waldo

you simply choose to ignore the "total package"... the mixed bag of presumptive motivations/influences driving the guy. It doesn't matter that authorities are most hesitant to, in the early days, speak to your same definitive assessment that singularly focuses on one thing, and one thing only. .

why bother... clearly, he's hell bent in derailing yet another thread! .

you're projecting... and you're interpreting comparative references as such no - how can a statement of fact be an insult? The insult here is your end-game to get this thread shut down again. .

no - but in your fixated, self-serving, narrow-skewed, one-track/trick mind... .

or evangelical preacher Kevin Swanson

uhhh, all good discussion... but about that CF-18 replacement thingee and criteria that might/should drive decisions: domestic first, you say! Who knew... who knew! .

evangelical preacher Kevin Swanson shared the stage with Republican presidential candidates and gave a defense of killing gay people .

really? My googly says the name has both Arabic and Hebrew attachments --- in Arabic the meaning of the name Omar is: Long-lived; In Hebrew the meaning of the name Omar is: Eloquent Speaker did my googly fail me or are you just making (more) shyte up? .

what's the point of you continuing to pine for the results from the ongoing Defence Policy Review... and what difference does it make to you anyway? Why is Canada just so important to you? Again, you've already been apprised that public consultations are currently underway across Canada. Please be patient: good results aren't cheap - cheap results aren't good! .

once again, concurrency bites the F-35 program in the azz! (notwithstanding the "no worries" here from MLW F-35 fan-boys over that quoted statement I've trotted out a couple of times from Michael Gilmore, the U.S. Department of Defense's director for Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E): "The current 'official schedule' to complete full development and testing of all Block 3F capabilities by 31 July 31, 2017 is not realistic" ... IOT&E will test the F-35's full combat capability, verifying the jets can fly real, operational missions as intended. so... about that "optimistic" full rate production in 2019... where does that slip to now? Gap? What gap? Final F-35 Testing Slips To 2018 (at the earliest) .

wassup USAF - is there a problem? Uhhh... Go Navy! U.S. Senate - 2017 Defense Appropriation Report

who was the guy here forever going on about that (fake/trumped-up/propaganda based) USMC IOC... forever hyping it? Of course, the IOC charade has already been relayed here in prior related F-35 threads. And now this - oh my! And somehow the postured 2019 full-rate production for the F-35 is to be... believed? US Marine Corps recovering 'boneyard' Hornets to plug capability gap Boeing Restores 30 F/A-18C+ Models for Marine Corps .

c'mon Archie... I asked you nicely once already for a cite. .

but you're not helping with your perception of, "seemingly forgetfulness" with your anecdotes and unsubstantiated statements. Who knows what you're referring to most of the time? If you have a straight opinion that doesn't presume to rely upon factual accounting and presentation, then all good. However, if your statement relies upon actual circumstance in past event/occurrence, I would suggest making a statement, add in context if you can, add in attribution if you can - otherwise, how do you expect anyone to respond? .

take it to the right thread and I'll continue letting you know... as I am in that very thread. Somehow, you're conveniently choosing to ignore parts of my "letting you know" - go figure. .

ok - again, only because I'm online and following the thread I see your quote of something I said... but again, WdaF! Why do you insist in purposely removing the names of members form quotes? Again, that doesn't allow the person you're quoting to leverage the notification feature of the board to be alerted to the fact you're actually quoting them. Now, of course, you clearly like it that way... as I've only stumbled upon statements of mine you've quoted in the past... weeks later as I wind on through a thread! Again... stop it! in your referenced post 1617, I speak to the cost as ~1/2 billion. The $400 million figure, oft produced, is an estimate for the cost of modifications to keep the F-18s flying until 2025. I've read that referred to as a 'low-ball estimate'... with suggestion it will be closer to (and likely above) 1/2 billion. no - the unproven product is the F-35... what you're relying upon being there! if you want to talk about "wholesale idiocy", "embarrassment", "blunders"... and your absolute insistence in not accepting the potential Super Hornet purchase as a "gap-filling interim" measure... then simply do the math for me... and produce the timeline. In all your emboldenment, this should be quite easy for you - yes? Here, let me put it forward again - I'm sure you didn't intend to ignore it! Here, try again: do the math! Spend the estimated ~1/2 billion to get the CF-18s to 2025... now, with YOUR total reliance on an unproven {F-35} product, start the timeline as to when Canada needs to sign a contract for the F-35, pay monies, get lined up in "the presumptive assembly queue (against all that expected crushing RUSH of foreign nations and respective U.S. military branches" and have the beginnings of 65 F-35s delivered. When's the start and finish of that "production" F-35 Canadian delivery, particularly in relation to 2025? Do the math... and provide the timeline - yes? (Notwithstanding, that will be $2.5 billion needing to have been spent to keep the CF-18s flying... because of the ongoing saga/delay that is the F-35). do the math... and provide the timeline - yes? .

can we defer the purchase of your "at all costs - whatever it costs" F-35?... maybe purchase a "gap-filling interim" alternate at a significantly reduced price.... and help a couple of them out maybe? Because doing so matters, as you say, more than brutal rapes or murders. Didja catch that... didja see what I did there? .

do the math! Spend the estimated ~1/2 billion to get the CF-18s to 2025... now, with YOUR total reliance on an unproven product, start the timeline as to when Canada needs to sign a contract for the F-35, pay monies, get lined up in "the presumptive assembly queue (against all that expected crushing RUSH of foreign nations and respective U.S. military branches" and have the beginnings of 65 F-35s delivered. When's the start and finish of that "production" F-35 Canadian delivery, particularly in relation to 2025? Do the math... and provide the timeline - yes? (Notwithstanding, that will be $2.5 billion needing to have been spent to keep the CF-18s flying... because of the ongoing saga/delay that is the F-35). do the math... and provide the timeline - yes? .

your posts continue to be your anecdotal reminisces that provide no accountability... for you... and provide no reference for others to question/challenge you on. Clearly, you like it that way! .

I appreciate and recognize your sensitivity; thanks for acknowledging your described disrespect... and apologizing for it. I expect we shouldn't see you using the label 'regressives' again. .

COUNTDOWN TO ANOTHER THREAD CLOSE... 10, 9, 8...

you and Rona... you've got to let it go! Your want to, 'bomb, bomb, bomb', didn't fit within the strategies of the newSherriff's government. It's not healthy for you - get over it! .

you had a chance to actually make a real point - I intended to ask you exactly what Trudeau Liberals (pre-election) and the Trudeau government (post-election) actually said in regards to prioritizing within refugee groupings... I was off researching that on my own... and then your post, as quoted, arrives. Reading you revert to the realArgus, repeatedly using the term "regressives", that alters any interest in further dialog with you I might have chosen. Why bother? .