Moonbox
-
Posts
8,707 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
40
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Moonbox
-
-
The arrests and violence at the G20 were a lie made by communist Chinese officials looking to smear Western government. It didn't happen. All video footage is fabricated and the protests were peaceful and fair.
Do not believe Chinese lies.
-
-
The problem with this commentary is the idea that Pearson is equating "the average lives of citizens" to mean "urban activitist." Pearson doesn't say that. In fact, McParland uses quotation marks in his commentary to make it appear that the phrase "average Canadian" is directly quoted from the blog posting. It isn't.
He's right. It's one of the reasons I don't like reading the Post. It was a pretty pathetic attempt to put a spin on something honest and fair that a Liberal wrote.
-
Hmm...I hadn't even thought of that.
Why are we talking about how we spelled it? I guess we just dismiss it as a bunch of idiotic nutjobs and forget about it. We ARE weird.
-
What makes a language useful as an international communication tool is how badly the language can be mangled by a non-native speaker yet remain understandable. English is a very forgiving language on that front.
Bingo. Simple grammar is the great equalizer. If you can figure out the grammar properly, you can dumb the language down with simple words. Experience and memory will eventually fill in your holes in vocabulary.
-
Which explains alot about V'Ger!
So far into the future one of our machine civilized worlds in the outer reaches reconstitutes an unmanned space probe from our remote past and sends it back to 1979 which is really the 23rd century. Man black holes DO bend time!
That was pretty funny actually.
-
pointless...
Wyly you're suggesting we're purchasing stealth fighters to intercept jet liners over the arctic. That's ludicrously dumb. We're purchasing them to fulfill our NORAD obligations and, if necessary, project air power abroad with NATO partners. The F-35 is a strike fighter, much like the F-18, and its meant to be both an offensive and defensive weapon.
go through the thread...protect us from ruskies flying over our airspace...protecting our artic sovereignty...protecting us from portugese fisherman poaching our fish...protecting us from commercial airliners....
Two of the requirements of the Canada First Defence Strategy:
-Lead and/or conduct a major international operation for an extended period.
-Deploy forces in response to crises elsewhere in the world for shorter periods.
Basically you don't know what you're talking about.
russians don't sell top shelf equipment to unstable governments, the F18 super hornet is still in production and is still a top shelf plane and will be for a long time to come for less money, it's a better plane than third world nation can afford...and in the end it's air to air missiles that are the danger not the planes...
You're only digging yourself a hole. Take a look at how widely distributed the Mig-29, Su-27 and Su-30 are. All of these planes are every bit as advanced as Canada's F-18's. As for the Super Hornet, the only reason it's called the Super Hornet is because it was easier to pass it through Congress with that name than proposing it as the brand new plane that it actually is. It's a completely different airframe and it would be a pointless marginal upgrade for Canada.
Iran is going to invade us? we're going to invade Iran? wait I know, Iran is going to fly over our arctic islands!
You're hilarious....
We don't know what we might need the planes for. That's the whole point. The equipment has to already be there when you need it or you're screwed. Hostile third world nations ALREADY have comparable (or better) airframes.
you obviously have no clue, the issue is sovereignty of the Arctic
That is ONE of the issues only.
a F18 is more than capable of the job of handling those scarrrrry russian planes... eeew I don't know how you sleep at night thinking about how scary russians might fly over an arctic island:rolleyes: ...
Actually, The Russians could blow our F-18's out of the air without blinking with even numbers over the arctic.
I think more than a few steps above you get a ladder and let me know when you've reached it...the issue is waaaay over your head...
I've highlighted several areas where what you're saying is false. If you're thinking above ANYONE on this forum, it's the head in the clouds burnout flunkie type thinking.
what big daddy protects Chile from invasion? what big daddy protects Costa Rica from invasion? what big daddy protects Zimbabwe from invasion, what big daddy protects Cuba from invasion....right as with the other question who is going to invade us you have no answer,you can't even identify a potential enemy or give a reason why anyone would invade us.. admit it the real reason you want F35s is because you get wood thinking about big nasty weapons....
The fact that you're still asking this question only proves that you're REALLY struggling here. We've already answered several times that it's unlikely anyone will 'invade' us. That being said, there are numerous scenarios I could think of, and obviously governments across the western world can think of, where we would need to project air power abroad to protect our interests. There have, in fact, been two instances of this in the last twenty years.
Perhaps this is too much mental exercise for you, but Canada doesn't live in a void. We are part of this world and there are many things that can and do affect us regularly all over the world. If not for the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein could have destabilized the entire middle east with profound implications on us. Your bus rides, for example, would be a lot more expensive as a result.
-
But what about the cvilians. Some of them, I don't know how many but some actually prefer islamic law and theocratic rule to democracy. For them, that's what they truly believe in their god and their culture.
And if we were to remove the rules of war that makes us become like savages too. We would kill more of the innocent civilians, than would have died if we never went there in the first place! How is that right!
I don't advocate the killing of civilians, but the only way theocracy as a system of government can be sustained is through oppression.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong but 20,000 policemen divided by $1 billion means $50,000 per cop. IOW, because of Harper and this summit, taxpayers across Canada paid off the mortgages of many Toronto policemen. Maybe it's a strange bank bail out.
August I thought you were smarter than that. If each police officer were simply paid $50,000 each to work for a weekend, I'd be similarly upset. The math I'm sure doesn't work out that way, however. While I'm sure they were paid well to come, a huge amount of the cost of security during the summit was logistical.
-
Typical of a quasi fascist to jump on the unfounded accusations to smear his opponents, lawful authority...well done Herr Bonghit
Oh you. I always love reading your posts. Herr Bonghit. That's hilarious
-
that you repeatedly don't comprehend it shows what? slow on the uptake are you?... the purchase of the F35 was justified (among other reasons)as defense against hijacked airliners in the arctic, and just what are those hijacked airliners going to attack? and if such a scenario were to come about we don't need a F35 to take down an airliner....
Reread what you wrote. The "other reasons" are why we decided to purchase the F-35.
5we don't need anything as expensive as the F35 to patrol the arctic...
That's not why we're buying them.
and just what in the last 65years have we needed to handle?... there won't be a war with any country that is that well equiped(Russia/China), any war we become involved in will be with under equiped 2nd and 3rd rate powers or insurgents...the F35 is overkill
By the time the F-18 is replaced in Canada it will be a 40 year old design. 2nd and 3rd rate powers have usually been equipped with comparable Russian fighters themselves anyways. Mig-29's and Su-27's are proliferated throughout the 3rd world, and are comparable to the F-16 and F-15 respectively. That's not exactly garbage hardware and if Canada were to enter a conflict against one of these powers the F-18 wouldn't really be at a huge technical advantage against them.
Take this premise another 10-20 years further and countries like Iran etc will be flying BETTER fighters than what we're flying.
and Canada is going to use the F35 to sink the next american ship that challenges our authority and sails through the NWP, rrright
and when they start lining up super tankers full of crude oil to sail through the passage we're going to sink those with F35s too I don't really think you have any idea what you're talking about. Why are we even talking about the Americans? If we claim the majority of the arctic I doubt they'd be upset about it. NAFTA ensures they have access to all those resources at a fair price already. Hell it'll be American owned subsidiaries that exploit the resources anyways.
can you even comprehend your links...at no time did a russian airplane EVER enter our airspace
They've flown their Bear bombers right up to the border of our airspace. Having worthwhile planes to patrol it acts as a deterrent.
and I'll ask again the question you nor anyone else can/will answer, just who is going to invade us? and why are they going to invade us?...you have no clue let alone an answer...
Unsurprisingly, you still don't get it, and a good many other things aside from that
.Nobody is going to invade us because big daddy USA is our closest neighbour. Having said that, it's not exactly fair or responsible to expect them to foot the bill for their own protection and for ours at the same time. Canada should be responsible for upholding its share of NORAD (in fact it is obligated to as far as I know) and we can't do that properly with 50+ year old hardware. You'd probably be happy if we were still flying patrol missions over Canadian airspace in Voodoos wouldn't you???
-
See all the reports
Why The HELL wear thay so stupid????.
99.99% of all the cases that get to Court will be dismissed lake of evidence or charter violation!!!
Don't get me started on civil liability clams That well be Hell for the general counsel of TO
Why The HELL wear thay so stupid????.
They were granted special powers by the McGuinty government for the summit. Civil liability claims will be negligible and the courts will see that they were reasonably acting to prevent and contain what was essentially a small riot.
-
Only somewhat true....as there are strike mission profiles for US based strategic bombers (i.e. B-1, B-2) using in-flight refueling as well as cruise missile strike missions from several forward deployed and survivable platforms.
You're right that's true but the F-22 doesn't really fit in with any of those profiles I don't think does it?
-
Why would a carrier variant matter? Is there a carrier variant of the A-10 or B-2? The US military is large enough to afford specialized equipment and has plenty of planes for carriers.
The carrier is the only way the US can reliably project it's air power abroad. One of the reasons the F-22 was cancelled was because in the event that it went to war with anyone against whom the F-22 would be required (ie China or Russia), any allied airfields that could launch the F-22 would be bombarded to death by missiles. A carrier group, on the other hand, moves and is escorted, and therefore is much easier to defend. Basically the USAF felt that the F-22 could potentially be neutralized before it was of any use.
-
The 2009 cost of the F-22 is $150 million. If the $9 billion that Canada is spending on F-35s is for planes only, the cost per F-35 would work out to about $138 million. That's not that much of a difference for a superior plane.
The F-22 costs enormously more per flight to maintain and requires tens of thousands of dollars worth of repainting and repairs after EVERY flight.
Aside from that, it has no carrier variant and even the US military doesn't think it's worth building any more of them.
-
This thread was created for people to see and acknowledge the pro Israeli lobby in Canada and the influence they have over the public and in the government. When Canada's security, safety and principles are compromised in order to protect another country, then I have a problem. I hope you do as well.
Gee I'm glad I'm not your friend. I'd know that you'd never have my back.
-
Exactly.
The F-22 has the edge over the F-35, and it seems that the F-35 isn't going to be much cheaper than the F-22, but the F-22 isn't available for export and even if it was, it's not a multi-role plane. The F-35, however, does have some of the same technology as the F-22.
The F-22 is significantly more expensive to build and purchase and prohibitively more expensive to operate and maintain. The radar absorbing paint it uses wears off after every flight and it costs retarded amounts of money to repaint.
-
Yup my knowledge is nil, and so is yours. The difference is youre willing to casually approve the spending of 10 billion dollars based on that informational void and Im more hesitant.
You can be hesitant all you want. The fact is that this plane is going to pretty much be the biggest fighter purchase in US history and THEIR record since the mid 70's has been pretty damn strong in that category. The F-14, F-15, F-16 and F-18 were all fantastic planes and did everything they were supposed to and more. Considering the last 35 years has almost always shown the US to be ahead of the curve in virtually all aspects of military technology, I'm willing to put my faith in their expertise instead of yours.
Given that we don't have a military industrial complex of our own, we kind of have to take the leavings of other countries.
Canada has been duped many many times with military equipment. France sold us crap, Brits sold us crap, and the US has also occasionally sold us crap. I think the reason Canada doesn't have a military - is because we always get the crap helicopters and leaky submarines dumped on us. "Oh, just sell it to Canada - they won't need it anyways."
Canada's military procurement problems have been purely political. Our government doesn't plan ahead nor is it willing to invest good money in it, so we're left with crap and hand me downs.
-
I want the best bang for the buck for products that satisfy our needs. Maybe the F35 is it. But we dont now that because from what I can tell our government didnt even do basic undergrad level business analysis on this purchase. If they did then I havent seen it.
HAHAHAHAHA!
I don't doubt you haven't seen the Ministry of Defence's analysis of their fighter requirements. That doesn't mean it didn't happen, just that they probably don't disclose all of the plane's specs to armchair generals on internet forums. Your 'knowledge' of the project appears to be nil. Let's go with what we DO know though. We DO know that the USAF considers the F-35 4x more effective than current 4th generation fighters. There isn't another plane out there that boasts that sort of capability that would be available to the Canadian market.
I did some quick reading about what the Canadian Airforce actually does with its fighters and the vast majority of the missions they fly dont require planes like this. It flew 600 missions over Canada last year that were basically just patrols... one of their primary missions nowdays is maintaining a state of readiness to take out rogue civilian airliners.
You could say the same about virtually any piece of military equipment. The equipment acts as a deterrent and it's better to have it and give yourself some measure of safety and self-reliance than need it and not have it. How many dead soldiers could have been saved in Afghanistan if we'd had heavy-lift helicopters and properly equipped tanks? The US discovered in Vietnam what the cost was of not having the right equipment for the job.
-
reading comprehension challenged are you?... what part of "that number was expected to double by 2009...." ...the number of engineering graduates is now at 450,000-500,000...that six times the number the US produces...and 35% of India is illiterate!....
The concept of quality vs quantity seems to be escaping you. The fact that a DEVELOPING nation with over a billion people is pumping out lots of engineers is irrelevant to the field of aerospace technology. It takes the brightest and best of the best to be on the cutting edge of warplane technology, and thus far India has not shown itself to be even in the same DECADE as the USA in that respect.
it's not Einstein the US Government awards research and development contracts, the manufacturers are PAID to do research by the US government...production/unit price costs do not reflect development costs...
Okay well answer me this then: Canada is paying about $138M/unit for a fighter that the company is going to be producing for about $89M/unit (based on production of about 1700 units) or according to Lockheed perhaps even 20% less than that.
We're not getting the R&D for free.
-
Bloodyminded you don't get it.
Give us examples of what you're talking about and, item by item, I'm sure we could outline the HUGE differences between them and the frothing rabid clerics calling for general violence against everyone and anyone that doesn't share their beliefs.
-
Well we absolutely have to pay more for less because conservative ideology requires us to.
-
With over a billion people living there the need for engineers is enormous and it stands to reason that they'd do everything they could to train and educate them.
It really doesn't matter how many engineers they have anyways as the most compelling argument you can make is that India does not have a 5th generation fighter and there's a reason for that.
-
Haha yeah fortunately our government is not decided by who people DIDN'T vote for.
Is this true....Some Canadian Cabinet minsters under foreign influence
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
It was also found to be a lie. The Soviet Union broke up because communism, in reality, was tyranny. Those on the top told those on the bottom what to do, and there was little anyone on the bottom could do about it.