Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

ottawacitizen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 382 posts

Re: Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

#231

Post by asdff »

dmoy wrote: post #217
stackedinserter wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much will you "train with weapons" in one week?

I mean.... enough to make shots on target at about 300-400 yards with a sling, and enough to make shots on target at about 50 yards while standing up. I do competitive bullseye rifle, and I've done some basic marksmanship coaching. That's about what I'd expect for maybe 6-12 hours of total training on a rifle for someone with zero prior experience with guns. The basics of rifles is very, very simple. In competition w…

It would probably take you a week just to be competent maintaining the rifle let alone shooting it.

Re: Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

#232

Post by wagwang »

scotty79 wrote: post #129
wagwang wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No you have a duty and obligation to the society that raised you.

Your obligations are your choices. Only a slave has obligations without freely chosing them.

Can I unchoose my obligation to my 2 year old or am I a slave.

Re: Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

#233

Post by notatoad »

imtringued wrote: post #176
notatoad wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i don't think they're really expecting people to serve a useful role in the military. it's a "supplemental reserve", meaning a level below ordinary reservists. it sounds like basically if the country was ever in a situation dire enough that they were calling on ordinary citizens to help with defense, an ordinary citizen with a week's training would be better than one with no training. or more cynically: it's a way to…

It's not even that. It's literally the equivalent of an assessment center. The military is basically looking for promising recruits ahead of time. It's not about having a week's worth of training. It's about knowing who did well or not.

yeah, that makes sense.

it's not about training somebody with a gun, it's about putting somebody on the list of "never ever give this guy a gun again"

Re: Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

#234

Post by cmrdporcupine »

wyldberry wrote: post #168
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were literal statements of annexation. Brushed off by some "that was a joke" but they were made. Lets not downplay that fact.

I personally can downplay them as a joke because it is a joke. The mostly likely path forward for anything like that would instead a certain oil rich province voting themselves independent and then asking the US for aid or to join. And, if it wasn't a joke, then that's even more of a reason to consider meeting your 2% NATO agreement instead of just phoning it in.

The only country to have ever invaded us is the USA.

Their national anthem is about a battle in that war.

Re: Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

#235

Post by testing22321 »

jjk166 wrote: post #96
gpm wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has been consistently signalling that it is considering annexing us since Donald Trump was re-elected in November of last year... the politicians are unlikely to say it outright but I think this is pretty clearly aimed at the US and making it too costly to do so.

The US invading Canada isn't a realistic possibility. Any attempt to do so would trigger a civil war within the US, to say nothing of obliterating the geopolitical system. Attempting to annex in any way shape or form is currently nothing more than the musings of an old man, the only way any territorial changes could happen are through peaceful, mutually agreed upon transfer. If the US were to seriously entertain the…

A external war that triggers a civil war would be a great way to cancel elections now wouldn’t it.

Re: Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

#236

Post by testing22321 »

Teever wrote: post #128
silisili wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any attempt to do so would trigger a civil war within the US What makes you say that? I could see heavy protests, even violent protests, as it's not something Americans want. I'm not sure I could envision any semblance of an actual civil war, though, but perhaps I'm underestimating things.

If the United States tries to seize Canada they will do so after a protracted blockade in winter that coincides with air strikes on Canadian infrastructure. A lot of Canadians talk big talk about some sort of insurgency like Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam but all those places have borders with other countries that can enable smuggling of supplies to the resistance. Canada will be blockaded and after a period of cold an…

Keep in mind the Canadians burnt down the Whitehouse. Twice.

Then simply marched back home and said “stop being so stupid.”

Re: Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

#237

Post by dragonsky67 »

asdff wrote: post #228
imgabe wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone in the military should be trained with weapons. If it comes down to it, even the guy who mops the floors is going to need to pick up a rifle if the situation is dire enough. It helps if he held one before at least.

That isn't really what happens. The unit would just surrender. That's how it went down in WWII early in the pacific campaign. Western nations don't go down to the last man.

Don't count other nations the way you do the US, and don't compare the behaviour of troops defending some piece of jungle on the other side of the planet with those defending their homes.

Re: Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

#238

Post by pavement_sort »

kulahan wrote: post #118
scotty79 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not teaching your son a second language so he can escape the country with draft as soon as he's 18 is evil. You are obligated to give your child tools to choose his future if your government is trying to deny him that choice.

Did you respond to the wrong comment or is this flying way over my head? I'm not actually sure how you arrived at talking about children needing to learn another language from this article that doesn't discuss language?

They are starting a new discussion about the ethics of drafting because you mentioned "universal male conscription".

In that discussion they are saying that it's unethical to have a child in a country that will draft him unless you prepare him (via learning another language, etc.) to leave as soon as he is 18.

(Just explaining, not putting forth any take on the matter).

Re: Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

#239

Post by krisoft »

swader999 wrote: post #182
palmotea wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A large nuclear exchange between great powers (and currently there are 3 great powers, the US, China and Russia) would be followed by the use of conventional military forces. E.g., The US would try to capture and hold the major ports of the power or powers that attacked it because holding those ports is the most effective way of denying the power the ability to deploy its own conventional forces outside its own ter…

It would have to go conventional after nuclear exchange or you'd be in a perpetual state of nuclear war.

Or after a nuclear exchange the war ceases because everyone who is left alive is too busy trying to survive in their changed circumstances.

Re: Canadian military will rely on public servants to boost its ranks by 300k

#240

Post by dmoy »

asdff wrote: post #231
dmoy wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean.... enough to make shots on target at about 300-400 yards with a sling, and enough to make shots on target at about 50 yards while standing up. I do competitive bullseye rifle, and I've done some basic marksmanship coaching. That's about what I'd expect for maybe 6-12 hours of total training on a rifle for someone with zero prior experience with guns. The basics of rifles is very, very simple. In competition w…

It would probably take you a week just to be competent maintaining the rifle let alone shooting it.

Ok, it does not though. I have taught people with no experience and it takes <10 hours to get to making hits at 300-400 yards. Basic maintenance takes even less time to teach
Post reply on HN