View Single Post
  #3  
Old June 11th, 2006, 02:10 PM

thatguy96 thatguy96 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 801
Thanks: 3
Thanked 21 Times in 20 Posts
thatguy96 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Interesting Note on Canadian Future Armor.

I'm going to restate my opinion looking at the matter from a larger point of view that most Canadian nationalists and tank-hungry armor traditionalists will.

Firstly, and most importantly, when if ever has Canada as an entity fought a conflict without being part of a large force? Whether their units operate independantly or not, Canada does not have a history of starting conflicts which is must fight itself.

Secondly, the current Canadian heavy transport structure does not have the capability to transport any of the Current Leopard C1/C2 fleet with any rapidity to any hotspot destination in the world.

Why not then, should the Canadian Army realize the truth of its predicament. It can either placate the staunch armor traditionalists and maintain tanks it will likely never have any real use for and that it cannot currently readily contribute to any of its deployments worldwide anyone, or it can use its unique situaiton to experiment with new types of mechanized/motorized warfare. It has the ability given its alliances and usual international obligations to experiment with a non-tank armored force in what is essentially a consequence free enviornment.

Why shouldn't Canadians toss their tank force which is costly and currently serves no purpose in their international deployment? While the Stryker MGS might not be a good replacement based on its merits as a vehicle, why shouldn't an idea be played upon by the Canadians? I say it is impossible to find a realistic scenario where Canadians would actually find need for a heavy armored force that couldn't be provided by a slew of allied forces.
Reply With Quote