Conscription - Could Canada even successfully do it now?

[Slegr]

Imagine Canada needed to become majorly involved in a new war. It's not too far of a stretch these days.

Canadians have been conscripted twice in history. Both times, only males were conscripted, for the first World War, and WW2. It was a hot issue that divided the English and French.

Fast-forward to 2024. There is more entitlement than ever, as well as dozens of potential exemptions that people could probably claim. We saw what happened when the Canadian government tried making Covid vaccines mandatory - all the naysayers joined forces.

So I have two questions:   

Could Canada hold a successful conscription today if it needed to?

And should females be part of it?

Edited February 18 by Slegr

[Bob Long]

I think we'd have enough people willing to protect Canada if need be. Maybe not the gravy seals but I do think many young people would step up.

 

On the female issue, I said no, but wouldn't prevent volunteers.

[NHLer]

Interesting question. What prompted you to ask?

[Ghostsof1915]

1) We need to get the right equipment, and decide what type of actions Canada can afford to take. We should be looking to nations like Sweden who have an effective

   military, and their own defence industries and they only buy outside for equipment they can't make themselves. Or do a lot of joint projects to help with jobs. Once again

   don't just throw money away for the most expensive and newest tech. Find the best bang for the buck.

2) We need to determine strategies for 21st century defence. Ukraine is doing very well with drones, artillery, and ground troops. And adjust accordingly. There should also be lots of equipment and training for natural disasters like earthquakes, floods, drought, blizzards. Even to be able to have military hospitals to assist with day to day to the public so that it can handle the minor injuries, and take the load off of our hospitals.

 

3) You can have one year of public service. Choose military or peace corps type programs when you're 19. Learn skills, trades, you don't have to be in the military. You can do construction, build homes, fix up homes, medical aid, childcare, social programs, help community projects. Get paid one year with bonuses that can be either in cash, bonds, or even post secondary credits and tuition credits.

 

4) If there's a serious war, do what Canada usually does. Volunteers first. If that isn't enough. Vote in the house on conscription.

 

[Ghostsof1915]

11 minutes ago, NHLer said:

Interesting question. What prompted you to ask?

Slegr wants us to take over Haiti.

[Miss Korea]

2 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Slegr wants us to take over Haiti.

Canada's economy is now.... bananas and cocoa beans

[Satchmo]

4 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Slegr wants us to take over Haiti.

I'm still hoping for the Turks and Caicos.   Jokes aside, I don't think Slegre's question can be answered without knowing against whom and why?

[Alflives]

Young Canadians would step up. No need for Conscription. But we should have a one year mandatory military training (non combat) after high school. Teach everyone how to use firearms (and other basic training) and to fight, if they choose to do so. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

Huge uproar in Quebec (among other provinces) about conscription for WW2.  Irony is many that ended fighting in Europe died in France (where Charles de Gaulle rewarded that sacrifice by his "Viva la Quebec Libre" speech stoking the fires of the Separtists).  

[bishopshodan]

What would the reasons be for not requiring females?

 

 

[Western Red]

8 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

What would the reasons be for not requiring females?

 

 

If they are pregnant, or have children under 19 yrs old and are primary caregiver.

[AAA]

Maybe I am in the minority, but I don't think young people would necessarily willingly choose to fight in a war.

 

Man-made lines designate what a country is... And "fearless leaders" get rich off of wars while protecting their families and their interests.

[RomanPer]

I answered "No" to the first question and wanted to expand on it. Conscription goes way beyond ability to convince the citizens to abide by the conscription law. This is normally a huge logistical operation (have sufficient uniforms for all the conscripts, which in Canadian climate includes both light summer and heavy winter clothing; sufficient protection equipment; sufficient number of firearms; sufficient number of sergeant and officers to lead the conscripts; means of transportation of the conscripts; provision of adequate training, etc.). This is where, I believe, the federal government will fail.

[Alflives]

16 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

What would the reasons be for not requiring females?

 

 

Care of the kids. 

[Coconuts]

Honestly, I don't think a lot of younger folks would be all that interested in fighting in a war. I sure as hell ain't. Canada doesn't have the ingrained military culture of the US. I don't believe not wanting to go fight in some military conflict makes one entitled. 

 

Conscription would probably be the only way some would fight, but I guarantee you there are probably many who'd rather simply sit in prison or something akin to that. If conscription were to happen I imagine it'd conscript younger folks in general, not just men. 

 

There's also a difference between agreeing to stick around in Canada and participate in the military and being willing to be shipped abroad. 

 

The military has not only struggled to recruit for a while, but to retain as well. 

Edited February 18 by Coconuts

[Gurn]

1 hour ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Slegr wants us to take over Haiti.

 

59 minutes ago, Satchmo said:

I'm still hoping for the Turks and Caicos.   Jokes aside, I don't think Slegre's question can be answered without knowing against whom and why?

 

 

I'm looking at Iceland and Cuba.

Having Iceland become part of Canada does a very good job of firming up Northwest Passage control; and Cuba would be a good acquisition in that they are similar in social  programs, doctors/dentists etc.- Plus warm water port for the Navy 

[the destroyer of worlds]

The two previous wars should be a guide.

 

Canada's patchwork volunteer militia/military was expanded first with volunteers.  Even the Boer was saw the drive of volunteers to the service.

 

It's only once in the thick of it that conscription became a thing.

 

By the end of the war, Canada's divisions were kicking ass tip of the spear type units.  In WW1, the Germans knew something was up when the Canadians or the ANZAC divisions showed up.  

[The Arrogant Worms]

It would be pointless.  We barely have a military now and any war won't be fought on the ground.

[bishopshodan]

1 hour ago, Western Red said:

If they are pregnant, or have children under 19 yrs old and are primary caregiver.

 

 

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Care of the kids. 

 

Nobody pregnant should be sent to war. That seems obvious.

 

Primary caregivers could be men too but I understand that children need to be looked after.

 

Anyway, if nasty little children are not in the picture, I dont see any reason not to have all able bodied adult Canadians help fight. 

 

[bishopshodan]

1 hour ago, AAA said:

Maybe I am in the minority, but I don't think young people would necessarily willingly choose to fight in a war.

 

Man-made lines designate what a country is... And "fearless leaders" get rich off of wars while protecting their families and their interests.

You might not be in the minority.

 

The young people are way too smart these days to fight for ....well, your second sentence.

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, bishopshodan said:

You might not be in the minority.

 

The young people are way too smart these days to fight for ....well, your second sentence.

 

I tend to think if your home is really threatened, people will step up. Like Tyson says, everyone has a plan until you get punched in the mouth. If Russia e.g., decided to invade I believe that the kids would step up. 

 

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

I voted no for both.

 

If we were to be engaged in a war requiring immediate conscription, we'd have already lost the war.  The military is not something that you can just add to without significant planning and proper roll-out.  Training aside, there are all sorts of logistics that come with it, much of which has already been covered in other posts by other posters more attuned to military needs.

 

Conscripting women also wouldn't be something that would or should happen right away.  I agree with @Bob Long's suggestion that on a voluntary basis women could join, but much for the same reason as above, the logistics of suddenly increasing the ranks would take an awful lot of planning and roll-out, adding to the fact that there would need to be different accommodations to fit the practical and physiological needs of females in the military (and I don't mean this in a sexist way).

 

A good example would be Taiwan.  They have mandatory military training, and they recently upped the term of active militar service from 4 months to a year, after they allowed women to volunteer as reservists.  The extension to include women didn't happen earlier due to a capacity issue, while the time extension returned the military service length to pre-2013 requirements, owing to the constant sabre-rattling across the Strait.  It's important to note that Taiwan is not yet (re-)engaged in war, so this preparatory work is something that could result in a successful all-open conscription if needed, unlike what Canada would likely be doing if we were to start conscripting after engaging in warfare.  Our only advantage is that we're somewhat distant to the most likely adversaries, but that distance has long since been shrunk through inter-continental ballistic missiles, internet warfare, submersibles, and high-speed watercraft and aircraft.  And if our opponent happens to be our neighbours to the south, we're fucked regardless.

[Spur1]

We have no shortage of gamers to operate drones. They can even do it from their parents basement. 

Edited February 18 by Spur1

[Bob Long]

3 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

I voted no for both.

 

If we were to be engaged in a war requiring immediate conscription, we'd have already lost the war.  The military is not something that you can just add to without significant planning and proper roll-out.  Training aside, there are all sorts of logistics that come with it, much of which has already been covered in other posts by other posters more attuned to military needs.

 

Conscripting women also wouldn't be something that would or should happen right away.  I agree with @Bob Long's suggestion that on a voluntary basis women could join, but much for the same reason as above, the logistics of suddenly increasing the ranks would take an awful lot of planning and roll-out, adding to the fact that there would need to be different accommodations to fit the practical and physiological needs of females in the military (and I don't mean this in a sexist way).

 

A good example would be Taiwan.  They have mandatory military training, and they recently upped the term of active militar service from 4 months to a year, after they allowed women to volunteer as reservists.  The extension to include women didn't happen earlier due to a capacity issue, while the time extension returned the military service length to pre-2013 requirements, owing to the constant sabre-rattling across the Strait.  It's important to note that Taiwan is not yet (re-)engaged in war, so this preparatory work is something that could result in a successful all-open conscription if needed, unlike what Canada would likely be doing if we were to start conscripting after engaging in warfare.  Our only advantage is that we're somewhat distant to the most likely adversaries, but that distance has long since been shrunk through inter-continental ballistic missiles, internet warfare, submersibles, and high-speed watercraft and aircraft.  And if our opponent happens to be our neighbours to the south, we're fucked regardless.

 

conscription doesn't necessarily have to be for the pointy end of the stick though. It can be for all of the operational support needed to allow our current forces members to get to the front quickly. 

 

[bishopshodan]

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

 

I tend to think if your home is really threatened, people will step up. Like Tyson says, everyone has a plan until you get punched in the mouth. If Russia e.g., decided to invade I believe that the kids would step up. 

 

Yeah,  in a defensive Red Dawn style..  sure.

 

The idea of being sent way for war though, not so sure.

Guess it comes down to what 'necessity' level we are talking about and who make's the determination of that necessity decision.

 

Could you image Trudeau coming out and saying we need to get involved in a war and you're about to be conscripted? 

Who's gonna listen to that?