Who Killed the Canadian Military?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.


ONE love, blood, life
Jul 6, 2000
I saw this book in Coles yesterday and almost picked it up. (But instead I got the Myth of converging values)

anyway, this is what is on the back of the book:

Who Killed the Canadian Military? questions the effectiveness of a military that is weakly waving the white flag both at home and on the international peacekeeping front. From failed submarine deals to tragic helicopter crashes, military equipment is sadly out of date and out of shape, Granatstein asserts. Military personnel are stretched far too thinly and are ill-prepared for the battlefield ?or peacekeeping. He wonders if Canadians are aware that we rank 34th among nations in the provision of troops for UN peacekeeping, and that our vaunted reputation for diplomacy is pretty much in tatters.

And now, it?s not just Canadians who are questioning our diminished military. Since 9/11 and the US?Iraq war, America is seriously evaluating our ability to defend our own border against a terrorist attack. Who are these killers of the Canadian army, navy, and air force? Granatstein fingers a government who believes that peacekeeping solves everything, and the organizational restructurers who thought that putting everyone in green might make a new breed of soldier. He notes, too, the anti-American sentiment that says we?d rather fight the Yanks than our (potential) enemies.

Granatstein provides a powerful and articulate argument for the re-establishment of a well-funded and well-trained military?and a realistic strategy for how we can achieve it, given the threatening new climate of the 21st century. Who Killed the Canadian Military? will provoke impassioned debate and controversy in the media, and among ordinary Canadians.

So what do you canadians think?

should we pour a bigger percentage of out budget into defense?

but if we started doing that, would we be able to afford the current health care system and whatnot?

I dunno, it may be a dangerous world, but I don't see how it's safer if everyone builds their military up to wazoo. But thats the way it's going. Maybe it's necessary, but I wish it wasn't.

tho i have not read this, ive heard it is in a vein similar to andrew cohen's while canada slept: how we lost our place in the world.

while cohen articulates the factual collapse of the military, he fails to contextualize the benefits canada would find were a cash infusion given and greater respect observed to invigorate the military.

my thinking is much along your lines basstrap-and that is a very canadian view it seems. great pride is still derived from pearson's nobel prize and it seems there is enough anti-bush sentiment in canada to convince us that 9/11 could have easily, and may yet, occur in toronto or ottawa (several specific sites in ottawa have been considered potentially likely targets, not just the U.S. embassy). the consensus among military minds in this nation is that in the last few decades canada has become a little too comfortable with the degree of safety we enjoy from simply being the neighbour of the U.S.

i think a broad resurgence of canada's global importance is one of the objectives of martin and will come about through his campaign. in addition to military funding and perhaps far more effective, are foreign aid increases such as those we are seeing today for the AIDS crisis. tentative participation in the 'star wars' missile program (sorry, i can't remember the new name) will go a long ways to improving american relations, though the program may never successfully come to fruition. so while greater funding for our military is absolutely necessary even if for our own protection, many resources should go toward other interests with similarly peaceful objectives.

keep in mind that efforts at greater global participation have been made. under pm chretien prior to the iraq war, an 11th hour canadian peace plan was applauded by many non-coalition members as an effective solution but shot down by the U.S.
Last edited:
Top Bottom