Canada: We wanna look cool, so we'll buy 65 F-35's for 9 Billion
168 replies, posted
[QUOTE=zombojoe;23439423]That made lol.
:v:[/QUOTE]
Yeah, you're not very bright.
[editline]10:52PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439363]Considering this is a military-oriented thread, and Canada could likely be beaten by North Korea, yes.[/QUOTE]
Do you know how stupid you look right now? Because you look pretty fucking stupid.
[editline]10:52PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439453]I threw my credibility out the window by pointing out that Canada has a relatively minor military?[/QUOTE]
Minor military compared to...? Yeah, we aren't the most militaristic country. That doesn't mean we don't have a skilled army.
It's really funny to see people talk shit about our military because it shows everyone that they have no fucking idea what they're talking about.
[QUOTE=Carbon Knight;23439472]By saying that North Korea could defeat Canada's military forces.[/QUOTE]
Canada currently has 62,000 active troops.
North Korea currently has 1,170,000 active troops.
My money is on North Korea.
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439535]Canada currently has 62,000 active troops.
North Korea currently has 1,170,000 active troops.
My money is on North Korea.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, and how many of those 1,170,000 have guns, are trained, are well fed, and are actually considered soldiers by other countries?
Jesus, if numbers were the only thing that meant anything, we'd all be fucked.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;23439550]Yeah, and how many of those 1,170,000 have guns, are trained, are well fed, and are actually considered soldiers by other countries?
Jesus, if numbers were the only thing that meant anything, we'd all be fucked.[/QUOTE]
North Korea also has another 4,700,000 troops in reserve, while Canada has 25,000
Don't delude yourself.
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439535]Canada currently has 62,000 active troops.
North Korea currently has 1,170,000 active troops.
My money is on North Korea.[/QUOTE]
Let's look at the Battle of France:
Germany had around 3 million men.
France had over 6 million, not including the forces of the Allies.
You're going to put your money on France, right?
[QUOTE=Tac Error;23439568]Let's look at the Battle of France:
Germany had around 3 million men.
France had over 6 million, not including the forces of the Allies.
You're going to put your money on France, right?[/QUOTE]
Thanks for posting a 2:1 ratio fight that the smaller side managed to win with superior technology. Of course, I'm not sure how a 2:1 ratio fight compares to a 67:1 fight, but I'm sure you'll definitely come out on top.
As far as the actual F35's, though, they're actually a pretty good decision. Since Canada obviously isn't a very warlike nation, strike aircraft are always a good boost.
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439616]Thanks for posting a 2:1 ratio fight that the smaller side managed to win with superior technology. Of course, I'm not sure how a 2:1 ratio fight compares to a 67:1 fight, but I'm sure you'll definitely come out on top.[/QUOTE]
I won't even begin to tell you how stupid you are.
Yes, we would be terribly outnumbered. No, we would not lose. If you seriously think numbers are the biggest deciding factor in a fight, you should probably go get all your buddies together and go get in group fights with people bigger than you, but of lesser numbers.
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439616]Thanks for posting a 2:1 ratio fight that the smaller side managed to win with superior technology. Of course, I'm not sure how a 2:1 ratio fight compares to a 67:1 fight, but I'm sure you'll definitely come out on top.[/QUOTE]
Do you think that North Korea is on par with Canadian Military technology?
Do you actually think they feed their troops?
If history has taught us anything, is that numbers don't always tip the balance of a war.
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439616]Thanks for posting a 2:1 ratio fight that the smaller side managed to win with superior technology. Of course, I'm not sure how a 2:1 ratio fight compares to a 67:1 fight, but I'm sure you'll definitely come out on top.[/QUOTE]
With the lethality of weapons and military technology today plus the skills needed of a typical Western soldier, force ratios are now a minor matter and are not a reliable way to determine a military's combat capabilities.
Canada has planes?
[QUOTE=Carbon Knight;23439643]Do you think that North Korea is on par with Canadian Military technology?
Do you actually think they feed their troops?[/QUOTE]
Don't bother arguing with him. It's clear he's as dumb as posters like Ragy and believes just as much in american exceptionalism.
Hey guys, did you know that a military's might is measured by the amount of soldiers it has?
[img]http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd216/123draw-images/finlandbeveryafraid.jpg[/img]
Oh... Wait....
[url]http://www.globalfirepower.com/[/url]
Hey look. Intelligent people agree with me.
North Korea isn't as inept as a lot of people give them credit for. They've been sold a lot of technology by China, and almost everything they make supports their armies.
[editline]02:08AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;23439665]Don't bother arguing with him. It's clear he's as dumb as posters like Ragy and believes just as much in american exceptionalism.[/QUOTE]
The hell are you talking about? It's not American Exceptionalism. It's that Canada isn't a warlike country, so they wouldn't win any serious wars.
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439714][url]http://www.globalfirepower.com/[/url]
Hey look. Intelligent people agree with me.
North Korea isn't as inept as a lot of people give them credit for. They've been sold a lot of technology by China, and almost everything they make supports their armies.
[editline]02:08AM[/editline]
The hell are you talking about? It's not American Exceptionalism. It's that Canada isn't a warlike country, so they wouldn't win any serious wars.[/QUOTE]
North Korea isn't as inept... but Canada is a more inept country?
Please, explain that one way away oh great american god of war.
Seriously, just because we aren't a warring country doesn't mean any and all armies would walk over us. That's fucking stupid.
[QUOTE=Ncccookiees;23439655]Canada has planes?[/QUOTE]
You're not even trying are you?
Also, go Canada.
[editline]02:12AM[/editline]
We were good in WW1 and 2...
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;23439751]North Korea isn't as inept... but Canada is a more inept country?
Please, explain that one way away oh great american god of war.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for changing what I said. Really helps me, I mean, you can just have an argument with yourself, while I relax and watch.
[QUOTE]Seriously, just because we aren't a warring country doesn't mean any and all armies would walk over us. That's fucking stupid[/QUOTE]That's probably why I didn't say you would be defeated by Ethiopia.
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439714]
The hell are you talking about? It's not American Exceptionalism. It's that Canada isn't a warlike country, so they wouldn't win any serious wars.[/QUOTE]
Just because we don't invade other countries at our own discretion doesn't mean we "suck" or anything. I guess you've never heard of Vimy Ridge, the Battle of Ortona or how Canadian forces at Juno Beach advanced further into Normandy than any of the other D-Day forces.
[QUOTE=Tac Error;23439832]Just because we don't invade other countries at our own discretion doesn't mean we "suck" or anything. I guess you've never heard of Vimy Ridge, the Battle of Ortona or how Canadian forces at Juno Beach advanced further into Normandy than any of the other D-Day forces.[/QUOTE]
you realize hes going to pull the "that was 70 years ago" card
[QUOTE=Tac Error;23439832]Just because we don't invade other countries at our own discretion doesn't mean we "suck" or anything. I guess you've never heard of Vimy Ridge, the Battle of Ortona or how Canadian forces at Juno Beach advanced further into Normandy than any of the other D-Day forces.[/QUOTE]
During WW2 + WW1 the Canadian army was comparatively much stronger and larger than it was today. The same can be said for the U.S., Britain, Germany, France, etc. I don't mean to demean what Canadian soldiers have done in the past, but that doesn't change the fact that Canada, in the past 50 years, has shrunk its army considerably.
[editline]02:20AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Tk1138;23439854]you realize hes going to pull the "that was 70 years ago" card[/QUOTE]
Damn you're good.
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439714][url]http://www.globalfirepower.com/[/url]
Hey look. Intelligent people agree with me.[/QUOTE]
Hey, someone made a website with a bunch of bare military statistics on it! It's written by a reputed military analyst or think-tank!
[editline]11:22PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439890]During WW2 + WW1 the Canadian army was comparatively much stronger and larger than it was today. The same can be said for the U.S., Britain, Germany, France, etc. I don't mean to demean what Canadian soldiers have done in the past, but that doesn't change the fact that Canada, in the past 50 years, has shrunk its army considerably.[/QUOTE]
Why should we need a giant-ass military anyways? The Cold War's over and we needed to cut off the fat to reorganize a force suitable for a modern world. As it has been said many times before, size isn't everything.
[QUOTE=Tac Error;23439895]Hey, someone made a website with a bunch of bare military statistics on it! It's written by a reputed military analyst or think-tank![/QUOTE]
Sorry I couldn't come up with a better source. You see, Canada vs. North Korea isn't a fight often considered these days. I had a great paper on NK's army (if they assaulted SK), but I seem to have misplaced it.
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439890]but that doesn't change the fact that Canada, in the past 50 years, has shrunk its army considerably.[/QUOTE]
Blame Diefenbaker, Or Trudeau, or who ever cut our military budge back then. Thats sad that I forgot.
[QUOTE=Tk1138;23439926]Blame Diefenbaker. Or Trudeau, or who ever cut our military budge back then.[/QUOTE]
Paul Hellyer and in all his infinite wisdom, the merger of the Canadian military branches into the Canadian Forces.
[QUOTE=Tac Error;23439895]Why should we need a giant-ass military anyways? The Cold War's over and we needed to cut off the fat to reorganize a force suitable for a modern world. As it has been said many times before, size isn't everything.[/QUOTE]
I never said you needed a giant-ass military. You probably don't, especially with the U.S. right below you, and being in a defense pact with most of the militaristic nations in the world. I just said a giant-ass military tends to win wars.
True, and if anyone tried to invade us we'd probably have half the world backing us up.
[editline]02:28AM[/editline]
My dad keeps saying the Americans are to blame that we cancelled the Avro Arrow project not just the cost, apparently they were afraid of it, yeah right I don't believe that.
[QUOTE=Morcam;23439925]Sorry I couldn't come up with a better source. You see, Canada vs. North Korea isn't a fight often considered these days. I had a great paper on NK's army (if they assaulted SK), but I seem to have misplaced it.[/QUOTE]
Except South Korea is not Canada. What kind of fight you're looking at? A North Korean invasion of Canada?
[QUOTE=Tac Error;23439990]A North Korean invasion of Canada?[/QUOTE]
The mere concept of that seems impossible. How big is the NK navy anyways, because I doubt they could invade from the air.
[QUOTE=Tk1138;23439998]The mere concept of that seems impossible. How big is the NK navy anyways, because I doubt they could invade from the air.[/QUOTE]
It's a green water navy that's only good for coastal defense and harassing Allied naval operations. It was nothing in the way of amphibious warfare capabilities.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.