"War wagons"!?!

What the f...? Does the reporter expect the CF to buy "peace wagons"? And so what if they're made in the US (having been designed in Britain)? Nobody builds this type of vehicle in Canada. Today has certainly provided nice opportunities (here and here) to highlight our media's slanted approach to "reporting":

$100M deal to provide new vehicles for JTF2, special forces
War wagons to be built in United States

The country's Ottawa-based commando unit will receive a fleet of new war wagons next year in a deal expected to be worth more than $100 million.

Evaluation of new vehicles for the military's Joint Task Force 2 commando unit, based at Dwyer Hill, and the special operations regiment in Petawawa has narrowed the search to two candidates, both to be built in the United States.

JTF2 and the Canadian Special Operations Regiment now use Humvees built by AM General in Indiana. Those were purchased during the early days of the Afghan war for JTF2.

Craig McNab of AM General said the company was pursuing the Canadian special forces vehicle project and was waiting for the second phase of the program to begin. That would involve the government issuing a request for proposals to the two companies whose vehicles have been selected.

McNab said he didn't want to get into details about the specific type of vehicle offered to Canada, but he added that AM General had established a good relationship with Canadian special forces through a maintenance and battlefield repair program the company offers on JTF2's existing fleet of Humvees. "We have a particularly good training program with U.S. special operations, and the Canadians liked it as well," he said.

Lockheed Martin is the second firm selected with its Supacat family of vehicles, industry officials say. Those high-mobility trucks were originally designed in Britain, and some variants, such as the Jackal, are in service with special forces and regular force units.

Lockheed Martin has a deal to sell the British vehicles to militaries in Canada and the United States.

In January, the Australian government announced that it had taken delivery of the first of 30 Supacat Jackal patrol vehicles for its special forces. Those vehicles are worth more than $1 million each.

Public Works and Government Services has declined to name the two firms selected for the Canadian program. In an e-mail, the department claims it has to protect the "commercial confidentiality" of the firms.

It did not explain why it needed to protect commercial confidentiality when the companies in question had acknowledged their interest in the project ["interest" yes--but not the fact that they have been selected - MC].

Public Works will issue a request for proposals to the two qualified bidders and a contract is to be awarded in the summer. The requirement is for 100 new vehicles.

Col. Mike Day, head of the Canadian Special Operations Forces Command, said last year that the existing fleet of Humvees would continue to be used as his personnel became proficient on the new vehicles. He said the new vehicles would be available to various units in the command.

For logistics purposes, the command is also looking for a vehicle fielded by a number of countries so that parts will be readily available.

Col. Day said the new vehicles were required to be transportable by helicopter. "I think that type of tactical force projection is a critical component," he said. "Use Afghanistan as an example, use any other part of the world. Do you want to fly for an hour or do you want to drive for a day?"

Stephen Priestley, a researcher for the Canadian-American Strategic Review website at Simon Fraser University in Surrey, B.C., said the Supacat Jackal appeared to meet the various criteria that Canada's special operations command needs. He said the Supacat variant selected by Australia came with the option of a bolt-on chassis that could convert the basic four-by-four vehicle into a six-by-six speciality vehicle in a matter of hours...

Photo of Jackal with Brits in Afstan:

Babbler's Update: I'd like to add a couple of points to Mark's assessment.

First: "War wagons"? I'll echo Mark's disdain for the sensationalist phrasing.

Second: the context for these purchases is completely missing. Special operations missions - at home or abroad - are no-fail. You don't call the guys and gals at CANSOFCOM for run-of-the-mill problems, you call them for the OH-SHIT!-emergencies where there's no margin for error. Hence the "special" in "special operations."

What sort of equipment do you want them using? Standard kit like the rest of the CF has to use simply doesn't cut it for a non-standard, no-fail mission like the CANSOFCOM folks have. Different taskings, different equipment needs.

CANSOFCOM needs the best of whatever they're buying. If better is faster, that's what they need. If better is lighter, get them that. If better is quieter, or more armoured, or stealthier, or higher powered, then that's what we as taxpayers should be putting into their hands. Because we're not going to be buying a lot of them, and if the special operators are being called in, it's an 'absolutely, positively needs to get done' scenario. The old joke that "your kit was made by the lowest bidder" just can't apply to special ops.

Big tempest, little teapot.

Upperdate: One supposes that instead of "war wagons" our special forces should be in this situation:

SAS commander says MoD has 'blood on its hands' over Snatch Land Rovers
Major Sebastian Morley, the SAS commander who resigned over "unsafe" Snatch Land Rovers in Afghanistan, has accused the Government of having "blood on its hands".

Over the past four years 37 servicemen and women have been killed in Snatch Land Rovers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Photo: AFP / Getty Images