He never meant to hurt anyone
06.03.2026 02:16
👍 2
🔁 0
💬 2
📌 0
He never meant to hurt anyone
I bet it's already taken
I am Eric Fury
*Epic
Yep exactly. And the Hornets would take a while and attract far more attention.
Once again, a naval task group deployment to assist with the protection of Gulf shipping is the most likely scenario in the event of a future Cdn mission.
CDS: Stating a negative on Eric Fury twice.
Bluesky: Per se?!
A likely scenario:
PMO: We're not getting involved in any way.
CAF: (looking up for scenario planning)....Um, Prime Minister, we might hypothetically in the extreme need to do x, y, z to address second order consequences in the region.
PMO: Ah.
(cough)
Starmer: We're not joining the US/Israeli war, but we are deploying forces to protect UK citizens and assist 10 regional allies who are affected.
Cdn Bluesky: The UK is joining the American war!
Our new podcast episode dropped: on #BattleRhythm @profwhw.bsky.social and I discuss the Iran war and also the fight between a tech company and the Pentagon over the use of their AI and then @plagasse.bsky.social Interviews LTG Boivan who runs all CAF ops cdsn.substack.com/p/episode-41...
Note as well the RCN's role in region in 1990-1991 and 2001-2002.
You understand that allied countries have ships and depend on shipping, right?
So, back to the navy.
One of the RCN roles is to defend sea lines of communication. Those sea lines keep the global
economy going.
It would be unwise to categorically rule out a role for the RCN in protecting allied shipping in the Gulf and Indian Ocean.
Canada's only ally in the world is the United States?
If you're worried that we're going to send CF-18s there or whatever, that would be tremendously complicated. And even then, if you're ruling out offensive roles, their utility would be limited.
If asked
The likeliest scenario for a very hypothetical Canadian involvement would be a navy task group to help protect shipping in the Gulf.
You asked about Greece and Turkey. The mission was the solution to two NATO allies in a conflict. If you know about it, perhaps it's worth revising to contention that we haven't looked at ways of addressing their situation.
You may have heard about Canada's peacekeeping mission to Cyprus that's been ongoing since 1964 and has attempted to keep these two apart.
What do we want? Steady alliances and a rules-based order!
So we defend our allies in accordance with international law, right? No!
I love this place.
You don't always need Article 5 to help defend an ally.
You can assist an ally if they ask.
Turkey is a NATO ally, for example.
Yes. Turkey is a NATO ally and could easily be targeted.
Turkey? NATO ally.
thehill.com/policy/defen...
He's saying we're not going to participate in offensive actions against Iran, but might need to defend our allies.
Chill, people.
Be it resolved that Prime Minister Carney's government is a government like any other, weighed down by inevitable inconsistencies, internal disagreements and bureaucratic politics, and intractable trade-offs.
Since writing that post, I have it on good authority that the RCN wouldn't really move any boats between the coasts, which makes the mixed fleet option much more plausible.
With a mixed submarine fleet back on the table, here's my take on the idea from September:
philippelagasse.substack.com/p/two-types-...
That said, 15% can matter a lot if the rest of the scores are close!
