>

I agree with your statement. However I am not suggesting to do more than just the flag removal. Would you fly a 'German 1940s' flag with the special symbol during ww2 to represent German people living in your city/country? The flag not only represent the people but its government as well. That's my two cents.
Next couple days should bring some good news from multiple countries. Expect more announcements before this round of security meetings are done. >

How much are they going to have at this point? Enough for an entire armoured division from western tanks and IFV’s? >

Hopefully even more. Several vehicle transfer 'red lines' have been crossed just in the past two weeks. The flood gates are being opened. >


Several vehicle transfer 'red lines' have been crossed

Its actually amazing to see
At the start of the war the line was effectively 1 or 2 troop carriers, a dozen or so antiaircraft launchers 
Now equipment enough to arm small countries is being sent each time >

I don't think Russia has ever encountered such a middle finger that didn't come from Russia itself. >

The got a nice middle finger salute from the Americans in Afghanistan in the 1980s. >

I would have submitted this as " Canada to send Senators into Ukraine battlefield"
It would have so many meanings and I think most Canadians could get behind any of those meanings. >

No I would be embarrassed reading that. To imply that we only sent one of our NHL teams to fight... >


To imply that we only sent one of our NHL teams to fight...

And not even one of the good ones. >

Hey! Not cool! >

Ya, frig you! >

Whoa thats a huge donation from Canada. The Mounties will have to go back to riding horses. ( Jk ) >

Wait when did they stop? Haha >

When they figured out how to saddle a tank. >

The trick is to use a broomstick to push the pedals while you're straddling the roof >

Aaah, Mr Bean style >

I see you are a being of utmost culture >

As a Canadian I approve!
Glory to Ukraine!
Edit* FUCK YOU RUSSIA, bunch of bitches. >

Not to put a damper on it, but supposedly the CAF has been trying to procure these things for our own use for years. It's kinda funny how we can get them for our friends in a matter of months, but not for ourselves. >

They have more need than us right now, don't be a suka. >

I don't think that's the point they are trying to make. I think they are just pointing out that our (Canadian) government isn't willing to fund our military needs for years but is happy to spend for Ukraine. It's not a good/bad thing, just an observation that there is money for this stuff but our government doesn't see it as important for our military. I genuinely doubt soldiers in our military are upset that we are sending stuff to Ukraine at all. >

Canada has NATO to fall back on. The pressure the people have on the gov to up the force quickly pales in comparison to the boost of goodwill and global presence these donation have >

And I'm not denying that whatsoever. Nor did I say that these donations were a bad thing, I inferred that they were a good thing. I'm just pointing out that our government needs to take our military needs more seriously since we have the money. We could have bought these a while ago for our own use and donated them in which case they would already be in transit, along with anything else we could have procured as well at this time.
Just because we have NATO to fall back on doesn't mean we shouldn't have a strong military - look at the slow and scrambling response from a number of European NATO members at the outbreak of this war. We have significantly more land and coastline to defend with a much smaller budget, US aside any support we could get is an ocean away. We shouldn't be in that position if we can afford it. >

A very valid point! I'm an American, so I have no right saying what Canada should or shouldn't do. I was just stating some things from my perspective. Thanks for the reply >

Would love to also see humanitarian refuge support so we can get at risk innocent Ukrainian women/children/elderly/disabled out of the country. This goes for the whole West. >


Canada is donating 200 Canadian-made armoured personnel carriers to Ukraine, Defence Minister Anita Anand announced on Wednesday while visiting Kyiv, Ukraine.

...

Anand said the Senator APCs are being purchased from Roshel, a Canadian company based in Mississauga, Ont., at a cost of $90 million.

...

Since the beginning of 2022, Canada has provided more than $5 billion in direct assistance to Ukraine, including $1 billion in military aid.

Nicely done,  Slava Ukraini. >

This makes perfect sense.
It's built on a standard truck frame (Ford F550) so no special servicing requirements or parts.
It's a Canadian Company so a portion of those funds will flow back in the form of taxes and secondary economic value. >

Fully agreed. We could also send some LAV heavy APCs/IFVs that are also built in Canada, but the government is seemingly not willing to do that yet. >

Honestly with the Bradley line being crossed I wouldn't be surprised to see some LAVs in the next package. America has broken the seal on IFVs and the LAVs we build are exceptionally capable in wet, shitty terrain. >

we (Belgians) recently received 40 million euros to reinforce certain highways for heavy military equipment. Most military roll material passes through our ports. I suspect that many countries will join Canada if they already invest in our road network... >

"So like, take good care of these here Zambonis, eh. We'll need them back by next winter" >

Ukraine is going to have bits and pieces of every western military, which is not great logistically and in terms of training.  OTOH Russia is going the other way, digging into the Soviet-era stuff in the back of the cabinet, consistent, but woefully outdated and poorly maintained, unable to keep up production of the new stuff.  Personally, as an armchair general myself, I think I would take the random assortment of modern hardware over rusted out Soviet bits. >

I suppose it's a good thing that western equipment is generally built with interoperability and modification in mind, huh? >

These are built on a standard Ford F550 chassis.
Parts and service are readily available from everywhere. >

Lots of Russian bots on here today ffs… >

Also a lot of people acting like they’re fighting the war by writing slava ukraina and phrasing their comments as if they are actually fighting >

Nice, between all countries they have to be up to several hundred armored vehicles at least. Maybe even a couple thousand. That will make an impact. >

I'm staring to believe that "donating equipment to Ukraine" is really "sending products to Ukraine for beta testing".
Sending those 200 vehicles will reap the benefits for the manufacturer/government when reports come back on their combat effectiveness and reliability for ... the next upgraded model, which can then boast "Tested under fire" >

That's already been happening, Canada has already sent around a hundred of these vehicles to Ukraine (it wasn't just the Canadian government sending them), and feedback from the Ukrainians has been continually integrated into new production. In early January, Roshel said that 100 had been delivered to Ukraine and 300 more were queued up to go. This new announcement would seem to indicate another 200 on top of that?
Either way, Ukraine is going to have a large number of Roshel Senators. They're not front-line combat vehicles, but they're still badly needed. >

Thanks, Canada! This is gonna be invaluable help! 💪 >

Let’s do this shit. Get our boys equipped to smite the Russians from Ukrainian land >

As a Canadian, I think we should be doing much more, as should the rest of the world, but it's a good start. Send those Leopard 2 tanks!
Slava Ukraini. >

Agreed but the problem with Leo2s is that we don’t get to choose if and when we can donate them, they’re not built here and therefore not easily replaceable. It would take years to replace whatever we donate. Also, we don’t have that many to begin with, especially compared to our NATO allies. 
What could be more useful and impactful, in my opinion, would be sent hundreds of LAV6, of which we have plenty. These are also built in Canada so it would be relatively easy to just order some more to replace those we donated. Literal bang for buck, that’s the best option IMO. Oh, and we wouldn’t have to wait for German approval as well. 
200 LAV6 > 20 Leo2 >

Oh, I think the US could spare a few Abrams for our northern neighbors. The Marine Corps is no longer using them, so that frees up about 400. >

We should really set up a trade. 
The US doesn't want to sned Abrams to Ukraine for fear tech will get captured by Russia and/or sold on to China/Iran
Germany doesn't want to permit export of Leopords to Ukraine to avoid escalation, and would potentially ban future export to Canada if we ignore them
The US can grease the wheels here by giving us enough Abrams to replace our small main battle tank fleet (112 tanks), and give us the ability to order future tanks from the US at the same discounted unit cost as the us military (to compensate from losing out of competitive bids from Germany, one of the largest tank exporters in the world) for a fixed number of decades.
In exchange we bring over a few thousand Ukrainians, give them extensive training with the Leopards, then send our entire fleet to the front while we retrain ourselves to use Abrams instead 
Seems fairly win-win if the US has idle tanks at standby >

You’d need some kind of mutual defense assurance in the meantime, but yeah it’d work. Something like “If anyone fucks with Canada while they don’t have operable tanks, we will end them.” 
But yeah, I see this as an absolute win. >

We already have that, it's NATO Article 5 >

Good point. We should move forward with this plan. >

O Canada 🇨🇦, and glory to Ukraine 🇺🇦.  Nice to see our government taking concrete actions to support the side of right, as well as our global interests. >

Well, that’s all of them. >

Hopefully much needed weapons will get to Ukraine even sooner, considering Russia appears to be getting ready to ramp up these imbecilic attacks and increasing their conscription. >

Canada is awesome.  funny how France has donated next to nothing but their sister country Canada is coming through big time >

Rules of Acquisition no. 34 War is good for business. >

Indeed, Star Trek rule 34 is interestingly worth applying to most situations in real life. Wish i had learnt about it earlier. >

Rule 35 is Peace Is Good For Business though, the Ferengi aren't militaristic, just profiteering assholes. >

I'm happy to see that Canada sending Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine is still on the table (what good are MBTs doing in North America, send them to Ukraine where they can do some good). I'd also like to see Canada send all of our Leopard 1 tanks to Ukraine. They've been somewhat modernized and were in active use until 2017, and Canada has been trying and failing to sell them all off ever since. If nobody wants to buy them, why not just give them to Ukraine? >

The reason why nobody wants them is that they are held together with bailing wire and duct tape, having been used for an order of magnitude longer than they were designed for.
Some were literally monuments, pulled off pedestals and pressed back into service in Afghanistan as stopgaps until the Leo2s made it there.
I participated in a fire-off of expired main gun ammo when the Leo1 was removed from service, and my poor panzer had no stab, no LRF, no thermals, and the gunner's sight would not align with the commander's sight. I was adjusting fire by Kentucky windage!
After a couple of rounds I had a pretty good idea where it was going to go and was getting first round hits, but the first couple of engagements... woof! >

So... like a modern Russian tank.
Joking aside (is it though?), I think even half working 50 year old Leopard 1s could be put to good use in Ukraine. Even used as reserve, they can free up better equipment to go to the front. >

i am thankful and surprised that canada can afford or has that many armored vehicles. >

We don't. Roshel has to build them.. deliveries should complete by summer >

ty for the info! summer though. i don’t know if that is quick or slow but it’s kinda sad russia still doesn’t wanna stop. 
i think russia will be divided by the time this ends and we will be supporting one side too. >

Well it's not like we're using them. >

Good but do we even have that many. LOL >

Right lol, that's like half our fleet right there.
Edit: looked it up, it's not half..but it's 10% total. >

Give them a squad of old A-10s they can destroy all the Russian artillery and be done with this. >

That is not a great idea. 
A-10s do what they do under the umbrella of overwhelming control of the airspace.
Something Ukraine does not have. 
Russian anti-air has been tuned to fight US air-assets and the A-10 tough bird that it is can not contend with actual "modern" anti-air. It is slow and flies low, which we have used to our advantage for years, but would not be helpful in this theater. 
There is a reason we haven't provided many aircraft, and it is mostly the proliferation of MANPADs that can shoot down modern aircraft. >

The whole Canadian inventory or she is going to buy them at the dealership. The poor Canadian armed forces will never ever get their equipment that quickly. Canadian politicians have no will to buy any weapons to the soldiers because Canadians in general don’t think it is not necessary. >

These arent used by the Canadian Military if I understand correctly and instead produced by a private canadian company >

So Canada bought them at a “dealership “. >

How many armored vehicles does Canada have? Is that a sizeable percentage of their fleet? >

These are being built new. >

Not like the Canadians need them >

Well, its not like the Canadian Forces use these vehicles. They are new builds for Ukraine. >

Send more money; more guns; more tanks more anything you have we need to vanquish Russia!!! >

Does Canada even have that many?  Sounded like they needed to be built, and so could take a while >

That's like our whole fleet >

Wow, this military industrial complex is actually proving to support justice and be a net good >

It's LAV 6s
Actually really new IFVs >

No it will be senator apcs still extremely useful and brand new but not IFVs >

TIL we have 200 armored vehicles to give away...  
(E: for reference, Canada has a total of 82 actual tanks. 200 armored vehicles represent about 10% of our armored vehicles if we include all categories. And that's Wikipedia's list, not the updated functional units count. Hence why I'm surprised we would give away such a big proportion). >

These are being built new. >

My bad, glossed over that part of the article. I'm surprised they would not send the Bison. They have almost exactly 200 of them that are supposed to be replaced between 2020 and 2025. >

Affordable housing. Canadians need housing. Everywhere across the board. Untouchable by equity and investment. Only private ownership by person occupying. >

Maybe Afghanistan could send them a few billion $ worth of equipment?
They've got no problem with Ukraine AFAIK >

i fully enjoy seeing this and as a Canadian am happy to see more help being sent, but internationally speaking, if Russia were to.. say, attack one of these shipments mid transit. how does that play out? is that a nato involvement? or can they cover their asses with "self defense" callouts? >

Let them play their game... >

I want each and every one to have Terrance and Philip painted on the side, farting on Putin >

It’s aboot time >

I got confused when I read the title with another post right below it about the church of England and I thought the church was donating 200 armored vehicles. >

Where the hell did we get those? Flying 50 year old helos and sailing on 40 year old ships. >

Can we just send over our freedom convoy fighters instead? >

Hope those vehicles come from London.
Would be cool if my city was a part of that. >

We have that nuch to give??? >

Keep it rolling, the murder of babies, mothers and grandmothers should not be tolerated anywhere in the world. >

Sweet! I got five on it. >

Too bad they only actually care about American tanks, and Olaf is such a fucking piece of shit. >

I so badly wish we could put boots on the ground and run roughshod over them. Russian forces would be decimated so fast. Fuck Putin and his bullshit. >

Isn't that like Canada's entire military? >

Yup, just fund other peoples wars with my money. All good. >

Given the condition of most Canadian military equipment, this action can be interpreted as supporting Russia. >

what's wrong with the Senator APC? you seem to be well informed to form such an opinion. >

when and how ukranians can pay these war depts... >

By weakening a terrorist state, Russia. They're doing it now. >

Yeah in the end of Russia's going to pay for this. Not just politically in their own country, economically in their own country, but war crime fines in UN courts... Or get kicked out of the UN if need be. >

Because in those parts of their own country were Russians, who have actually been there since 2011 as far as I know from my friends in Donetsk. Hard to remove foreign invaders when they are armed Russian soldiers. Have to do some bombing, and as we have seen Russians love using the civilians in those areas as cannon fodder. >

True Donation like Germany or Land Lease like US? >

Straight up donation
Canada is not participating in a lend lease agreement.
Canada is pretty invested in the war in Ukraine, since Canada is home to the largest number of Ukrainian ex-pats of any country in the world >

Not expats, but people of ukrainian descent. Also, that is a poor excuse for helping Ukraine. We're helping them because it's a chance to knock out on our top geopolitical enemies. >

Excuse me, but it's a fantastic reason to help Ukraine. Defending both democracy and your own ancestry is a way better reason than punching out at a rival. >

Should we be obliged to help India, or god forbid China as well for the same reason? Hence why it's not a good reason.
India I'm sure we would, because they're at least nominally considered an ally. But not because we have a lot of indian people. >

Having a good reason to do something in no way obligates you to do it. >

Didn't realize we had 200 armoured vehicles.
This just makes it easier for the US to invade us when they inevitably come for our water and other natural resources. >

We're coming for your maple syrup! >

So, canoes with body armor? >

Down vote all you like, it doesn't change the fact of what I said. >

And the city of Sudbury keeps flying the russian flag saying they won't take it down. It represents the people..... >

They fly it along with flags from many other nations.  
"The concept of our 'Bridge of Nations' was to showcase who lives in Sudbury and how many communities live in peace here in Sudbury. Every flag that's on the bridge was fundraised by the respective community and it's a symbol to show pride, peace and goodwill to our community,"   
We need to be careful to separate Russians immigrants in Canada from the actions of their government. Otherwise we repeat the mistakes made e.g. against the Japanese in WWII.