F-35 Purchase

[punked]

And those requirements? What makes you feel confidante that Boeing’s Super Hornet could meet said requirements today?

As for the battle of the “X-Planes”, I’ve seen it, and worked for Boeing in the late 90s……but thanks.

The US requirements are not Canadaa.

[Guest Derek L]

The US requirements are not Canadaa.

And what were Canada’s, to add the other JSF partners, requirements?

[Guest Derek L]

I’ll give you a hint:

To replace their 4th generation Hornets, Falcons and Harriers………

[punked]

And what were Canada’s, to add the other JSF partners, requirements?

We got in the JSF so we could bid on contracts the Liberals who got us in have already said that.

[Guest Derek L]

We got in the JSF so we could bid on contracts the Liberals who got us in have already said that.

And we had no interest in replacing our Hornets with them? It was strictly for the contracts eh?

[punked]

And we had no interest in replacing our Hornets with them? It was strictly for the contracts eh?

That is what the government at the time says of course they are Liberals so like the Conservatives they could be lying.

[Guest Derek L]

That is what the government at the time says of course they are Liberals so like the Conservatives they could be lying.

And the statement, by then associate deputy minister Williams, the same guy that has changed his story today……..you be the judge:

Joint Strike Fighter Signing Ceremony

Williams: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you Pete for your earlier remarks.

I too really value our personal friendship and the opportunity we have had over the last many months to work together on a number of issues. I look forward to building on this personal relationship in the future.

It's with great pleasure that I formally announce today Canada's participation with the United States and Great Britain in the systems development and demonstration phase of the Joint Strike Fighter program. Canada's decision to participate in the JSF program is yet another clear demonstration of the Canadian government's continuing commitment to North American security and industrial cooperation.

Participation in this internationally oriented technologically advanced program will assist us in our efforts to enhance interoperability with the U.S. and allies and provide us with a unique window into the leading edge technologies being developed for this world class weapon system.

In addition, Canadian industry will have an opportunity to provide its expertise to this important program. Through its ability to make a value-added contribution and its highly competitive position, Canadian industry will assist the U.S. prime contractors in their efforts to deliver a technologically advanced but affordable aircraft to the U.S. Department of Defense and allies.

This was from just over ten years ago.

[Guest Derek L]

Perhaps you want the MOU itself?

Here you go and from page 18:

JSF MOU

1.1. This Annex establishes the provisions which will

govern the conduct of JSF Cooperative Project Personnel. The CA

DND will assign military members or civilian employees to the JSF

Program Office or U.S. DoD field activities in accordance with

Section III (Management (Organization and Responsibility)), Annex

A (Supplement Management Structure) and this Annex. JSF

Cooperative Project Personnel will fulfill all the

responsibilities for the positions assigned to them under this

Supplement. Commencement of assignments will be subject to any

requirements that may be imposed by the U.S. DoD or the U.S.

Government regarding acceptance of JSF Cooperative Project

Personnel, such as, but not limited to, visas and visit request

documentation. The U.S. DoD and CA DND EC representatives will

determine the length of tour for the positions at the time of

initial assignment.

Clearly by assigning military members to the JSF office, this demonstrates the Liberals were only interested in the industrial offsets right?

[waldo]

And the statement, by then associate deputy minister Williams...

Joint Strike Fighter Signing Ceremony

This was from just over ten years ago.

you tried... and failed... with this once already - you reek of desperation! You know full well the formal position of the Liberal party from 1997 on through to the 2002 JSF signing agreement. You know full well there was no commitment... no obligation... to purchase the JSF F-35... you know this, and yet you, once again, presume to play games with your linked article. Of course, as was pointed out to you earlier, you conveniently ignore the most significant Q/A exchange within your very own linked article; specifically:

Q:

One of the benefits of being early signatories basically was supposed to be that you can basically assure yourself of a slot in the production line, if you so choose. Where in the long-range plan would you see Canada buying in? And we're probably talking about the CTOL [Conventional Take Off And Landing] version here.

Williams:

As you know, we currently operate the F-18s. We are currently embarking on a significant upgrade program that we feel will keep them serviceable through the year 2017, 2018.

We will take our time between now and then to assess our capabilities and our needs and make a decision by that time.

[Guest Derek L]

This part (intro) of the MOU, signed the 7th of February, 2002 by minister Williams is far more interesting:

JSF MOU

The Department of National Defence of Canada (CA DND) and the

Department of Defense of the United States of America (U.S. DoD),

hereinafter referred to as the “Participants”:

Recognizing that this Supplement is subject to the Memorandum of

Understanding among the Minister of National Defence of Canada,

the Secretary of State for Defence of the United Kingdom of Great

Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Secretary of Defense on

behalf of the Department of Defense of the United States of

America concerning the Cooperative Framework for System

Development and Demonstration (SDD) of the Joint Strike Fighter

(JSF SDD Framework MOU) and any amendments thereto;

Recognizing the unique and extensive defense technology and

industrial relationship between Canada and the United States and

the importance of reducing barriers and stimulating the two-way

flow of defense equipment and technology and the industrial base

necessary for the security of both nations;

Recognizing the importance of affordability as a cornerstone of

the JSF Program;

Recognizing the benefits to be obtained from interoperability and

standardization of defense equipment toward achieving

compatibility in coalition operations;

Desiring to improve their mutual conventional defense

capabilities through the joint development, sharing and

application of new Air System technologies, and new management

and engineering approaches, through full cooperation on

technology release throughout the SDD Phase of the JSF Program

and any cooperation in subsequent phases;

Recognizing the contributions that the CA DND has made to the

Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program in the Conventional Take-off

and Landing (CTOL) portion of the JSF Program Concept

Demonstration Phase pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding

concerning the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Preferred Weapon System

Concept Refinement Project of 2 January 1998 between the

Department of Defense of the United States of America and the

Department of National Defence of Canada;4

Desiring to extend their JSF cooperation into the System

Development and Demonstration (SDD) Phase with a view to

consideration of subsequent cooperation in JSF developmental

upgrades, production, and support;

Nah, we had no interest what-so-ever in buying the F-35 under the Liberals...

[Guest Derek L]

you tried... and failed... with this once already - you reek of desperation! You know full well the formal position of the Liberal party from 1997 on through to the 2002 JSF signing agreement. You know full well there was no commitment... no obligation... to purchase the JSF F-35... you know this, and yet you, once again, presume to play games with your linked article. Of course, as was pointed out to you earlier, you conveniently ignore the most significant Q/A exchange within your very own linked article; specifically:

That's indeed what he said, and the above passage is what he signed

[waldo]

This part (intro) of the MOU, signed the 7th of February, 2002 by minister Williams...

Nah, we had no interest what-so-ever in buying the F-35 under the Liberals...

are you formally announcing your desperation tour? The principal reason for being a part of JSF was one intended to gain insight/first-hand knowledge... as a part of/towards an open tendered process review. You know this. Where was the expressed formal commitment... where was the contract... uhhh, other than in the subsequent fabricated world of Harper Conservatives?

[waldo]

That's indeed what he said, and the above passage is what he signed

lol away, hey. Let's get you on MLW record... as a part of your desperation tour, what reasoning/rationale do you attribute to Williams for his current position/statements... that you presume to suggest are "somehow different" from his 1997-2002 era position/statements. Get it out, put it on MLW record... sure you can.

[Guest Derek L]

are you formally announcing your desperation tour? The principal reason for being a part of JSF was one intended to gain insight/first-hand knowledge... as a part of/towards an open tendered process review. You know this. Where was the expressed formal commitment... where was the contract... uhhh, other than in the subsequent fabricated world of Harper Conservatives?

Then where was the MOU signed with other producers of jet aircraft like Boeing, Dassault, Saab etc, to obtain “insight/first-hand knowledge"? I don’t suppose you can produce said document?

If not, why didn’t the Liberals try to garner “insight/first-hand knowledge" with these other programs? Why didn't the Liberal Government assign Military and civilian members of DND to these other programs for direct "insight/first-hand knowledge"?

Perhaps you should qualify yourself Waldo, are you a supporter of the LPC?

[Guest Derek L]

lol away, hey. Let's get you on MLW record... as a part of your desperation tour, what reasoning/rationale do you attribute to Williams for his current position/statements... that you presume to suggest are "somehow different" from his 1997-2002 era position/statements. Get it out, put it on MLW record... sure you can.

Let's get past this first issue of why the Liberal Government was only interested in "insight/first-hand knowledge" from the F-35.........

[waldo]

Then where was the MOU signed with other producers of jet aircraft like Boeing, Dassault, Saab etc, to obtain “insight/first-hand knowledge"? I don’t suppose you can produce said document?

If not, why didn’t the Liberals try to garner “insight/first-hand knowledge" with these other programs? Why didn't the Liberal Government assign Military and civilian members of DND to these other programs for direct "insight/first-hand knowledge"?

did those avenues exist with the other manufacturers?

[Guest Derek L]

did those avenues exist with the other manufacturers?

All other the other aircraft currently touted as an alternative to the F-35, were either in production or development circa February of 2002.…….I don’t see a reason why said other manufactures wouldn’t have shared information relating to their products to a potential buyer………The marketing arms of the Boeings, Dassaults and Saab were clearly demonstrating their products at this time.

[Guest Derek L]

lol away, hey. Let's get you on MLW record... as a part of your desperation tour, what reasoning/rationale do you attribute to Williams for his current position/statements... that you presume to suggest are "somehow different" from his 1997-2002 era position/statements. Get it out, put it on MLW record... sure you can.

Quid pro quo

I have to question Mr Williams “expert opinion” on the JSF program today, based on the fact that he’s been out of Government for some time, and under the security clauses of the agreement that he signed (and I provided) he would no longer be privy to such classified information……..

[Jack Weber]

Other than the special economic zones, how has Red China changed into something other than Red China? Revolution when I wasn't lookin'? They still do their Mao jackets up one latch at a time and the Politburo still meets in the Hall of People.

So Chairman Mao would approve of the:

1.Private banking and lending for ownership of private real estate?

2.Allowing citizens to own private insurance?

3.Allow for the corporate logo'd neon lights of Shang Hai?

4.Allow for any indication of "bourgoisie" private business operating at all?

Hmmmm???

These do not exactly fit the hallmarks of a totalitarian leftist society you claim is the bogeyman...

They are the bogeyman just not the one you think they are...Black shirts and stick wrapped axes is the modern Chinese game...

Unless you believe the silly word game that the Peoples Republic of China makes the "Communist" just like the German Domocratic Repuiblic made East Germany a "democracy"?...'Cause,y'know....Erich Honacher and his STASI were raging defenders of democracy...

Mao would probably organize against this version of China...In fact,this version is the one I could envision your boy,General Shek running...

[DogOnPorch]

While the Mao days may be over...for now*...other than the special economic zones (whose activities you described), I see nothing that sets this China apart from the so-called old China. Same ol' flag...same ol' Politburo...same ol' Army. This all started, if you recall, when Hong Kong was dropped into their lap due to old 'leases' from the 19th century expiring. Stupid, stupid British. But, I guess war with Red China would have been the other choice...lol.

*Mobile execution vans are pretty clever...you have to admit. But, it reminds me of certain activities during the Holocaust...ifn' yez knowz whats I meanz. So like everything else in China...it's a copy.

Not from the Mao days...

[Argus]

Now the Chinese have over ~2.2 active duty personal (800k reserves) with a stated budget of ~143 billion, or a little more than what the Americans in human resource related costs………So my question, if the Chinese pay even 1/3rd of what Western Forces do towards HR costs, how do they fund the rest of their military with their stated budget?

Something doesn’t add up?

They don't pay 'even 1/3'. As I said, it's more like 1/12th. Also, since they're conscripts in for limited years the Chinese military probably isn't responsible for pensions and other long term health costs.

[Argus]

You don't know a thing about me.

This is a pointless back-and-forth exercise which has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

For the record, I once tried to avoid Chinese made goods. It simply proved the next best thing to impossible unless I wanted to spend hours driving all over time for every little widget I bought, and even then I couldn't be sure given the Chinese habit of mislabeling.

[Argus]

alright... I've just had a quick review of GMI and the organizations behind it. Of course, there's a lot behind the figure... along with a lot of scrutiny/criticism... that, in isolation, it's an equally questionable number. In any case, the GMI country ranking numbers (of 148 ranked countries), for the 3 countries under discussion (lower number implies greater militarization):

U.S. => 30 ; China => 83 ; Canada => 87

[

Canada is about as militarized as China then? If you put even a second of thought into it you'd realize how ludicrous such an assertion is. The way they've measured things is equally ludicrous. Comparing the number of doctors to the number of soldiers? WTH is the point of that?!

And again, they don't appear to be taking into account the difference between purchasing power and the actual cost of the military. As I said, a US rock bottom private makes about 12 times as much as a Chinese private. Therefore, the US has to spend 12 times as much just to remain even with China in those terms.

[Argus]

I've been concerned and questioning the wisdom of our trading with these countries, especially China for years now.

The very same warhawks sneer with disdain at any talk whatsoever of withholding resources from China.

So to recap...the warhawks are clearly insane.

I think your use of that term is unnecessarily pejorative unless your goal is to incite insults back at you. It's also silly and untrue. Warhawks? People who simply want an adequate (not powerful, not great, not even good) military cannot be dismissively termed 'war hawks' unless one has the mentality of a juvenile. Which, come to think of it, is an apt description of the originator of the term here.

And for the record, I have never said anything kind about China. I have proposed boycotting their imports, in fact, or at the very least subjecting them to intensive scrutiny and charging import taxes to pay for that scrutiny.

[Argus]

So we don't need an F35 we need a fighter plane that are able to integrate with the Americans? Great now we know you are Fibbing. Unless you are claiming there is only one fighter plane that can integrate with the Americans. Is that your claim?

I'm still waiting to hear what OTHER fighter plane we ought to buy.