Keeping the blogosphere posted on the goings on of the world of submarines since late 2004... and mocking and belittling general foolishness wherever it may be found. Idaho's first and foremost submarine blog. (If you don't like something on this blog, please E-mail me; don't call me at home.)

Monday, December 19, 2005

Canadians Are Still Funny

A while back, I blogged about Canadian displeasure with American warships, including submarines, treating their self-proclaimed territorial waters as if they had to grant the same right of innocent passage as every other country on Earth is required to do. What makes it so funny is that Canada has no idea if American subs are passing through... unless we tell them.

Today, in the run-up to the Canadian election, it's becoming an issue again. Based on U.S. Navy press releases that USS Charlotte (SSN 766) passed through the Arctic, the Canadians are assuming that we passed through Canadian territorial waters, and the Prime Minister says he'll "take the necessary measures". (The article says he spoke more strongly in French than in English... that should tell you something.)

Of interest, they're not mentioning USS Salt Lake City's recent Arctic transit, probably because the Navy hasn't publicized it as much.

I might be back to make fun of our Canadian allies some more after dinner.

Update 2000 19 Dec: I thought about it, and decided that this is just standard election-season posturing, and no reason to make any further fun of our neighbors to the north. I did find another resource that talks about U.S. Freedom of Navigation (FON) exercises; no Canadian exercises are listed, but it's pretty much the same concept if we do go through the Northwest Passage. Pretty much all of the technical discussion I covered in the earlier post, and the rest of what I might add would probably just be variations on how Canadians say "aboot" and "eh" all the time.

Bell-ringer 0642 20 Dec: Inspired by Ninme's comment -- the Canadian Anti-U.S. Submarine Defence Force in action:

And on a more serious note, this article looks through the posturing to point out that, this late in the year, it's more likely that Charlotte would have exited the Arctic via the Greenland/Iceland gap (not claimed Canadian waters), vice the Greenland/Ellesmere Island channel.


Blogger NCdt(II) Genest said...

Well, a big chunk of arctic water IS our territorial water.

Anyways, not gonna get into a big rant, but I think that, as our allies, the US should respect our territorial waters and ask us to get through, when going through with warships. Not saying this time they did; I don't know the details.

We're trying to figure out ways to increase our northern presence. After the military exercises up there, I've heard some actually serious thought about buying icebreakers or equipping our subs with AIP so we can patrol the arctic waters more efficiently and just plain more.

The whole Northern Sovereignty is a big deal up here, and althought it might not be down in the States, you should let us have this toy. You already stole the Softwood toy from us! :p

12/19/2005 7:50 PM

Blogger Bubblehead said...

While I might be tempted to agree with you on this one, the U.S., having appointed ourselves as "protectors of international transit rights" would lose whatever moral authority we have on this issue if we started letting our friends slide.
I think we normally do let the Canadians know; that's why I think that Charlotte probably went down the east coast of Greenland, if the PMs office claims they didn't know about it.

12/19/2005 8:09 PM

Blogger NCdt(II) Genest said...

Yeah, I think you're right aboot that. I guess I'll make sure I have all the facts before I comment, eh?

(I do say "eh" but not "aboot", by the way)

12/19/2005 8:59 PM

Blogger ninme said...

You boys better be careful or they'll launch the polar bear strike force.

12/19/2005 10:28 PM

Anonymous Byron Audler said...

Ninme, don't forget the narwhal special ops team:)

12/20/2005 7:56 AM

Blogger NCdt(II) Genest said...

Don't forget we got our third CF-89 Flying Squirrel squadron. And we have the arctic version of the CGU-11, as well.

We're starting to be pretty dangerous in the North, you might wanna reconsider messing with us.

12/20/2005 9:45 AM

Blogger drunknsubmrnr said...

Umm...the US hasn't signed on to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Why is the USN enforcing it?

12/20/2005 1:40 PM

Blogger ninme said...

Yeah, and the narwhals. And remember, our super secret weapon (B1rD bombers) is only feasible against our tropical enemies. They'd never survive that high in the arctic circle.

(are the puffins on our side?)

12/20/2005 3:44 PM

Blogger Bubblehead said...

The right of innocent passage precedes the Law of the Sea Convention; plus, if we don't do it, no one else will, and then where will we end up?

12/20/2005 11:37 PM


Post a Comment

<< Home