[Newsbot]

Title: Liberals to spend extra $13.9B by 2026-27 on defence, mostly after 2019 election | CTV News
Category: Military
Posted By: uwish
Date: 2017-06-07 13:40:30
Canadian

[Freakinoldguy]

Except for the timeline which is ridiculous and obviously politically driven, this is a ray of hope. Especially, if they actually carried through with it but, until I see the money being spent rather than just used as political fodder I remain highly skeptical especially after living through numerous previous "white papers" on defense spending which were long on promises and extremely short on equipment.

[Jabberwalker]

... sounds a lot like the 2008 Defence paper. If "someone" hadn't dropped the ball, we'd be talking about different things a decade later than the same 15 replacement Frigate/Destroyers and fighter aircraft.

[Coach85]

Nothing from this will come to fruition. Let's not kid ourselves.

[CDN_PATRIOT]

It's cute that Trudeau an Sajjan think they'll be in power after 2019. This is just anouther round of BS that equates to nothing but the proverbial carrot on a stick.

-J.

[ShepherdsDog]

Who is there to challenge Tater Tot? Scheer is just a place holder until someone relevant comes along. Conservatives failed to elect a challenger. We're stuck with Sir Selfie.....unfortunately.

[housewife]

Well isn't that just gloomy. I can't decide which is worse the idea that none of spending will happen or him winning the next election

[martin14]

Coach85 Coach85:

Nothing from this will come to fruition. Let's not kid ourselves.

I agree, this smells of too much BS. Someone has found a way to steal a lot of money
from the trough.

[Hyack]

That $13.9B is a very small drop in a very, very large bucket, as for the time frame, it has all the earmarks of being nothing more than an election promise.....Canada desperately needs replacements for our aging fleet of frigates, destroyers and oilers/replenishment ships not to mention the need for a decent fleet of ICE breakers! It's going to require a very large block of salt to go along with these promises....

[Canadian_Mind]

Hyack Hyack:

That $13.9B is a very small drop in a very, very large bucket, as for the time frame, it has all the earmarks of being nothing more than an election promise.....Canada desperately needs replacements for our aging fleet of frigates, destroyers and oilers/replenishment ships not to mention the need for a decent fleet of ICE breakers! It's going to require a very large block of salt to go along with these promises....

Going by GDP ratio, it will bring us from .95% to around 1.24% by 2027. But that is not nearly the correction we need. I would like to see a .1% rate increase per year, to 2% by 2027, NOT including desparately needed one time capital costs that will amount to 100 Billion over those 10 years.

[BartSimpson]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Hyack Hyack:

That $13.9B is a very small drop in a very, very large bucket, as for the time frame, it has all the earmarks of being nothing more than an election promise.....Canada desperately needs replacements for our aging fleet of frigates, destroyers and oilers/replenishment ships not to mention the need for a decent fleet of ICE breakers! It's going to require a very large block of salt to go along with these promises....

Going by GDP ratio, it will bring us from .95% to around 1.24% by 2027. But that is not nearly the correction we need. I would like to see a .1% rate increase per year, to 2% by 2027, NOT including desparately needed one time capital costs that will amount to 100 Billion over those 10 years.

Meaning that President Trump is right about Canada and other NATO countries failing to make their 2% GDP defense commitments.

[herbie]

No. Meaning that in 10 years we still won't be spending what he demands. A slap in the face, but I'm sure Trumpoids will claim it as some sort of success.

[Coach85]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Meaning that President Trump is right about Canada and other NATO countries failing to make their 2% GDP defense commitments.

We should just pull out of any commitments we had. So much easier that way.

[Nuggie77]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Hyack Hyack:

That $13.9B is a very small drop in a very, very large bucket, as for the time frame, it has all the earmarks of being nothing more than an election promise.....Canada desperately needs replacements for our aging fleet of frigates, destroyers and oilers/replenishment ships not to mention the need for a decent fleet of ICE breakers! It's going to require a very large block of salt to go along with these promises....

Going by GDP ratio, it will bring us from .95% to around 1.24% by 2027. But that is not nearly the correction we need. I would like to see a .1% rate increase per year, to 2% by 2027, NOT including desparately needed one time capital costs that will amount to 100 Billion over those 10 years.

Meaning that President Trump is right about Canada and other NATO countries failing to make their 2% GDP defense commitments.

Who gives a shit what Trump says.

[martin14]

herbie herbie:

No. Meaning that in 10 years we still won't be spending what he demands. A slap in the face, but I'm sure Trumpoids will claim it as some sort of success.

It's not Trump you idiot.

2% NATO spending was agreed back in 2006.



We haven't spent 2% on the military since the 90's, maybe.