nicky10013 Posted July 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Wait...the War of 1812 is proof that we have nothing to fear from potentially hostile foreigners...and that we should instead be worried about the USA??? Bravo my friend. That's truly brain-dead. I didn't read the rest because I was frankly lazy. That and the fact that most people on this issue are fiercly in one camp or the other which is kinda stupid. That being said this line caught my eye. This is a good point. Our territorial sovereignty hasn't been formally breached since 1814. That doesn't speak to the stupidity that it will never happen again, it speaks to the fact that a transcontinental invasion uses so much resources and so much planning, that we'd probably know about it a year in advance. On top of that, the only countries that could undertake such a move are probably Russia and China. Though, the lack of a true blue water navy for either dictates that the likelihood that any breach of Canadian territorial integrity would come ballistically are through air power. We could buy patriot batteries and any ballistic missile shield either doesn't work, or by the time that it does, the new Russian and Chinese ICBMs being developed right now will be able to defeat the countermeasure. Now, my point isn't to say that it's smart to replace fighters with missile batteries. That being said, I'm not a defence expert. The entire point is we never had the conversation to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 It's a terrible analogy and it's evidence of how weak your argument is. The analogy would maybe hold true if you were talking about whether or not you needed a Concorde or a 747 to cross the ocean, but it has absolutely ZERO relation to military equipment. Here, let me try an equally stupid analogy: Why do we need to equip our soldiers with M16's? A Lee-Enfield WW1 rifle will kill someone just as well! Why do we need modern destroyers and frigates? Our WW2 ships did a fine job patrolling our seas! I dont think you read what I said, either that or you completely misunderstood it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 I didn't read the rest because I was frankly lazy. That and the fact that most people on this issue are fiercly in one camp or the other which is kinda stupid. That being said this line caught my eye. This is a good point. Our territorial sovereignty hasn't been formally breached since 1814. Formal bah, what about all the informal ones? Why the hell do we have so many pictures and reports over the years of our aircraft turning back russian bombers, what the hell do you think they are testing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 I'm not saying we should buy the cheapest. I'm saying we need to purchase according to our needs. We haven't had a defence review and the priorities haven't been made public. There was also no competition. For a 16 billion dollar contract, you'd think those two would come mandatory before 16 billion dollars. Furthermore, having a debate on the issue is normal conversation. Swallowing the kool aid isn't. So really, I don't think you have anything to complain about. How many times in opposition did Harper and co. bitch about sole sourcing with contracts the fraction the size of this one? How ridiculous. Compete for what? F-35 is the best on the market the naval variant fits our requirements best. Oh but your a liberal you just want to buy the European Garbage that rarely ever measures up. We can play your game point to an aircraft from any country that has a multi role aircraft for sale the is as good or better then th f-35. I'll save you the time, there isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky10013 Posted July 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Formal bah, what about all the informal ones? Why the hell do we have so many pictures and reports over the years of our aircraft turning back russian bombers, what the hell do you think they are testing? There's only 1 picture because Russian bombers have only been intercepted once (now twice) close (read: not inside) to Canadian airspace. As for informal ones, the only informal breach of our border has come from Fenian Raiders, which were turned back by Toronto militia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky10013 Posted July 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Compete for what? F-35 is the best on the market the naval variant fits our requirements best. Oh but your a liberal you just want to buy the European Garbage that rarely ever measures up. We can play your game point to an aircraft from any country that has a multi role aircraft for sale the is as good or better then th f-35. I'll save you the time, there isn't. You don't know that and neither do I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 I love it when they say it is sole soursed, countries look at what was available and the F-35 was the one that was picked and we have invested 100 of millions on it, but yet you want to pick something different just to be difficult. But we do not 20 years to wait for the liberals to buy something, remember the frigates and are the helicopters here yet? I'm on your side the liberals, NDP, and the like are so full of shit on this its not even funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky10013 Posted July 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 I'm on your side the liberals, NDP, and the like are so full of shit on this its not even funny. Jesus, you really did go off your meds. How is wanting a true free market competition to see what's best full of shit? Don't you conservatives love that kind of thing? If anything, it would make the price of the plane come down. Furthermore, I never said replace it witha European plane. I said make it compete with a European plane and see where it comes out. If the F-35 is the best, then so be it. However, not you or anyone else on here can equivocally make the statement that the F-35 is the best plane to fit our needs because the contract wasn't put out to tender. Period. End of story. So really, who is full of shit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 (edited) http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2010/07/30/nl-russian-planes-730.html MacKay said NORAD fighters have intercepted between 12 and 18 bombers annually since 2007. Edited July 30, 2010 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Compete for what? F-35 is the best on the market the naval variant fits our requirements best. We won't be getting that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky10013 Posted July 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 We won't be getting that one. Nope. Like the F-22, not for sale. Period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Nope. Like the F-22, not for sale. Period. Well, I'm pretty sure that congress could be persuaded to make an exception for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Not sure that's possible, even. The production run is rather limited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Not sure that's possible, even. The production run is rather limited. But couldn't the production run be extended? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky10013 Posted July 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Well, I'm pretty sure that congress could be persuaded to make an exception for us. Nope, haven't you noticed we're pinko commies not to be trusted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Actually in this case is a bit more like going from a 1957 Chevy Impala to a 2010 Chevy Camaro. 57 impala was easy to fix by anyone with a rench set and a brain, 2010 camaro? good luck with that, and the the 2010 camaro won't take you anywhere the 57 couldn't go...point being both will do the job but the 57 is considerably cheaper to own and maintain(as long as there are parts)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 But couldn't the production run be extended? Probably...but it's more a matter of does the US (Obama in particular) want to. It has turned out to be rather expensive next to the F-35. Talk of an extra 75 F-22s for 17-18 billion hasn't seemed to have got very far. Under 200 in all exist, apparently. Compare this to 11,500 MiG-21s.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TrueMetis Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 57 impala was easy to fix by anyone with a rench set and a brain, 2010 camaro? good luck with that, and the the 2010 camaro won't take you anywhere the 57 couldn't go...point being both will do the job but the 57 is considerably cheaper to own and maintain(as long as there are parts)... Yes and like the Impala parts are in short supply, it's definitely not cheaper, and the Camaro isn't exactly difficult to fix either. Doesn't matter though, we've got some of the best mechanics in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 I didn't read the rest because I was frankly lazy. That and the fact that most people on this issue are fiercly in one camp or the other which is kinda stupid. That being said this line caught my eye. This is a good point. Our territorial sovereignty hasn't been formally breached since 1814. That doesn't speak to the stupidity that it will never happen again, it speaks to the fact that a transcontinental invasion uses so much resources and so much planning, that we'd probably know about it a year in advance. On top of that, the only countries that could undertake such a move are probably Russia and China. Though, the lack of a true blue water navy for either dictates that the likelihood that any breach of Canadian territorial integrity would come ballistically are through air power. We could buy patriot batteries and any ballistic missile shield either doesn't work, or by the time that it does, the new Russian and Chinese ICBMs being developed right now will be able to defeat the countermeasure. then there is the desire or need to take our territory, Russia is resource rich and we have already sold China a piece of our tar sands so why would they launch a horrifically costly war for resources we're only too happy to sell them?...plus as you correctly noted any invasion plans would be seen years ahead of time and Canada has the capability if it wished to build nuclear weapons in 6 months if required which ends any thought of invasion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Yes and like the Impala parts are in short supply, it's definitely not cheaper, and the Camaro isn't exactly difficult to fix either. Doesn't matter though, we've got some of the best mechanics in the world. ya we've got greqat mechanics but there was a time nearly anyone with a set of tools could fix a car I did many times and I'm no mechanic....frequency of service and ease of maintainence are also considered when buying military equipment... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 then there is the desire or need to take our territory, Russia is resource rich and we have already sold China a piece of our tar sands so why would they launch a horrifically costly war for resources we're only too happy to sell them?...plus as you correctly noted any invasion plans would be seen years ahead of time and Canada has the capability if it wished to build nuclear weapons in 6 months if required which ends any thought of invasion... Why were Russian bombers caught off Nwfdlnd today? Why would they wish to test our defences? Perhaps the Cold War is over...for us in our minds...others seem keen to keep playing the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Probably...but it's more a matter of does the US (Obama in particular) want to. It has turned out to be rather expensive next to the F-35. Talk of an extra 75 F-22s for 17-18 billion hasn't seemed to have got very far. Under 200 in all exist, apparently. Compare this to 11,500 MiG-21s.... which has been Russia's game plan, keep it simple, make it strong and build as many as possible to overwhelm the opponent...WW2 the tiger was the best thing on tracks but the Russians and the USA/UK/Canada did with the Sherman lose 4 for every Tiger but eventually win out... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Yes and like the Impala parts are in short supply, it's definitely not cheaper, and the Camaro isn't exactly difficult to fix either. Doesn't matter though, we've got some of the best mechanics in the world. What matters though is we will be spending more to complete our missions than we need to. And we are borrowing every penny of the money... our government doesnt even have the cash to keep itself operating each year never mind buying the most expensive planes possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TrueMetis Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 ya we've got greqat mechanics but there was a time nearly anyone with a set of tools could fix a car I did many times and I'm no mechanic....frequency of service and ease of maintainence are also considered when buying military equipment... Yes and what's easier, ordering parts or machining new ones? Many of the parts for the CF-18 are difficult to get and we've been machining them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Why were Russian bombers caught off Nwfdlnd today? Why would they wish to test our defences? Perhaps the Cold War is over...for us in our minds...others seem keen to keep playing the game. they stopped with the end of the Warsaw Pact but the USA/Nato continued it's patrols why not stop when the cold war ended? which side continued the agressive behaviour? our side... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.