Duterte Threatens War with Canada

[Yusseria]

While this is stupid, he does have legitimate complaints.

Canada lied and dumped their garbage in the Phillipines and then demanded that the Filipinos dispose of it.

Take your fucking garbage back, Canada.

[Novus America]

While this is stupid, he does have legitimate complaints.

Canada lied and dumped their garbage in the Phillipines and then demanded that the Filipinos dispose of it.

Take your fucking garbage back, Canada.

Exactly.
Canada is in the wrong, but threatening a war you cannot possibly fight is silly.

[Tokora]

Would Duterte's reputation be in any way impacted if neither he nor Canada do anything?

[Kowani]

Would Duterte's reputation be in any way impacted if neither he nor Canada do anything?

Nah, he’d just look like a deranged old man. One more tinpot dictator.

[Yusseria]

Would Duterte's reputation be in any way impacted if neither he nor Canada do anything?

Nah, he’d just look like a deranged old man. One more tinpot dictator.

I'm fairly certain that neither of those countries possess the military capabilities to meaningfully project power onto the other. This "war" would probably just be them shooting spitballs at each other.

[Happsborough]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/24/asia/duterte-canada-trash-intl/index.html
https://thehill.com/policy/internationa ... -canada-if

Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte has threatened to "go to war" with Canada if the country doesn't take back tons of trash a Canada-based company had shipped to Manila several years ago.

"I'll give a warning to Canada maybe next week that they better pull that (trash) out," he said Tuesday, according to CNN Philippines. "We'll declare war against them, we can handle them anyway."
According to CNN Philippines, 103 containers holding 2,450 tons of trash were shipped to the Philippines in 2013 and 2014.
The containers were labeled as plastics for recycling, but inspectors in Philippines found the garbage was not recyclable. The trash was declared illegal as the private Canada-based company responsible for shipping the cargo didn't have import clearances.
Some of the containers are still at the port of Manila, according to the report.
The issue of global waste and what to do with it has become a growing problem. For years, developed countries have shipped recyclable waste overseas for processing, bu that is now beginning to change.
Last year, China moved to ban "foreign garbage" as a way to reduce environmental damage. The restrictions have reportedly led to recycling waste piling up in developed countries with nowhere to send it.
"I cannot understand why they are making us a dump site" said Duterte, who warned that he would sail to Canada and dump the trash there himself, adding: "The garbage is coming home."
The Philippines has been calling on Canada for years to repatriate its trash. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said in the past that he was "very much engaged in finding a solution" to the dumped waste.
Duterte often uses bombastic statements. Earlier this month, for instance, he threatened to send his troops on a "suicide mission" if Beijing didn't "lay off" a Manila-occupied island in the South China Sea.

So yeah my opinion, slayer of drug lords Papa Rody has decided to threaten Canada with war. Considering both the leaders are really bad, I worry about this. Anyways, I do hope this doesn’t escalate, because if it did, the Philippines may go back to its former colonizer, I do think Duterte will revoke his statements, giving it at most a week. So NSG, what do you feel about this statement from Duterte?

Is he serious? Threatening a US-backed country easily 30x the size of his with a military way better and stronger? I hope he's joking, or a repeat of the late 1890's (except with more syrup) may occur.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Why do you always insist they take off from Vancouver when even Dawson is 1500km closer?
-To take a very extreme example, the distance between Ottawa and Manilla is over 13,000 km... your point?

It has already been pointed out that a flight from Gaum would put them within 2500 km, within single-tanker range.
-Worst-case is Darwin to Manilla, a 3100 km flight.

Pull out a map and look at strike-options, not excuses. You aren't paid to make excuses.

Guam and Darwin are not Canadian bases.
Obviously a combined ANZUS NATO operation would win easily.
But Canadian participation would be negligible.

I guess you are really desperate to get the “I participated” trophy?

If the Philippines merely declared war, but did not attack (which it would not because it could not) it is very unlikely the US or Australia want to attack the Philippines.

And without them you are in no shape to do much. Well even with them.
Just drop a few bombs and that is it.

Or cuise up with a destroyer/frigate and lob a few five-inchers to test out those precision artillery shells.

Or launch a few harpoons...

Or sling a harpoon onto their Sea Kings/Cyclones. (Or fly a group of attack helies off the deck of a cargo-ship, Russian Naval Infantry style), which opens up the use of Chinook gunships, Huey/Griffons and Jetrangers/Kiowas for the inevitable land-invasion.

[Novus America]

Guam and Darwin are not Canadian bases.
Obviously a combined ANZUS NATO operation would win easily.
But Canadian participation would be negligible.

I guess you are really desperate to get the “I participated” trophy?

If the Philippines merely declared war, but did not attack (which it would not because it could not) it is very unlikely the US or Australia want to attack the Philippines.

And without them you are in no shape to do much. Well even with them.
Just drop a few bombs and that is it.

Or cuise up with a destroyer/frigate and lob a few five-inchers to test out those precision artillery shells.

Or launch a few harpoons...

Or sling a harpoon onto their Sea Kings/Cyclones. (Or fly a group of attack helies off the deck of a cargo-ship, Russian Naval Infantry style), which opens up the use of Chinook gunships, Huey/Griffons and Jetrangers/Kiowas for the inevitable land-invasion.

Canada has no 5 inch guns on ships.
It has no destroyers and its frigates have a mere 57 inch gun.

Chinooks are not gunships.

Canada does not have forces well suited for the role, and as such could only provide vide very limited, ancillary support to the US.
So it would be the US actually doing the fighting.

Which again unless the Philippines actually attacked Canada (which it could not do) the US would not do.

So if the Philippines actually did declare war it would be a poorly symbolic measure, and settled by diplomacy anyways.

[Novus America]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/24/asia/duterte-canada-trash-intl/index.html
https://thehill.com/policy/internationa ... -canada-if



So yeah my opinion, slayer of drug lords Papa Rody has decided to threaten Canada with war. Considering both the leaders are really bad, I worry about this. Anyways, I do hope this doesn’t escalate, because if it did, the Philippines may go back to its former colonizer, I do think Duterte will revoke his statements, giving it at most a week. So NSG, what do you feel about this statement from Duterte?

Is he serious? Threatening a US-backed country easily 30x the size of his with a military way better and stronger? I hope he's joking, or a repeat of the late 1890's (except with more syrup) may occur.

Serious? Maybe, maybe not. Dude is known for his outrageous and insane rants.

But declaring war and fighting one are two different things.
And actually the Philippines has 3 times Canada’s population.

Of course it has no way to actually project power across the Pacific and its military is very portly equipped.

But it is just Duterte being Duterte.
He only does a tiny portion of the insane stuff he rants about.
He is a danger to his own people but not to Canada.

[Pilipinas and Malaya]

Would Duterte's reputation be in any way impacted if neither he nor Canada do anything?

Well, it would be likely negatively impacting Duterte if he did nothing, especially where here he’s seen as a leader that has initiative.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Would Duterte's reputation be in any way impacted if neither he nor Canada do anything?

Well, it would be likely negatively impacting Duterte if he did nothing, especially where here he’s seen as a leader that has initiative.

So pretty much exactly like those times Scotland keeps declaring war on England, but somehow even less credible?

In American terms, Michigan and Ohio. Except there was actually sorta a border-war that one time back in eighteen tickety tree...

[Grand Britannia]

Guam and Darwin are not Canadian bases.
Obviously a combined ANZUS NATO operation would win easily.
But Canadian participation would be negligible.

I guess you are really desperate to get the “I participated” trophy?

If the Philippines merely declared war, but did not attack (which it would not because it could not) it is very unlikely the US or Australia want to attack the Philippines.

And without them you are in no shape to do much. Well even with them.
Just drop a few bombs and that is it.

Or cuise up with a destroyer/frigate and lob a few five-inchers to test out those precision artillery shells.

Or launch a few harpoons...

Or sling a harpoon onto their Sea Kings/Cyclones. (Or fly a group of attack helies off the deck of a cargo-ship, Russian Naval Infantry style), which opens up the use of Chinook gunships, Huey/Griffons and Jetrangers/Kiowas for the inevitable land-invasion.

Harpoon is an anti ship weapon...

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Or cuise up with a destroyer/frigate and lob a few five-inchers to test out those precision artillery shells.

Or launch a few harpoons...

Or sling a harpoon onto their Sea Kings/Cyclones. (Or fly a group of attack helies off the deck of a cargo-ship, Russian Naval Infantry style), which opens up the use of Chinook gunships, Huey/Griffons and Jetrangers/Kiowas for the inevitable land-invasion.

Harpoon is an anti ship weapon...

Originally, yes. But it has significant land-attack applications.

Essentially the RGM-84G is a ship-launched harpoon with a Tomahawk warhead to get around the ground launched cruise missile ban.... because that totally makes it a different missile for poli-legal reasons of 1980's logic.

So a recap:
These were legal.
These were not.

Mostly because the BGM-109 had an extra zero to its range.

More fun is when you realize you can just strap them directly onto their tankers for a very Canadian strategic bomber.

[Novus America]

Harpoon is an anti ship weapon...

Originally, yes. But it has significant land-attack applications.

Essentially the RGM-84G is a ship-launched harpoon with a Tomahawk warhead to get around the ground launched cruise missile ban.... because that totally makes it a different missile for poli-legal reasons of 1980's logic.

So a recap:
These were legal.
These were not.

Mostly because the BGM-109 had an extra zero to its range.

More fun is when you realize you can just strap them directly onto their tankers for a very Canadian strategic bomber.

Canada does not have any SLAMs though...
Look at the list of operators.

SLAM is not launched from any land or sea based platforms, only aircraft. It is based on Harpoon.
But is a different weapon. It cannot launch from standard Harpoon tubes.

And again Canada has no SLAMs.
Plus you cannot simply strap it to a platform to launch it.
It would require substantial modifications to a tanker to do that.
It would need proper weapons hard points installed.

It would be cheaper to just buy a proper aircraft for the job.

[Hladgos]

Does Canada have a space program right now? Trash powered rockets sounds like a great way to solve this all.

[The P h i l i p p i n e s]

What is this?

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Originally, yes. But it has significant land-attack applications.

Essentially the RGM-84G is a ship-launched harpoon with a Tomahawk warhead to get around the ground launched cruise missile ban.... because that totally makes it a different missile for poli-legal reasons of 1980's logic.

So a recap:
These were legal.
These were not.

Mostly because the BGM-109 had an extra zero to its range.

More fun is when you realize you can just strap them directly onto their tankers for a very Canadian strategic bomber.

Canada does not have any SLAMs though...
Look at the list of operators.

SLAM is not launched from any land or sea based platforms, only aircraft. It is based on Harpoon.
But is a different weapon. It cannot launch from standard Harpoon tubes.

And again Canada has no SLAMs.
Plus you cannot simply strap it to a platform to launch it.
It would require substantial modifications to a tanker to do that.
It would need proper weapons hard points installed.

It would be cheaper to just buy a proper aircraft for the job.

You really don't like doing follow-up ersearch on every land-attack variant of the harpoon, do you? Even after I mentioned what "RGM" in RGM-84G stands for...

Even the standard models have a land-attack capability (not as great, with a reduced range, but a lot better than launching a Tartar, SA-6, or Sea-Sparrow missile in radar-guided land-atack mode).

It would also be rather embarassing for the Mexican Navy to have better models of Harpoon missiles (Block II, RGM-84L) than the Canadians.

But hey, lets see what Canadian gov't has to say, eh?
So yes, it seems you can. And Canada does have RGM-84Gs or better, in this case, the L-model.
But maybe the internet lies.

As part of the Canadian MRTT program, the tanker refueling probes are pylon-mounted, and are swapped between transport aircraft to distribute the airframe stresss of being a tanker. If the Kiwis can strap it to the belly of a P-3 Orion and C-130, you can bet solid money you can strap them to a tanker (although prob not as good as the A/KC-130J that can just... park itself over a country's airspace for a week).

[Novus America]

Canada does not have any SLAMs though...
Look at the list of operators.

SLAM is not launched from any land or sea based platforms, only aircraft. It is based on Harpoon.
But is a different weapon. It cannot launch from standard Harpoon tubes.

And again Canada has no SLAMs.
Plus you cannot simply strap it to a platform to launch it.
It would require substantial modifications to a tanker to do that.
It would need proper weapons hard points installed.

It would be cheaper to just buy a proper aircraft for the job.

You really don't like doing follow-up ersearch on every land-attack variant of the harpoon, do you? Even after I mentioned what "RGM" in RGM-84G stands for...

Even the standard models have a land-attack capability (not as great, with a reduced range, but a lot better than launching a Tartar, SA-6, or Sea-Sparrow missile in radar-guided land-atack mode).

It would also be rather embarassing for the Mexican Navy to have better models of Harpoon missiles (Block II, RGM-84L) than the Canadians.

But hey, lets see what Canadian gov't has to say, eh?
So yes, it seems you can. And Canada does have RGM-84Gs or better, in this case, the L-model.[/quote]

But you mentioned SLAM.
Which was incorrect.

Sticking SLAM you do not have on an aircraft that does not hard points is still a bad idea.

Now yes you can use Harpoon as a limited land attack weapon. Would not do much damage though.

[Dogmeat]

Dumb. Dumb never changes.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

You really don't like doing follow-up ersearch on every land-attack variant of the harpoon, do you? Even after I mentioned what "RGM" in RGM-84G stands for...

Even the standard models have a land-attack capability (not as great, with a reduced range, but a lot better than launching a Tartar, SA-6, or Sea-Sparrow missile in radar-guided land-atack mode).

It would also be rather embarassing for the Mexican Navy to have better models of Harpoon missiles (Block II, RGM-84L) than the Canadians.

But hey, lets see what Canadian gov't has to say, eh?
So yes, it seems you can. And Canada does have RGM-84Gs or better, in this case, the L-model.

But you mentioned SLAM.
Which was incorrect.

Sticking SLAM you do not have on an aircraft that does not hard points is still a bad idea.

Now yes you can use Harpoon as a limited land attack weapon. Would not do much damage though.

As noted by the Canadians, it is still better than the 57mm DP gun on their frigates.

And a bit less suicidal than strapping MLRS onto the top cargo deck of a naval transport or asking Canadian marines to set up their 120mm mortars on the decks of their frigates.

In terms of actual impact, it'd be about par with hitting another country with a rolled-up newspaper concealing a brick. The one upside of the RGM-84 is that even in land-attack mode, it can and will track a taget if it moves. So hitting a specific limo/motorcade would not be out of the question

Anyways, this craft would indeed be rated for the AGM-84

It is in-effect, a limited capability patrol-bomber with insane range/endurance.

[Novus America]

Even the standard models have a land-attack capability (not as great, with a reduced range, but a lot better than launching a Tartar, SA-6, or Sea-Sparrow missile in radar-guided land-atack mode).

It would also be rather embarassing for the Mexican Navy to have better models of Harpoon missiles (Block II, RGM-84L) than the Canadians.

But hey, lets see what Canadian gov't has to say, eh?
So yes, it seems you can. And Canada does have RGM-84Gs or better, in this case, the L-model.

But you mentioned SLAM.
Which was incorrect.

Sticking SLAM you do not have on an aircraft that does not hard points is still a bad idea.

Now yes you can use Harpoon as a limited land attack weapon. Would not do much damage though.

As noted by the Canadians, it is still better than the 57mm DP gun on their frigates.

And a bit less suicidal than strapping MLRS onto the top cargo deck of a naval transport or asking Canadian marines to set up their 120mm mortars on the decks of their frigates.

In terms of actual impact, it'd be about par with hitting another country with a rolled-up newspaper concealing a brick.[/quote]

Well yes, using the Harpoons on the frigates would be the best option.
Of all bad options. Does not make it a very good one though.

But yes, the Philippines should probably invest in some new weapons.
Not because of Canada of course but because it has no real defense capabilities against naval or air attacks.

[First American Empire]

Dumb. Dumb never changes.

You're wrong. It's constantly changing. Always getting even dumber.

[Rio Cana]

Update - Canada blinked. They will be taking back that six year old garbage. Chances are Vancouver will be stuck with the garbage since that is where the Canadian ship taking it back will dock.

Story on that - http://www.cnnphilippines.com/news/2019 ... pines.html

[Hammer Britannia]

Update - Canada blinked. They will be taking back that six year old garbage. Chances are Vancouver will be stuck with the garbage since that is where the Canadian ship taking it back will dock.

Story on that - http://www.cnnphilippines.com/news/2019 ... pines.html

ffs canada, man up

When a tiny shithole threatens you, you have to think to yourself: "What would America do?"

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Update - Canada blinked. They will be taking back that six year old garbage. Chances are Vancouver will be stuck with the garbage since that is where the Canadian ship taking it back will dock.

Story on that - http://www.cnnphilippines.com/news/2019 ... pines.html

The most likely thing that everyone predicted was going to happen happened.

Mostly beacuse everyone else besides Duterte sees how stupid it would be to go to war over garbage.

And how more stupid it would be going to war with a country that has more resources, manufacturing capability, railroads, and also has fighter jets in its air force.

Even stupider would be all of that plus the fact that there was no way to attack the country you declared war on.