Arctic Sovereignty Patrols

[Neo]

Canadian ranger group completes longest one-way Arctic sovereignty patrol
(http://www.canada.com/news/national/story.html?id=0e312bd6-9542-4141-897c-fc498dafdb70)

Opinions? Comments? Let's hear them...

[DVessey]

sounds like fun! :D

Definitely need to establish Canada's ownership of Northern waterways though.

[Logan]

They should use army cadets for that and just call it an expedition :D deffinately would require a high level of physical fitness.

[piper]

Good idea, we'll give all those intruders a scare with our Daisy air rifles.

[Neo]

Now for my comments :D

I think its great, especially now that the Rangers are being used. I find it interesting that Lee Enfields still have a use these days, its good to heart...

I also find intersting that a Canadian Ship will be heading up for the first time in 20 years (the HMCS Montreal), its a good thing, we should go to the little island the Danes have tried to claim, and raise the maple leaf.

[wil_kla_von]

This is pretty amusing. I like the phrase "sovereignty patrol." It sounds 19th century. You would think that during this day and age, modern countries would not need to resort to such measures.

Doesn't the United States go up their with their Coast Guard ice breakers year round? You don't see them trying to gobble up territory. Besides, they got Alaska. Who would stop them? :p

What are those Danes up to anyway? :( Or is this what small little countries do to have fun? :) Heres what they would say: "How bout we feel important about ourselves, and go find some international dispute, just so we can feel mighty, and put our nations armed forces to a test? Averting war of course, we can't have that." I guess I would call it modern international humor. With a twist, the cast can freeze to death, rather than get shot.

I give the Canadians credit though. Its a tough job, and somebody has go to do it. Thank goodness no one perished.

[N. McKay]

Doesn't the United States go up their with their Coast Guard ice breakers year round? You don't see them trying to gobble up territory. Besides, they got Alaska. Who would stop them? :p

I don't know how often it happens now, but they've certainly done it in the past.

The issue is that some countries dispute Canada's claim to some of our territorial waters (and, as you know, the Danes dispute our claim to one of the islands as well). If Canada can't demonstrate sovereignty over the water or land, we risk losing them and the resources therein. For example, if there's oil to be had from the Northwest Passage, we don't want someone else grabbing it off of our doorstep.

One very effective way to demonstrate sovereignty over an area is to put soldiers on it, and that's what the Rangers are up to.

[Logan]

The reason enfields are still used is because they're the only rifle that can suvive in those conditions for an extend period of time. the plastic on the C-7 gets really brittle and breaks in temperatures that cold.

[Neo]

I know why they use them, I just happen to like the Lee Enfields and for some reason pleased that we are still using them.

[Bos'n101]

(and, as you know, the Danes dispute our claim to one of the islands as well).
Alot more than 1, the Danes have claimed our entire eastern set of arctic islands. I'm not 100% sure, but i believe that includes Ellesmere and Baffin.

[Slippery Pete]

This may sound a lot like the sort of thing that was necessary in the 19th century. However, with the rise of global warming (debate all you wish but the ice caps are melting) the North-West passage is becoming a viable option for international shipping rather than the Panama Canal.

The United States and the European Union do not recognise the passage as Canadian waters and refer to it as International Waters. In the next 20 years Canada would be entitled to substantial fees from shipping passing through the passage rather the than costly Panama Canal. If Canadian sovereignty is not established in the area and they are secured as international waters Canada would not be entitled to anything.

In addition, the United States and Canada currently do have a dispute as to the projection of the Alaska/Canada border into the Arctic Ocean. As previously mentioned, this area is very rich in natural resources and Canada stands to lose a lot if the US claim is succesful.

[frammy]

do i sniff a war on the horizon?

You Canadians will win if it came to that as the danish only have ham shanks to throw as weapons

[Neo]

I think Canada needs to spend some money on creating some sort of Military Stations throughout the Arctic.

I know it seems like a huge action, but a few stations could maintain our hold over a sizable area of land and water. As well, our Submarines would be able to patrol the waters, since really, what else do they have to do once they become active?

This is one of those issues where Canada needs to stick up for itself.

[SLt Hillier]

Alot more than 1, the Danes have claimed our entire eastern set of arctic islands. I'm not 100% sure, but i believe that includes Ellesmere and Baffin.
Just for everyone to know, Baffin Island is home to Iqaluit, the capital of Nunavut. There is no dispute there.

Carry on

[N. McKay]

I think Canada needs to spend some money on creating some sort of Military Stations throughout the Arctic.

There's one now: CFS Alert.


I know it seems like a huge action, but a few stations could maintain our hold over a sizable area of land and water. As well, our Submarines would be able to patrol the waters, since really, what else do they have to do once they become active?

Diesel submarines don't do too well under the ice. Arctic sovereignty was one of the arguments in favour of getting some nuclear submarines in the '80s.

The submarines employment will include training (easier to learn how to catch one if you've got one to practise with!) and fisheries patrol (easier to get pictures of a misbehaving fishing vessel when they don't know you're around), among others I'm sure.

[Neo]

There's one now: CFS Alert.

I meant more then Alert Sir, to reinforce our military presence. :)




Diesel submarines don't do too well under the ice. Arctic sovereignty was one of the arguments in favour of getting some nuclear submarines in the '80s.

The submarines employment will include training (easier to learn how to catch one if you've got one to practise with!) and fisheries patrol (easier to get pictures of a misbehaving fishing vessel when they don't know you're around), among others I'm sure.

It doesn't have to be covert, I just meant perhaps they could travel there as a military presence.

--

But what Canada really needs is new Ice Breakers, we have to be the ones clearing the path, we need to take the initiative.

[N. McKay]

Alert certainly isn't what it used to be; there used to be a substantial garrison there. I'll bet the mess is pretty quiet compared to twenty years ago.

Icebreakers (even one) would certainly be nice to have. HMCS LABRADOR was the last naval icebreaker, long since paid off via the Coast Guard.