CANADIAN ARMED FORCES: SUBMARINE SPENDING SPREE!

Canada has just announced that the Royal Canadian Navy will purchase a fleet of 8 - 12 new diesel-electric submarines to replace the aging Victoria class subs. What they failed to mention is that in a perfect world, the first of these new submarines will not be delivered until 2037! It is time to target the sad saga of subs in Canadian service.

#canadianarmedforces #canadianarmy #canada #canadianforces #army #military #canadiannavy #canadianairforce #caf #airforce #navy #rcaf #royalcanadianairforce #cansofcom #royalcanadiannavy #canadianmilitary #armylife #militarylife #csor #airborne #cansof #corporal #veteran #infantry #tactical #soldier

[dmeinhertzhagen]

Crazy to think that tiny countries such as Norway and Sweden both have the capability to design and manufacture their own submarines but not Canada! What a joke of a country have we become between WW2 and now!

[ArmyJames]

If Canada acquires ONE new submarine, I will eat my hat.

[KellyBrownlee]

The real problem with Canadian procurement is way way too much political interference, and cheap governments, it is a seller beware as he said in the video.

[minuteman]

Relax, this will never happen. They don't actually intend for it to ever happen.

[octaviushite]

Here in Taiwan we are building our own because no one will sell us any.

[ickster]

I left the Navy in 2019. In my last few years I was juggling sailors in order to get units to sea. We had a hurculean effort to get 2 subs underway at the same time, let alone 8.

[CharlesLambert]

Much respect and gratitude for the men and women who serve this nation, especially considering how they are not appreciated by the general population.

Canadians (general population), going for bronze. No ambition. No pride. Abundance of entitlement.

[marcusaetius]

Yup Sweden with a population of 10.5 million, Norway with a population of 5.5 million design and manufacture submarines (as well as a whole slew of other military equipment.
Canada makes snowmobiles….

[John_Mack]

Don't forget that we got the Upholder subs because the British owed us $750m for use of Happy-Valley Goosebay during the Cold War. Yes, the boats were mothballed, that was because the UK Navy did a shift to all Nuclear boats. The Upholders were in fact designed exactly the same as the Nuclear varient. Was it a good deal for Canada? Yes, it was. At the time, the going price for a DE Boat was about $1-1.5b each. Do the subs work as intended? Yes, they do. In fact during recent exercises one of these boats stayed undetected while hiding under a US carrier. Why are they not always at sea? Simple, not enough trained sailers. Why is this good news never reported? The media does not like good news, neither do Canadians, we just want to hear the bad stuff.

[timberwolfdtproductions]

We need those subs now! We need a total revamp of our military procurement process.🇨🇦

[vc-cwyp]

It's great to see these videos that explain more about our military history and issues.
But i have to say... I wish the videos were longer Scott!
More in depth... Maybe with some guests even?
Keep up the good work and thanks

[edp]

Scott why are you surprised with the associated price tag? Did you expect the price to go down over time? Is that this year's tax dollars or 2037 tax dollars? Is that a fair price for new subs? I hope you weren't hoping for another 'used sub' buy? If we go ahead with the purchase is the Canadian taxpayer getting their money's worth? I have no doubt that you are aware that stretching out the price over decades is the only way that the CAF can ever pay for any new equipment. Furthermore, after the delivery of 3 or 4 subs (if it happens), the government of the day will find that the contract has ballooned even more and cancel the remainder of the contract while paying a subsequent substantial penalty. Then the government will trumpet that they have saved the taxpayers billions of dollars. Of course, this presumes that there is no global conflict before then; at which time it won't matter anyway.

[Aaron-otxs]

It's not a spending-spree when you're replacing 50-year old vessels. That's the lifecycle.

[AdrianLeeMagill]

The Canadian class nuclear subs can still be built. We just need more leaders and fewer politicians in charge.

[CyberScifi]

The whole story is they don't want any spending on anything. Period. Simple.

[lloydkuepfer]

Yep. Canada is way behind because of decades of defense cuts

[johnmcadam]

JT: Canada will be purchasing 8 new subs
Me: Whose the supplier ?
JT: Mattel !

[Mork]

The government would rather push and spend on DEI and leave our national security to the US. Terrible and embarrassing to say the least.

[michaelchandler]

Scott, I would like to hear more of your thoughts on how this planned purchase relates to Arctic Sovereignty. I am not a lawyer trained in international law, but my rudimentary understanding of the subject is that one of the indices of sovereignty is the ability to exercise jurisdiction in a geographical area. If American nuclear submarines can operate in areas of the "Canadian Arctic" that Canada's submarines cannot then it is hard to argue that we have sovereignty in the area. It seems to me that at the very least we should have a fleet that equals the American capability in that area. Your point about unmanned underwater boats is an interesting one and it would be interesting to speculate on what sovereignty would mean in an era when almost everyone can go anywhere.

[rickblackwell]

Canada has been ignoring defence spending for decades as most Canadians do not care. Pouring billions into defence will not get anyone elected. Of course, this has negatively affected relationships with other nations such as NATO members and, more importantly, the USA.