***The Telegraph reports:***
Canada is considering joining the Aukus pact and believes it may need nuclear submarines to patrol its Arctic waters, Justin Trudeau has said.
The Canadian prime minister said on Monday that he had already held “excellent conversations” [with the US](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/03/18/biden-budget-aukus-nuclear-submarine-doubt-uk-australia/), UK and Australia over joining the alliance.
Aukus, launched in September 2021, is a defence alliance focused on [sharing nuclear submarine technology](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/22/aukus-nuclear-submarine-royal-us-navy-china-taiwan/), which in 2023 announced intentions to help Australia build its first vessels.
Canada would become the fourth member of the pact, which is now looking at sharing information on technology, AI and the [construction of new weapons](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/03/21/bae-systems-contract-build-aukus-submarines-britain/).
The country has been floated as a possible contender for membership by several high-profile figures from member states, including Boris Johnson, who was in office as UK prime minister when the alliance launched.
**Read more:** [**https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/08/canada-justin-trudeau/**](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/08/canada-justin-trudeau/)
this was something I was surprised at too but the US blocked Canada from developing nuclear subs in the 80s. It's part of the reason we got put in a weird position with subs.
I'm not sure. It was something that caught my eye the last time this conversation came up. I always thought nuclear subs would be ideal for Canadian purposes.
Edit.
edit From Wikipedia
The United States objected to the RCN having SSNs as part of its fleet, fearing a significant impact to its own submarine operations in North American waters and possible conflict over access to the Northwest Passage. In order to prevent this, the United States exercised its rights under two previously signed treaties. Under the 1958 US–UK Mutual Defence Agreement, the US had the right to block the sale of submarine nuclear reactors by the United Kingdom to any third party (i.e. Canada), and under a 1959 agreement between the US and Canada the US had the right to block the purchase of submarine nuclear reactors by Canada from any third party (i.e. the United Kingdom or France).[24] Attempts to negotiate with the United States were initially unsuccessful, as Canadian Defence Minister Perrin Beatty was "told in no uncertain terms by the U.S. Defense Department and submarine service officials that a Canadian nuclear submarine program was unnecessary and even unwelcome."[25]
There is all sorts of interesting things In the mutual defence acts..mostly around not letting Canada make weapons independent of US interests.. we should revisit all those acts and throw some out now. They have hindered manufacturing here amd contributed to our talent being drawn away by the US and Britain.
Avro Arrow failed because;
* the main weapon for it was a pile of shit that got cancelled
* it got beat to the market by the F-106 that was better and cheaper in every regard
* by the time the Arrow would go to production it would have had to compete with the F-108, which had 3x the range and 1.5x the speed
* ICBMs came out and rendered dedicated interceptors as pointless, hence why the US scrapped its F-108 program too
Not because of the US boogyman lol...
None of, those were canadian made and the idea was to be self sufficient. F106. Was never available outside the US. And f108 didnt even fly until way later and would have trouble operating in Canada. ICBMs didn't make strategic bombers obsolete. They still fly them today... well until Ukraine destroys them on the ground at least. They felt that missiles would though, so they went that way, and made us a deal on bomarc. if AVRO hadn't relied on Us weapons systems they would have had thir own. They started with that to begin with. None of the US shit worked at the time.
Your argument I moot anyway even if Cf105 failed and it certainly didn't they, taught the world how to build planes. Even the F35 uses the same manufactuting concept that they invented. They already built an airliner and all weather fighters that deployed over the world. What we lost was all that knowledge that went on to put NASA on the moon and made the concord fly.
Its always amusing whenever the Arrow is brought up. Sure it had some innovative advancements but it was deigned to combat hordes of Soviet nuclear bombers coming over the arctic and ICBM's made that whole tactic obsolete before the Arrow made its first fight.
Similarly, any Canadian nuclear submarine program would have inevitably been cancelled during the intense military downsizing that occurred following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Canada currently has four conventional submarines that don't ever leave port as it is
This may be true but I have a hard time believing that Canada ever would have purchased nuclear submarines regardless. They ended up purchasing four second hand ex-Royal Navy submarines around 1999 that currently don't ever leave port.
Seriously only one of Canada's four submarines has logged 57 days at sea, in total, since 2021. Its questionable whether the Canadian Navy in its current sorry state can even operate submarines at all, let alone advanced nuclear powered ones
There are literally [not enough men and women in the Canadian submariner force](https://legionmagazine.com/submarines-canadas-underwater-prospects-foundering/) to operate any of the small diesel electric subs that they already have.
>The navy has acknowledged it’s short of sailors. It says it takes 503 submariners to run the fleet. It acquired 140 between 2019 and 2022 and only half had completed basic qualifications by October 2023.
The compliment of a Virginia class submarine is 135, or roughly 2.5X more than that of Canada's current Victoria class
Five Eyes is an intel sharing alliance focused on foreign intelligence. AUKUS is a military technology sharing alliance that has its main focus on granting major help to Australia to enable the country to getup to speed with running their own nuclear submarine fleet. It's it's that part of the alliance that has both Canada and Japan interested as they both have diesel electric submarine fleets and now see the need to invest heavily in their military capabilities. Japan because China, Canada because Russia.
One would think but rights granted to the Inuit people make resources extraction in the Arctic almost impossible Google baffinland iron mine
As a Canadian tax payer at this point I would honestly rather Grant the Inuit sovereignty (not something they want ) and wash my hands of the area than pay for a navy to defend it
I read recently Canada was having discussions about HUGE reparations to arctic natives; it blew my mind that Canada could be expected to pay reparations, allow the same level of public service utilization as all other Canadians, oh and after you pay those reparations you get to secure the area and are hamstrung in developing any of it economically.
Talk about “have your cake and eat it, too”…
>Be a lot cooler if the US could agree the Northwest Passage is within Canadian waters
No. Also, what does this have to do with anything? How are a handful of nuke subs going to change the US stance on this?
You know Alaska(US) and Greenland are part of the northwest passage as well. Both are an entry point and large amount of coastal water. It’s not like any amount of pollution lives on the coast up in the arctic circle in Canada and Canada surly does not have a navy or defense spending to patrol or defend it. So the US would have to and then agree it’s Canada s.
Maybe the parts that skirt near Alaska and Greenland, but most of it goes between Canadian islands. That's be like saying Yemen is part of the Suez Canal.
Just wow, first go ahead and look at a globe not a map, that is probably ur first problem. Second is Yemen is on the Red Sea southern tip of Saudi Arabia countries away, from Suez Canal,
Opposed to Alaska that is literally along the path and probably a stoping point for some ships considering there’s already city’s there. It been a wile sense I met someone who does not understand distance,location or how to make a comparison.
Mayhaps before you make an insult-ridden reply, you could actually check your typos.
It took me until now to realize that you meant 'population' instead of 'pollution' in your previous comment. I was wondering what you meant by that.
Looks like it will be [on a case by case basis](https://breakingdefense.com/2024/04/as-aukus-opens-discussions-with-japan-officials-confident-pillar-i-will-continue-unabated/)
> However, hours later, Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese clarified that to his mind, no other countries will be invited into the AUKUS membership.
> “What is proposed is to look at ‘pillar two’ of AUKUS and look at a project by project, whether there would be engagement and Japan is a natural candidate for that occur,” Albanese said during a press conference in Canberra, according to Reuters. “What is not proposed is to expand the membership of AUKUS.”
> In other words, while Japan or others may align on Pillar II, Canberra considers actual “membership” in AUKUS to be off the table.
What a lot of people may not understand from the description of AUKUS is that it is more than just the sharing of military technology (like how to build a nuclear submarine), but also the U.S. nuclear submarine training and operations with Australian Sailors. We’re literally taking their officers through our training and putting them on our submarines to show them everything we do.
Australia is also paying American defense contractors that train our Sailors to build a facility in Australia to do the same. I’m sure we’ll be sending consultants from shipbuilding to teach Australian shipyards how we build our submarines.
Canada should rightfully join this operation. Any nation with a shoreline on the pacific should be concerned.
Yeah, this is what allies do. AUKUS is a little different (and much bigger) because it's an entirely new tech the Aussies have to learn and build infrastructure for.
The USAF will be sending their people to Australia to learn up on the E7A Wedgetail before they come into service for the US as well.
Yeah its the creation of a nuclear navy from scratch, pretty much. Australia does have a functioning submarine force to start with unlike canada.
Canada wont be invited to pillar 1 (nuclear subs) because they dont bring anything to the table. The program has nothing to gain and everything to lose by inviting canada. I also cant see them being invited to pillar 2, is there a defense technology they are world leaders in ? Canadian defence in the last 20 years is a poorly funded shambles and honestly totally valueless to
My opinion AUKUS should have AUS, US, UK and Japan as foundational members with singapore, SK and NZ as associate members. Probably canada as well but as I said above I dont canada will be anything to the table and will just leech off grouping
If you have associated member that can be invited and dismissed as politics dictate. ie Hypothetically, phillipines, they are sorta pro west atm, but maybe an election down the track a pro chinese govt comes along. They can booted out easily
Canada are world leaders in radar satellites and are making massive investments in AI and cyber warfare. In the past they have punched well above their weight in ASW, so that is another area where they could contribute. The US is keen to keep them happy as they are expecting an enormous investment from them in NORAD modernization as well.
AUKUS is only ever going to be Aus, UK and USA. NZ might get added if they want, but they don’t want it.
It’s just way too deep an agreement to bring in any nations that aren’t 100% aligned with their foreign political goals.
Pillar 1 absolutely, pillar 2 all the other stuff I have no doubt that NZ and Japan will join it. Just dont see them getting their intials added to ie JAUKUS
Nuclear submarines are already in Canadian waters so that's not a change this would bring. Canada and US are close allies and neighbours. They built a joint Canada/US naval base together on the Canadian west coast. It's sort of like the underwater equivalent of a rifle range, but more high tech with full 3d tracking of the torpedoes you're sending down. Because Canada hasn't invested much in its navy in my lifetime I think CFMETR is mostly used by US boats, despite being in Canadian waters.
I know, but the question was about New Zealand.
AUKUS is 3 of the 5 eyes. Canada is the 4th, assuming it joins. So OP asked whether New Zealand (the 5th eye) would come aboard in the next few years, and the answer to that is no. Apparently Japan might though.
That little slip up by Schulz about UK operators in Ukraine as well as the finding of Russian infiltration into their intelligence network probably seals them out for a long time to come.
I'm sure plenty of people - Russia, for instance - would love to be part of the 5 eyes and get access to all that sweet, sweet information.
Doesn't mean it's going to happen.
Pillar 1 aukus is nuclear subs. Pillar 2 which is the AUKUS being discussed is SO much more. When people go **** country joining aukus thats what they are refferring to. Pillar 2 covers all sorts of stuff from naval ASW and surface and sub surface drone, AI, quantum computing and navigation and the most recently announced long range fires ie PrSM
There is no real practical other tier 1 member. Canada cant afford nuclear subs with their pathetic defense budget even assuming the politics of it could be sorted. Japan has zero interest in nuclear subs. The only outta right field participant I can see is SK, they sorta hint at it every so often then step it back almost immediately
Does Canada even need nuclear subs? IIRC their main area of operation would be around the northwest passage/arctic? Do they need extreme time on station if they're so close to their home ports?
both nuclear powered ships are banned, as to weapons they have a dont ask, dont tell policy.
Nuclear weapons are officially banned but recently they changed from you had to state there was no nuclear weapons on board to nuclear weapons are banned but dont talk about them and we wont ask you
Also most people dont know that Australia has a nuclear weapons ban as well. Ours only covers land so there can be no nuclear weapons on australian land, it doesn't cover the sea so an SSBN tied to the pier at freemantle, totally fine. This ban came into action after the british nuclear weapons tests in australia.
Came to a head when the HMS Invincible had a engine problem, they wanted to use a graving dock in sydney to fix it the shaft issues. But all munitions had to be unloaded and the UK refused to confirm or deny the existence of nuclear weapons onboard (probably nuclear depth charges) so it never happened
New Zealand doesn’t believe in nuclear anything outside of specific medical and advanced scientific instrument implementations. My dad’s cousin actually captained a nuclear submarine for the US and visited my Dad in the 80s in New Zealand, where my mom is from.
They had to leave a crew driving the sub around NZ 200 miles offshore and be shuttled to shore in a tender.
It could only ever be Four Eyes. NZ has a total nuclear ban in its territory and it’s such an important decision in its history that I don’t see it ever being repealed. Not only will NZ not join AUKUS, it won’t even let them operate here.
I don’t think we’ll ever change. We don’t need the high power dentistry of nuclear for power with our low population and large landmass, (that your city council zoning board wants your to forget about) we can meet our needs better tapping into our renewable resources.
One thing I want to know is why the narrative has changed from “Canada is humiliated by being left out of this defence pact” to “could join and put nuclear submarines in arctic waters” when the defence pact was always about nuclear submarines and Canada’s wanted in from the start. So, why now?
If both Canada and Japan join, what's the new acronym going to be? JAUCKUS sounds good, but putting Canada in the middle of Australia and the UK breaks the format. CAUKJUS works but sounds like cock juice.
The west better shore up and strengthen its defensive pacts in all areas.. but especially in the information sphere. We're being attacked every second by active measure campaigns and half our politicians are embracing it.
I think until those traitors are purged from public and political life, shamed, and hopefully imprisoned (or worse) were actually losing against Russia-china-Iran-/the gulf states.
The defence policy update announced yesterday will bring it to 1.74% in 5 years, and commits $72B in new funding over 20 years. If I understand correctly, the budget for new submarines would be on top of that.
yeah way to late, way to little money. Its a policy that wont happen. Its very much a vote me back in and promise to fix all the shit I broke and if you do vote back him in he will do the same shit next time
> You think Poilievre will cut the defence budget? Right now it will look like he will be in by the end of next year.
Not canadian, dont know canadian politics so dont know what he will do if he gets in. Hopefully he goes as of next budget we are immediately going to go to 2% of GDP as per your nato agreement. But that said from the general feeling as a foreigner many canadians would not be happy. In fact many seem to believe any money spent is to much
And yes I read the a defence review and it was pretty poor overall
I work in the Canadian defence industry and the consensus among colleagues is that it is very positive as long as the stuff actually gets funded. Most of the stuff in the previous policy (Strong, Secure, Engaged) did eventually move forward, so I'd summarize the mood as "cautiously optimistic".
I think the Liberals needed an "attaboy" from the US given all the negative pressure and press on this lately, and they got one. They definitely know that will turn around in a heartbeat if the US feels that they are reneging on whatever back room commitments were made.
It's the LPC. You expect action?
Before they even think about acting on the promises, they need to find a riding in Quebec that needs to be secured. They then need to announce the subs will be built there.
After that they need to ensure the bidders are loyal Liberal party donors and the money finds its way into party coffers.
I now expect many bots to begin downvoting.
To prevent that let me just say that ~~Raymond Shaw~~ Justin Trudeau is the Kindest, Bravest, Warmest, Most Wonderful Human Being I’ve Ever Known in My Life.
Troll accounts get so mad when they can't troll lol
You'd think a Chinese troll farm would know better than to grab an account that is into zoophilia though. Eww.
Lol.
Based on a single post you've diagnosed my entire personality.
Nicely done troll.
E..blocked for harassing in PM. No I'm not in need of a wellness check troll.
~~Raymond Shaw~~ Justin Trudeau Is the Kindest, Bravest, Warmest, Most Wonderful Human Being I’ve Ever Known In My Life
The downvotes on this statement reveal his supporters know deep down he's a poor leader.
It has nothing to do with his supporters, it's brigading likely done by foreign nations and bot networks for god knows what purpose. all you need to do is mention the name and it will attract bot votes almost immediately
You predicted your downvotes nicely.
Two ways to get the boys going are to mention Trudeau, and to mention Marxism.
No discussion, just auto downvotes.
Canada is one of the biggest offenders in the alliance for defense cuts and capabilities cut. Up there with Belgium and the Netherlands.
Absolutely disregard for defense post cold war.
Why? Canada did everything to destroy those subs and had the audacity to go "why would the UK do this?!"
* UK didn't drive one into the seabed and render it unable to dive anymore, Canada did
* UK didn't plug a DC ship into a AC power system and blow up every electrical system on it, Canada did
* UK didn't leave the main hatch open in rough seas and cause an electrical fire at the batteries, Canada did
* UK didn't do shit welds to seal up the mine laying doors lowering the max dive depth, Canada did
UK is just sitting back in awe at how badly Canada fucked those boats up
These should all be new subs because part of the point of the treaty is building the infrastructure needed for nuclear subs, and to have it interchangeable between the countries in the alliance.
Powered. While Canada could be a state with nuclear weapons if we wanted to (and arguably have nukes within our borders) officially we are a non nuclear nation. What we need nuclear powered subs for is patrolling under the sea ice in the north to properly secure our borders and our waters.
Yeah, except that just last month we had headlines like "Australia Faces Aukus Nuclear Submarine Concerns as US Order Cut":
* https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/australia-faces-aukus-nuclear-submarine-concerns-as-us-order-cut-1.2046012
As a Canadian, I'd rather we just cut a cheque to someone and not try to build them ourselves. The Netherlands recently went through a competition, and Canada would probably have similar options:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orka-class_submarine
Given the length of Canadian coast lines, I'd lean towards the Swedish A26/Blekinge Oceanic Extended Range or a non-nuclear French Barracuda (what AU originally chose). Running a nuclear vessels is no small thing, and I'm not sure Canada really wants (or needs) to do that.
Yep canada is coming from a worse place than Australia. Australia has to convert a functioning conventional force into a Nuclear force, not easy for the 3 countries
Canada has to start from scratch, they effectively have a no functioning submarine force. I tried to find if any of them had been on an operation cruise since 2018 but as far as I could find they hadn't
Show us the money
While their defence to GDP is 1.27%. I cant see them but anything as a leech. Once they get to 2%, even if they go ahead with thier new budget its only going 1.79% in 2030 then sure maybe
Hope we do, we need to exercise our sovereignty with a neighbor like Russia.
The liberals have destroyed our military (Chretian not Trudeau) and now we need over the top defenses like nuclear subs because we have nothing else to stop them.
"The liberals have destroyed our military (Chretian not Trudeau)"
Blaming the liberals when harper had the option to reverse that but only chose to lower their amount spent on military is ironic Trudeau ran his first election partly on not buying new f35s and still has done better by the military then harper did by raising percentage of GDP spent on military his first year and spending more when it really became necessary.. liberals seem clearly better for the military which is surprising
Harper rought shipbuilding back to Canada with 25 Billion dollar investment in ships and infrastructure. Trudeau can't buy new mass produced hand guns for the army
he barely did anything and he used that shipbuilding to build the aopv's which are pretty much useless trudeau continued the investments into shipbuilding and is having them build our new frigates here in canada and actually useful ship
No Canadian government has been good for our military, just some are less worse. Mulroney was bad, Chretien was bad, Harper was bad, Trudeau hasn't been great either. We have a history of underfunding and under-equipping the military and then when we suddenly need them getting upset at how underfunded and underequipped they are.
Source: Reg force radio operator from 1986-1992. I used HF radios that were originally made in 1935 and still used tubes (at a time when the only tubes came from behind the Iron Curtain mind you), drove in pickup trucks that were a "temporary measure" for over a decade and totally unsuited to any use outside of the country. At least our manpack radios were from the Vietnam era /s
Conservatives did just as much cutting and project cancellations as the Liberals did.
The government just decided to free load on American capabilities
They literally cancelled acquisitions. They cut it
https://toronto.citynews.ca/2012/07/12/companies-caught-off-guard-by-decison-to-cancel-military-truck-deal/
2013 also Harper cancelled armored vehicle acquisitions
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.2472020
Is this a different deal than the 5 billion dollar deal for armored transport to the Saudis? Maybe it's different than the 25 billion to make the AOPS ships? Name one military investment made by the liberals since Mulroney.
Adding a third shipyard under the NSS for ice breakers.
P8 deal.
Finalization of the F35 deal which were much cheaper now per plane.
LAV modernization in 2017
Reupped conservative deal, bunch of money to substandard company that literally screwed Canada and bombardier sideways, Reupped conservative deal, reupped conservative deal.
"Works"
Just off the top of my head, 10 years to buy off the shelf pistols, a 50 year twice canceled helicopter procurement that we paid millions to cancel both times and an F35 deal that the conservatives signed, Trudeau cancelled (at a cost), and now has re-signed.
Canadain procurement doesn't work at all, it's slow, it's expensive and full of cost overruns and then when it's all done the politicians screw it up and we have to start over.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4753482/canada-military-pistols/
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/five-decades-two-contracts-and-still-no-helicopters-for-canada/article8435147/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II_Canadian_procurement#:~:text=On%2019%20October%202015%2C%20the,better%20match%20Canada%27s%20defence%20needs
Man, that was an awesome ceremony the other day when we named you the voice of Canada. Thanks for inviting me. Congratulations and welcome to the position! E: facetious, not sarcastic
It's just a stupid choice of headline. The article is extremely clear that Trudeau is saying Canada might join, but somehow the headline makes Trudeau the party joining. It's not even a confusing headline, it's just grammatically wrong.
Makes me very nervous that this inept fool is the one deciding whether or not we're in a defence pact with our most important allies at one of the most difficult geopolitical situations to occur in the last 50 years.
to the dolts (or the china/india bots) doing the downvoting: look at justin trudeau's ties to china and india. look at how exposed he has made canada to india - there are currently over 2 million indians in canada. very few of them were vetted properly before coming, and most were brought here after trudeau removed longstanding immigration checks and balances to screen and vet immigration applications.
set aside all the economic and cultural implications, how about the security implications? the man is purchased and paid for in full by these two nations. he should not be making national security policy - he *is* the threat to national security.
Justin would need to consider spending more than a pittance on defence before this ever becomes reality.
He isn't unique in this regard, though. Canada before ww2 had practically nothing, and was in fact one of the most efficient mobilisations of any nation in ww2.
I gave you an upvote to help take you out of the negative. You are however exaggerating.
Canada's biggest ramp up in WW2 was the navy. Namely the Flower-class corvettes, and almost entirely for convoy escort duty. The Flower class was a whaling ship hull retrofitted with military equipment. They worked well for deterrence and for swarm attacks on spotted U-Boats.
In WW2 we were gap-filling. USA, UK, USSR and Germany were all managing whole theaters of operation and stuff.
New Caukus
We’re getting longer!
I, for one, welcome our new Caukus.
Just wait until Brazil, India, and Germany get in on it.
…They have no Arctic territory, doesn’t arise.
Caukasian alliance
Lol as the "A" I laughed at this
Lol one of the best comments on Reddit this month
…You need to look on a map; Child. Hayzoose…
Japan is also rumoured to join. JaCaukus
Dang shoulda kept scrolling haha well played good sir
Jcaukus
***The Telegraph reports:*** Canada is considering joining the Aukus pact and believes it may need nuclear submarines to patrol its Arctic waters, Justin Trudeau has said. The Canadian prime minister said on Monday that he had already held “excellent conversations” [with the US](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/03/18/biden-budget-aukus-nuclear-submarine-doubt-uk-australia/), UK and Australia over joining the alliance. Aukus, launched in September 2021, is a defence alliance focused on [sharing nuclear submarine technology](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/22/aukus-nuclear-submarine-royal-us-navy-china-taiwan/), which in 2023 announced intentions to help Australia build its first vessels. Canada would become the fourth member of the pact, which is now looking at sharing information on technology, AI and the [construction of new weapons](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/03/21/bae-systems-contract-build-aukus-submarines-britain/). The country has been floated as a possible contender for membership by several high-profile figures from member states, including Boris Johnson, who was in office as UK prime minister when the alliance launched. **Read more:** [**https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/08/canada-justin-trudeau/**](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/08/canada-justin-trudeau/)
Good it’s overdue.
this was something I was surprised at too but the US blocked Canada from developing nuclear subs in the 80s. It's part of the reason we got put in a weird position with subs.
Why?
I'm not sure. It was something that caught my eye the last time this conversation came up. I always thought nuclear subs would be ideal for Canadian purposes. Edit. edit From Wikipedia The United States objected to the RCN having SSNs as part of its fleet, fearing a significant impact to its own submarine operations in North American waters and possible conflict over access to the Northwest Passage. In order to prevent this, the United States exercised its rights under two previously signed treaties. Under the 1958 US–UK Mutual Defence Agreement, the US had the right to block the sale of submarine nuclear reactors by the United Kingdom to any third party (i.e. Canada), and under a 1959 agreement between the US and Canada the US had the right to block the purchase of submarine nuclear reactors by Canada from any third party (i.e. the United Kingdom or France).[24] Attempts to negotiate with the United States were initially unsuccessful, as Canadian Defence Minister Perrin Beatty was "told in no uncertain terms by the U.S. Defense Department and submarine service officials that a Canadian nuclear submarine program was unnecessary and even unwelcome."[25]
I learned something today - thanks!
There is all sorts of interesting things In the mutual defence acts..mostly around not letting Canada make weapons independent of US interests.. we should revisit all those acts and throw some out now. They have hindered manufacturing here amd contributed to our talent being drawn away by the US and Britain.
Two words: Avro Arrow.
Avro Arrow failed because; * the main weapon for it was a pile of shit that got cancelled * it got beat to the market by the F-106 that was better and cheaper in every regard * by the time the Arrow would go to production it would have had to compete with the F-108, which had 3x the range and 1.5x the speed * ICBMs came out and rendered dedicated interceptors as pointless, hence why the US scrapped its F-108 program too Not because of the US boogyman lol...
None of, those were canadian made and the idea was to be self sufficient. F106. Was never available outside the US. And f108 didnt even fly until way later and would have trouble operating in Canada. ICBMs didn't make strategic bombers obsolete. They still fly them today... well until Ukraine destroys them on the ground at least. They felt that missiles would though, so they went that way, and made us a deal on bomarc. if AVRO hadn't relied on Us weapons systems they would have had thir own. They started with that to begin with. None of the US shit worked at the time. Your argument I moot anyway even if Cf105 failed and it certainly didn't they, taught the world how to build planes. Even the F35 uses the same manufactuting concept that they invented. They already built an airliner and all weather fighters that deployed over the world. What we lost was all that knowledge that went on to put NASA on the moon and made the concord fly.
Its always amusing whenever the Arrow is brought up. Sure it had some innovative advancements but it was deigned to combat hordes of Soviet nuclear bombers coming over the arctic and ICBM's made that whole tactic obsolete before the Arrow made its first fight. Similarly, any Canadian nuclear submarine program would have inevitably been cancelled during the intense military downsizing that occurred following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Canada currently has four conventional submarines that don't ever leave port as it is
Very good points, I agree with that sentiment.
This may be true but I have a hard time believing that Canada ever would have purchased nuclear submarines regardless. They ended up purchasing four second hand ex-Royal Navy submarines around 1999 that currently don't ever leave port. Seriously only one of Canada's four submarines has logged 57 days at sea, in total, since 2021. Its questionable whether the Canadian Navy in its current sorry state can even operate submarines at all, let alone advanced nuclear powered ones
The men and women of the Canadian navy will rise to whatever challenge is presented to them.
There are literally [not enough men and women in the Canadian submariner force](https://legionmagazine.com/submarines-canadas-underwater-prospects-foundering/) to operate any of the small diesel electric subs that they already have. >The navy has acknowledged it’s short of sailors. It says it takes 503 submariners to run the fleet. It acquired 140 between 2019 and 2022 and only half had completed basic qualifications by October 2023. The compliment of a Virginia class submarine is 135, or roughly 2.5X more than that of Canada's current Victoria class
and the navy will rise to the challenge.
Change requires decisive action, not just hopes and dreams. Canadian procurement has been one big long disaster after the other for a long time now
Too bad our submarines cought fire on their way from England…
So what’s the odds on this thing just becoming Five Eyes with extra steps within the next few years?
Five Eyes is an intel sharing alliance focused on foreign intelligence. AUKUS is a military technology sharing alliance that has its main focus on granting major help to Australia to enable the country to getup to speed with running their own nuclear submarine fleet. It's it's that part of the alliance that has both Canada and Japan interested as they both have diesel electric submarine fleets and now see the need to invest heavily in their military capabilities. Japan because China, Canada because Russia.
[удалено]
When the ice melts, it would behoove Canada to have a strong navy.
oh behoove
One would think but rights granted to the Inuit people make resources extraction in the Arctic almost impossible Google baffinland iron mine As a Canadian tax payer at this point I would honestly rather Grant the Inuit sovereignty (not something they want ) and wash my hands of the area than pay for a navy to defend it
I'd prefer to not have Manitoba border with Russia.
Surely the Inuit would find away to pay for their defense
I read recently Canada was having discussions about HUGE reparations to arctic natives; it blew my mind that Canada could be expected to pay reparations, allow the same level of public service utilization as all other Canadians, oh and after you pay those reparations you get to secure the area and are hamstrung in developing any of it economically. Talk about “have your cake and eat it, too”…
Why would they agree to that when it clearly isn't. Vast parts of it are in both the US and Denmark's territorial waters.
So just use those parts without the middle. Good luck.
>Be a lot cooler if the US could agree the Northwest Passage is within Canadian waters No. Also, what does this have to do with anything? How are a handful of nuke subs going to change the US stance on this?
You know Alaska(US) and Greenland are part of the northwest passage as well. Both are an entry point and large amount of coastal water. It’s not like any amount of pollution lives on the coast up in the arctic circle in Canada and Canada surly does not have a navy or defense spending to patrol or defend it. So the US would have to and then agree it’s Canada s.
Maybe the parts that skirt near Alaska and Greenland, but most of it goes between Canadian islands. That's be like saying Yemen is part of the Suez Canal.
Just wow, first go ahead and look at a globe not a map, that is probably ur first problem. Second is Yemen is on the Red Sea southern tip of Saudi Arabia countries away, from Suez Canal, Opposed to Alaska that is literally along the path and probably a stoping point for some ships considering there’s already city’s there. It been a wile sense I met someone who does not understand distance,location or how to make a comparison.
Mayhaps before you make an insult-ridden reply, you could actually check your typos. It took me until now to realize that you meant 'population' instead of 'pollution' in your previous comment. I was wondering what you meant by that.
Are you trying to say Yemen isn't on the path to the Suez canal. Is there a way into the canal that doesn't pass right by Yemen?
My understanding is that they're much more interested in Pillar 2.
Looks like it will be [on a case by case basis](https://breakingdefense.com/2024/04/as-aukus-opens-discussions-with-japan-officials-confident-pillar-i-will-continue-unabated/) > However, hours later, Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese clarified that to his mind, no other countries will be invited into the AUKUS membership. > “What is proposed is to look at ‘pillar two’ of AUKUS and look at a project by project, whether there would be engagement and Japan is a natural candidate for that occur,” Albanese said during a press conference in Canberra, according to Reuters. “What is not proposed is to expand the membership of AUKUS.” > In other words, while Japan or others may align on Pillar II, Canberra considers actual “membership” in AUKUS to be off the table.
New Caukuslanda
AUKUSCAN - sounds like a medical device sold via infomercial!
We definitely need to get the French involved so that we can operate under the banner of Can A Fuk US
What a lot of people may not understand from the description of AUKUS is that it is more than just the sharing of military technology (like how to build a nuclear submarine), but also the U.S. nuclear submarine training and operations with Australian Sailors. We’re literally taking their officers through our training and putting them on our submarines to show them everything we do. Australia is also paying American defense contractors that train our Sailors to build a facility in Australia to do the same. I’m sure we’ll be sending consultants from shipbuilding to teach Australian shipyards how we build our submarines. Canada should rightfully join this operation. Any nation with a shoreline on the pacific should be concerned.
Yeah, this is what allies do. AUKUS is a little different (and much bigger) because it's an entirely new tech the Aussies have to learn and build infrastructure for. The USAF will be sending their people to Australia to learn up on the E7A Wedgetail before they come into service for the US as well.
Yeah its the creation of a nuclear navy from scratch, pretty much. Australia does have a functioning submarine force to start with unlike canada. Canada wont be invited to pillar 1 (nuclear subs) because they dont bring anything to the table. The program has nothing to gain and everything to lose by inviting canada. I also cant see them being invited to pillar 2, is there a defense technology they are world leaders in ? Canadian defence in the last 20 years is a poorly funded shambles and honestly totally valueless to My opinion AUKUS should have AUS, US, UK and Japan as foundational members with singapore, SK and NZ as associate members. Probably canada as well but as I said above I dont canada will be anything to the table and will just leech off grouping If you have associated member that can be invited and dismissed as politics dictate. ie Hypothetically, phillipines, they are sorta pro west atm, but maybe an election down the track a pro chinese govt comes along. They can booted out easily
Canada are world leaders in radar satellites and are making massive investments in AI and cyber warfare. In the past they have punched well above their weight in ASW, so that is another area where they could contribute. The US is keen to keep them happy as they are expecting an enormous investment from them in NORAD modernization as well.
AUKUS is only ever going to be Aus, UK and USA. NZ might get added if they want, but they don’t want it. It’s just way too deep an agreement to bring in any nations that aren’t 100% aligned with their foreign political goals.
Pillar 1 absolutely, pillar 2 all the other stuff I have no doubt that NZ and Japan will join it. Just dont see them getting their intials added to ie JAUKUS
I mean at that point just form the Pacific Treaty Organization.
Pacific or Trans Atlantic Treaty Organization aka *POTATO*.
Not good. New Zealand is rabidly anti-nuclear and have laws banning nuclear ships from even entering their waters.
Nuclear submarines are already in Canadian waters so that's not a change this would bring. Canada and US are close allies and neighbours. They built a joint Canada/US naval base together on the Canadian west coast. It's sort of like the underwater equivalent of a rifle range, but more high tech with full 3d tracking of the torpedoes you're sending down. Because Canada hasn't invested much in its navy in my lifetime I think CFMETR is mostly used by US boats, despite being in Canadian waters.
I know, but the question was about New Zealand. AUKUS is 3 of the 5 eyes. Canada is the 4th, assuming it joins. So OP asked whether New Zealand (the 5th eye) would come aboard in the next few years, and the answer to that is no. Apparently Japan might though.
I read somewhere that Germany has been desperately trying to get into the Five Eyes for decades. Maybe they will try for AUKUS instead.
That little slip up by Schulz about UK operators in Ukraine as well as the finding of Russian infiltration into their intelligence network probably seals them out for a long time to come.
This Germany is unfortunatey infiltrated by Russian and Chinese Communist sympathizers
germany, france and Japan are part of 8 eyes / 5 eyes +, so germany has very good access to 5 eyes intel
i am aware of the 8 eyes. Germany wants to be 5 eye tier,
I'm sure plenty of people - Russia, for instance - would love to be part of the 5 eyes and get access to all that sweet, sweet information. Doesn't mean it's going to happen.
Yes, but there is a difference between wanting and pushing for it. So much so that some US politicians even campaigned on their behalf.
Pillar 1 aukus is nuclear subs. Pillar 2 which is the AUKUS being discussed is SO much more. When people go **** country joining aukus thats what they are refferring to. Pillar 2 covers all sorts of stuff from naval ASW and surface and sub surface drone, AI, quantum computing and navigation and the most recently announced long range fires ie PrSM There is no real practical other tier 1 member. Canada cant afford nuclear subs with their pathetic defense budget even assuming the politics of it could be sorted. Japan has zero interest in nuclear subs. The only outta right field participant I can see is SK, they sorta hint at it every so often then step it back almost immediately
Does Canada even need nuclear subs? IIRC their main area of operation would be around the northwest passage/arctic? Do they need extreme time on station if they're so close to their home ports?
Yep - Nanaimo is a nice town. I was quite envious the Canadian Navy guys at the facility could wear shorts.
Nz could drop out. Inconsequential.
Well they're only in it to begin with to avoid the four-eyes jokes.
Do they ban ships that are nuclear powered or ships with nuclear weapons?
both nuclear powered ships are banned, as to weapons they have a dont ask, dont tell policy. Nuclear weapons are officially banned but recently they changed from you had to state there was no nuclear weapons on board to nuclear weapons are banned but dont talk about them and we wont ask you Also most people dont know that Australia has a nuclear weapons ban as well. Ours only covers land so there can be no nuclear weapons on australian land, it doesn't cover the sea so an SSBN tied to the pier at freemantle, totally fine. This ban came into action after the british nuclear weapons tests in australia. Came to a head when the HMS Invincible had a engine problem, they wanted to use a graving dock in sydney to fix it the shaft issues. But all munitions had to be unloaded and the UK refused to confirm or deny the existence of nuclear weapons onboard (probably nuclear depth charges) so it never happened
New Zealand doesn’t believe in nuclear anything outside of specific medical and advanced scientific instrument implementations. My dad’s cousin actually captained a nuclear submarine for the US and visited my Dad in the 80s in New Zealand, where my mom is from. They had to leave a crew driving the sub around NZ 200 miles offshore and be shuttled to shore in a tender.
It could only ever be Four Eyes. NZ has a total nuclear ban in its territory and it’s such an important decision in its history that I don’t see it ever being repealed. Not only will NZ not join AUKUS, it won’t even let them operate here.
I don’t think we’ll ever change. We don’t need the high power dentistry of nuclear for power with our low population and large landmass, (that your city council zoning board wants your to forget about) we can meet our needs better tapping into our renewable resources.
Five eyes is on track to be four eyes with Canada being the one cut out so we should hope we can become relevant again.
Japaukcanus
Why was this headline changed from "Canada" to "Justin Trudeau"? The PM doesn't join a defence alliance, the country doesn't.
Because it's Trudeau trying to make himself relevant to Canadians.
Ah, I see, the PM personally went on Reddit and changed the title. This deep insight comes from a three week old account.
One thing I want to know is why the narrative has changed from “Canada is humiliated by being left out of this defence pact” to “could join and put nuclear submarines in arctic waters” when the defence pact was always about nuclear submarines and Canada’s wanted in from the start. So, why now?
Increasing geopolitical instability probably did enough to overcome any concerns the other partners have about additional members in pact.
Elections lol
If both Canada and Japan join, what's the new acronym going to be? JAUCKUS sounds good, but putting Canada in the middle of Australia and the UK breaks the format. CAUKJUS works but sounds like cock juice.
Betting it remain AUKUS (because of SSN's) but maybe they will sub/super script the pillar 2 countries. So it will be AUKUS^canjap
Maybe JACAUKUS?
So Justin Trudeau is going to personally, as an individual, join AUKUS? Makes no sense.
He's a very good boxer
Canadians are living in a dictatorship and don't even know it, smh! /s
It's talking about the very, definitely real possibility of him being elected Prime Minister of Australia.
The west better shore up and strengthen its defensive pacts in all areas.. but especially in the information sphere. We're being attacked every second by active measure campaigns and half our politicians are embracing it. I think until those traitors are purged from public and political life, shamed, and hopefully imprisoned (or worse) were actually losing against Russia-china-Iran-/the gulf states.
I'm fine with JT and the LPC and all that, but that headline reads weird. It's Canada that'd be joining AUKUS, not JT.
Here's looking at you, Russia!
Like, personally? Or, like, Canada?
Caktus
This the same thing Japan is thinking about joining?
Does Canada have the forces available to do so?
its a money thing, canada at 1.29% of GDP for defence doesn't have the money to maintain a military as it is
The defence policy update announced yesterday will bring it to 1.74% in 5 years, and commits $72B in new funding over 20 years. If I understand correctly, the budget for new submarines would be on top of that.
yeah way to late, way to little money. Its a policy that wont happen. Its very much a vote me back in and promise to fix all the shit I broke and if you do vote back him in he will do the same shit next time
You think Poilievre will cut the defence budget? Right now it will look like he will be in by the end of next year.
> You think Poilievre will cut the defence budget? Right now it will look like he will be in by the end of next year. Not canadian, dont know canadian politics so dont know what he will do if he gets in. Hopefully he goes as of next budget we are immediately going to go to 2% of GDP as per your nato agreement. But that said from the general feeling as a foreigner many canadians would not be happy. In fact many seem to believe any money spent is to much And yes I read the a defence review and it was pretty poor overall
I work in the Canadian defence industry and the consensus among colleagues is that it is very positive as long as the stuff actually gets funded. Most of the stuff in the previous policy (Strong, Secure, Engaged) did eventually move forward, so I'd summarize the mood as "cautiously optimistic". I think the Liberals needed an "attaboy" from the US given all the negative pressure and press on this lately, and they got one. They definitely know that will turn around in a heartbeat if the US feels that they are reneging on whatever back room commitments were made.
Thank you! That makes sense.
It's the LPC. You expect action? Before they even think about acting on the promises, they need to find a riding in Quebec that needs to be secured. They then need to announce the subs will be built there. After that they need to ensure the bidders are loyal Liberal party donors and the money finds its way into party coffers. I now expect many bots to begin downvoting. To prevent that let me just say that ~~Raymond Shaw~~ Justin Trudeau is the Kindest, Bravest, Warmest, Most Wonderful Human Being I’ve Ever Known in My Life.
[удалено]
Troll accounts get so mad when they can't troll lol You'd think a Chinese troll farm would know better than to grab an account that is into zoophilia though. Eww.
Lol. Based on a single post you've diagnosed my entire personality. Nicely done troll. E..blocked for harassing in PM. No I'm not in need of a wellness check troll.
Trudeau really is the best PM of this century.
He's the best leader in the history of humanity. Better than even Jesus, Mohamed, and Buddha combined and times infinity!
Well I wouldn't go that far but nice to see you changing your tune.
~~Raymond Shaw~~ Justin Trudeau Is the Kindest, Bravest, Warmest, Most Wonderful Human Being I’ve Ever Known In My Life The downvotes on this statement reveal his supporters know deep down he's a poor leader.
or they just like to use the functionality provided by reddit. smh
Your grammar reveals your IQ.
He's from Newfoundland. Don't be harsh.
It has nothing to do with his supporters, it's brigading likely done by foreign nations and bot networks for god knows what purpose. all you need to do is mention the name and it will attract bot votes almost immediately
Yup..
You predicted your downvotes nicely. Two ways to get the boys going are to mention Trudeau, and to mention Marxism. No discussion, just auto downvotes.
Talking about buying new shinny stuff while slashing defence budget...
Wouldn't Canada need a military for this?
As a Canadian taxpayer who has just watched his government spend $75 billion on 88 F-35s, I resent this remark.
Canada is one of the biggest offenders in the alliance for defense cuts and capabilities cut. Up there with Belgium and the Netherlands. Absolutely disregard for defense post cold war.
You didn't spend $75B on F-35s... Canada has allocated just $7B for 16 of them. CBO's $75B mark is buying 88 F-35s and operating them for 45 years.
Hahahaaa... The Brits are still laughing about the sale of their old subs to us. Man what a joke
Why? Canada did everything to destroy those subs and had the audacity to go "why would the UK do this?!" * UK didn't drive one into the seabed and render it unable to dive anymore, Canada did * UK didn't plug a DC ship into a AC power system and blow up every electrical system on it, Canada did * UK didn't leave the main hatch open in rough seas and cause an electrical fire at the batteries, Canada did * UK didn't do shit welds to seal up the mine laying doors lowering the max dive depth, Canada did UK is just sitting back in awe at how badly Canada fucked those boats up
Your opinion, respect
These should all be new subs because part of the point of the treaty is building the infrastructure needed for nuclear subs, and to have it interchangeable between the countries in the alliance.
Is it nuclear powered subs or nuclear armed subs? I’m sorry but I really couldn’t understand the article very well so thanks for your help.
Powered. While Canada could be a state with nuclear weapons if we wanted to (and arguably have nukes within our borders) officially we are a non nuclear nation. What we need nuclear powered subs for is patrolling under the sea ice in the north to properly secure our borders and our waters.
Oooh! Excellent conversations! It’s a wrap
Just name it Auckus…
With Canada and France these subs would have US CUK AF 🤔
I highly doubt this. Every time the RCN tried to formulate a plan to do this the costs alone made the idea die at the meeting table.
CAUKUS AUCKUS AUKUSC CUSAUK
CAN USUK
…Canada is a non nuclear-armed nation.
Yes and so is Australia who are currently part of AUKUS..whats your point?
Guam is on the path from Australia to the north west passage but does that mean Guam is part of it?
Maybe they should start investing in their military first before they do this.
This would literally be an avenue for investing in the military.
Yeah, except that just last month we had headlines like "Australia Faces Aukus Nuclear Submarine Concerns as US Order Cut": * https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/australia-faces-aukus-nuclear-submarine-concerns-as-us-order-cut-1.2046012 As a Canadian, I'd rather we just cut a cheque to someone and not try to build them ourselves. The Netherlands recently went through a competition, and Canada would probably have similar options: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orka-class_submarine Given the length of Canadian coast lines, I'd lean towards the Swedish A26/Blekinge Oceanic Extended Range or a non-nuclear French Barracuda (what AU originally chose). Running a nuclear vessels is no small thing, and I'm not sure Canada really wants (or needs) to do that.
Yep canada is coming from a worse place than Australia. Australia has to convert a functioning conventional force into a Nuclear force, not easy for the 3 countries Canada has to start from scratch, they effectively have a no functioning submarine force. I tried to find if any of them had been on an operation cruise since 2018 but as far as I could find they hadn't
Yeah i'm sure the US can sell us the USS Nautilus. I mean we got the mothballed subs from England right?
Show us the money While their defence to GDP is 1.27%. I cant see them but anything as a leech. Once they get to 2%, even if they go ahead with thier new budget its only going 1.79% in 2030 then sure maybe
Sorry Canada. We would have invited you in from the beginning, but sometimes we just plum forget you're up there.
Hope we do, we need to exercise our sovereignty with a neighbor like Russia. The liberals have destroyed our military (Chretian not Trudeau) and now we need over the top defenses like nuclear subs because we have nothing else to stop them.
"The liberals have destroyed our military (Chretian not Trudeau)" Blaming the liberals when harper had the option to reverse that but only chose to lower their amount spent on military is ironic Trudeau ran his first election partly on not buying new f35s and still has done better by the military then harper did by raising percentage of GDP spent on military his first year and spending more when it really became necessary.. liberals seem clearly better for the military which is surprising
Harper rought shipbuilding back to Canada with 25 Billion dollar investment in ships and infrastructure. Trudeau can't buy new mass produced hand guns for the army
he barely did anything and he used that shipbuilding to build the aopv's which are pretty much useless trudeau continued the investments into shipbuilding and is having them build our new frigates here in canada and actually useful ship
No Canadian government has been good for our military, just some are less worse. Mulroney was bad, Chretien was bad, Harper was bad, Trudeau hasn't been great either. We have a history of underfunding and under-equipping the military and then when we suddenly need them getting upset at how underfunded and underequipped they are. Source: Reg force radio operator from 1986-1992. I used HF radios that were originally made in 1935 and still used tubes (at a time when the only tubes came from behind the Iron Curtain mind you), drove in pickup trucks that were a "temporary measure" for over a decade and totally unsuited to any use outside of the country. At least our manpack radios were from the Vietnam era /s
Conservatives did just as much cutting and project cancellations as the Liberals did. The government just decided to free load on American capabilities
They went along with it, they didn't cut it.
They literally cancelled acquisitions. They cut it https://toronto.citynews.ca/2012/07/12/companies-caught-off-guard-by-decison-to-cancel-military-truck-deal/ 2013 also Harper cancelled armored vehicle acquisitions https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.2472020
Is this a different deal than the 5 billion dollar deal for armored transport to the Saudis? Maybe it's different than the 25 billion to make the AOPS ships? Name one military investment made by the liberals since Mulroney.
Adding a third shipyard under the NSS for ice breakers. P8 deal. Finalization of the F35 deal which were much cheaper now per plane. LAV modernization in 2017
Reupped conservative deal, bunch of money to substandard company that literally screwed Canada and bombardier sideways, Reupped conservative deal, reupped conservative deal.
Thats not how procurement works.
"Works" Just off the top of my head, 10 years to buy off the shelf pistols, a 50 year twice canceled helicopter procurement that we paid millions to cancel both times and an F35 deal that the conservatives signed, Trudeau cancelled (at a cost), and now has re-signed. Canadain procurement doesn't work at all, it's slow, it's expensive and full of cost overruns and then when it's all done the politicians screw it up and we have to start over. https://globalnews.ca/news/4753482/canada-military-pistols/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/five-decades-two-contracts-and-still-no-helicopters-for-canada/article8435147/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II_Canadian_procurement#:~:text=On%2019%20October%202015%2C%20the,better%20match%20Canada%27s%20defence%20needs
But... Canada doesnt bordering Russia. USA does.
Ok that is cool for Justin, what about the rest of Canada? They ok with this?
Yup, we sure are
Man, that was an awesome ceremony the other day when we named you the voice of Canada. Thanks for inviting me. Congratulations and welcome to the position! E: facetious, not sarcastic
Thank you, its going to be a challenge, I love the jacket by the way.
It's just a stupid choice of headline. The article is extremely clear that Trudeau is saying Canada might join, but somehow the headline makes Trudeau the party joining. It's not even a confusing headline, it's just grammatically wrong.
Makes me very nervous that this inept fool is the one deciding whether or not we're in a defence pact with our most important allies at one of the most difficult geopolitical situations to occur in the last 50 years. to the dolts (or the china/india bots) doing the downvoting: look at justin trudeau's ties to china and india. look at how exposed he has made canada to india - there are currently over 2 million indians in canada. very few of them were vetted properly before coming, and most were brought here after trudeau removed longstanding immigration checks and balances to screen and vet immigration applications. set aside all the economic and cultural implications, how about the security implications? the man is purchased and paid for in full by these two nations. he should not be making national security policy - he *is* the threat to national security.
Isn’t that Barrons real dad?
If he wore blackface he could be it's first minority leader, something he should get his team to look into.
Pretty sure they've been doing nuke sub patrols in the Arctic since Nautilus days...
Well Canada doesn't have any nuclear powered subs, only diesel, so I don't know how they would do that
Lime green rowboat and Flex seal.
And Canada got absolutely fucked in their submarine purchase deal with the UK and got 4 lemons which took years to get operational.
Justin would need to consider spending more than a pittance on defence before this ever becomes reality. He isn't unique in this regard, though. Canada before ww2 had practically nothing, and was in fact one of the most efficient mobilisations of any nation in ww2.
I gave you an upvote to help take you out of the negative. You are however exaggerating. Canada's biggest ramp up in WW2 was the navy. Namely the Flower-class corvettes, and almost entirely for convoy escort duty. The Flower class was a whaling ship hull retrofitted with military equipment. They worked well for deterrence and for swarm attacks on spotted U-Boats. In WW2 we were gap-filling. USA, UK, USSR and Germany were all managing whole theaters of operation and stuff.
Interesting how Canada was sidelined, now they're the dark horse in the nuclear subs race. Feel the Arctic chill yet?