll-driven decisions, we are so irrelevent that no one notices.

Reply to this message