Military blueprint sparks confusion..

What we know is that the buildup of our forces will cost billions and that it will be used not so much for peacekeeping as to help advance U.S. foreign policy and of course as a profit source for the joint military-industrial complex of the two countries. It may not hurt funeral directors but will cause grief for some military families. However, they can take solace in the fact that Canadians are supporting the troops, advancing the cause of former Afghan warlords and corrupt Afghan politicians. You will notice that in articles on our Defence buildup the U.S. is not even mentioned!
Natynczyk by the way, who is our vice-chief of defence, served in the Iraq war and was even presented a medal for his service by the governess general. He may become our next chief of defence with the resignation of Hillier.

Military blueprint sparks confusion TheStar.com - Canada - Military blueprint sparks confusion


ANDREW VAUGHAN/THE CANADIAN PRESS
Prime Minister Stephen Harper, right, and Defence Minister Peter MacKay head from a military spending announcement in Halifax on May 12, where Harper announced what he called a $30-billion Canada First Defence Strategy.
Briefing offers more details on 20-year, $50B plan by Conservatives to beef up Canadian Forces
May 15, 2008 Allan WoodsOttawa Bureau
OTTAWA–The Canadian Forces are slated to spend between $45 billion and $50 billion on equipment between now and 2028, says Lt.-Gen. Walter Natynczyk, the vice-chief of defence staff.
On Monday, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Defence Minister Peter MacKay presented the "total investments we're making in the military in the next generation" as a $30 billion undertaking during a news conference on the Canada First Defence Strategy in Halifax.
But the $30 billion figure represents just the budget for the Department of National Defence in 2028 as a result of a 2 per cent annual increase that starts in 2011.
"What we're going to invest between now and (2028), and further on beyond that, is that $45 billion to $50 billion," a senior military official explained yesterday. "These are two different numbers. They mean two different things."
Dan Dugas, a spokesperson for MacKay, denied that the Prime Minister or defence minister misspoke, and said any confusion was the fault of reporters who "seized" on the $30 billion figure "rather than look at what we were rolling out as priorities."
But it was the government and the military scrambling yesterday to salvage a blueprint for the future of the military that has been trashed all week as a rehash of old announcements designed to get the Conservative party re-elected. The briefing served up a few more details on the plan, such as a rough schedule for the purchase of new fighter jets (2017), search-and-rescue planes (2015), destroyers (2017) and frigates (2024). The ships will eat up more than half of the equipment budget.
There were also a few surprises, including the latest forecast on efforts to build up the size of the Canadian Forces.
In the 2006 election campaign, the Tories committed to building up to a military of 75,000 regular forces and 35,000 reserves within five years of taking office. Last year, the department said it needed six years to meet that goal due to the rate of retirements. The target has now been downgraded to 70,000 full-time soldiers and 30,000 part-timers, but there is no longer a timeline for achieving that force size, a senior military official admitted.
"That's what happens when you don't come up with a real plan," said NDP defence critic Dawn Black (New Westminster-Coquitlam), who said she was mystified by the defence strategy's new price tag and concerned at cuts to coastal patrols and search-and-rescue capabilities.
Pundits and even military enthusiasts decried the lack of detail and vision in the 20-year military plan this week, as well as the absence of a public document, a so-called white paper, to formalize the government's ambitions.
Dugas said the government does plan on "providing paper of some kind," but he couldn't say when.
Richard Cohen, a senior policy adviser to MacKay, said yesterday that the two years of work that went into the Canada First Defence Strategy are articulated in a secret but "very detailed" cabinet document.
But asked about the information void on the major file, Cohen seemed to acknowledge there had been problems.
"Things could always be better," he said.