Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I suspect that you find this government's military policy very confusing, as I do.

in April of 2015, it was Harper Conservative Minister of National Defense, Jason Kenney, who pegged the cost for Canada's participation, to that point, at almost $600,000,000. I've not found a formal accounting for additional costs over the subsequent 8 months... notwithstanding the bombing since expanded into Syria... however, estimates beyond $1 billion dollars spent so far are out there in various articles. As I replied to once already, those CF-18s are simply symbolic in that they have participated in less than 3% of all bombing sorties and more than 2/3rd of the time they come back without having dropped any bombs. What you find "confusing" is a policy that speaks to improving the contribution level that Canada can make... extending on the training and humanitarian avenues... continuing the air surveillance, air refueling and transport. Is there any particular reason you believe Canada can't contribute appropriately without the symbolic 6 CF-18s... notwithstanding, again, many NATO countries have chosen to not include direct participation in bombing within their military contributions.

  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Yes, substance over appearances. The election is over...somebody should tell Trudeau.

Someone needs to learn that. As Trudeau is currently running the country, I doubt it's him.

Posted

Someone needs to learn that. As Trudeau is currently running the country, I doubt it's him.

Maybe they will only understand with more references to American political history. That's what seems to work north of the border.

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted

Maybe they will only understand with more references to American political history. That's what seems to work north of the border.

No we have our own political history. Seems our decisions turned out more beneficial. As such we don't have to worry so much about the likes of "the hair" taking over our government.

Posted

CF-18s providing air support for Canadian ground forces...what a novel concept. But campaign promises were made, so.........

Maybe this explains why CF-18s never made it to Afghanistan. Let somebody else do it.

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted

Doesn't matter....he has fallen into the same lazy trance that seemingly ignores aspects of actual Canadian history to find such comparisons.

sure it matters! :lol: It's perfect... the fact the writer is British... with the linked article appearing in the Guardian... completely undercuts your ad nauseum narrative that you continue to play out here, day in, day out! Perfect.

Posted

Let somebody else do it.

your claimed country broke it... and you want other countries to help bomb away 'your' mess? Really? How's that regime change working out for ya, hey!

Posted (edited)

Prime Minister Trudeau....Canada's new leader...of retreat. Sunni Ways!

Have you always been this infatuated with Canada? Perhaps you became inspired when Prime Minister Chretien told Bush to FO with regards to an illegal war in Iraq.

Edited by On Guard for Thee
Posted (edited)

Brian Mulroney went after Pierre Trudeau in his memoir, basically calling him a coward during WW2.

Will Trudeau Jr. fall into the same trap, already attacked as a coward by Mulcair during the "grueling" election ?

This CF-18 withdrawal thing is just another example ?

Is Justin Trudeau a yellow-belly to Canada's "allies" ?

Edited by bush_cheney2004

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted

so... when I ask you for an official source designating the F-35A flyaway cost at $98 million... this is the best you can do?

I trust you can be more specific and provide the actual link... "your official source"... and quote the flyaway cost figure from that referenced link. Thanks in advance.

.

I provided two links with the cost of the additional purchases, in addition, the USNI link provided the breakdown for the more costly USN/USMC aircraft......simple math Waldo.........I have zero inclination to go through a ~2000 page US Government budget document to provide you with further proof.

Posted

you said the Rafale production line would end in 2016... I called BS and stated the French military had orders in to 2019. So, you provide a 2013 dated linked reference that states another 6 years of production (to 2019) just based on the French military orders alone. Thanks for providing your own source to support exactly what I stated!

No, I provided a previous news item quoting the French Government that they would purchase no further Rafales absent additional orders, as the production line would no longer be viable.

Posted

no - I don't believe you have ever offered comment about the iterative F-35 procurement plans and ever diminishing numbers spread out over ever increasing years. The prior U.S. GAO graphic I linked to clearly speaks to the F-35 delays and related problems (from an earlier plan that had ~2000 F-35s built by 2019 to a 2012 plan that had the number at 585 F-35s built by 2019... and as I suggested, given the heavy lifting is yet to come... as in the most complex testing is still ahead, I expect this will result in more delays and yet another procurement plan that shifts numbers down and out accordingly. Which, of course, presumes upon U.S. funding being there in the first place.

.

More delays? The program is finally on schedule........I still await comment from you on why, despite upcoming funding pressures the Pentagon feels the F-35 program offers the most combat capability for money spent?

speaking of that funding, that other U.S. GAO graphic I linked to is equally revealing in regards to the GAO's analysis of the U.S. DOD's budget versus procurement numbers from 2015 on through to 2038... you know, where you just so casually accept those numbers and the ~$15 billion for a decade will just be there! Notwithstanding U.S. President Trump's vow to shut the F-35 program down! :D

.

I notice Trump is quoting the same sources used by the F-35 detractors here.........quite telling that he would cancel a multinational defense program, with 44 of 50 States contributing to, that has found bipartisan support since the Clinton Admin, based on a blog report that was quoted here numerous times :lol:

Does that come before or after he bans Islam and builds the Great Trump Wall along the Southern border? ;)

Posted

More delays? The program is finally on schedule........I still await comment from you on why, despite upcoming funding pressures the Pentagon feels the F-35 program offers the most combat capability for money spent?

I notice Trump is quoting the same sources used by the F-35 detractors here.........quite telling that he would cancel a multinational defense program, with 44 of 50 States contributing to, that has found bipartisan support since the Clinton Admin, based on a blog report that was quoted here numerous times :lol:

Does that come before or after he bans Islam and builds the Great Trump Wall along the Southern border? ;)

Weird as Trump is, he didn't make money by investing in "lemons" ;) .

Posted

Why do you address him as Trudeau Jr. Just say Trudeau. He's the only living Trudeau PM we have.

Google Trudeau Jr. You'll find even the media occasionally refer to him that way.

"We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers

Posted

Prime Minister Trudeau....Canada's new leader...of retreat. Sunni Ways!

Will Trudeau Jr. fall into the same trap, already attacked as a coward by Mulcair during the "grueling" election ?

Is Justin Trudeau a yellow-belly to Canada's "allies" ?

please sir, then Opposition leader Mulcair was playing election campaign politics in regards to Bill C-51... nothing whatsoever to do with this exchange on the symbolic use of CF-18s to assist in the American led bombing campaign against the force that G. W. Bush created as a consequence of the illegal U.S. invasion of Iraq.

there are 65 countries formally recognized as a part of the U.S.-led coalition against ISIS... other than the U.S., 12 of those countries have engaged in active bombing, some only in Iraq and not in Syria. Of those 12 countries, as I read and interpret, 8 countries have done even less bombing than Canada's symbolic level (Canada @ less than a 3% participation sortie rate), and 1 of those countries has withdrawn from bombing for some 6+ months now. Would you care for a sub-list of those 65 countries, with a military bombing capability, who have chosen not to directly participate in the U.S.-led bombing campaign... in fact have chosen not to send any military contribution whatsoever... apparently there "in name only". Germany is the most recent profiled country to join... much was made of Germany committing Tornado jets... but for reconnaissance flights only. By your measure does that warrant your "coward, yellow-belly' labeling for German Chancellor Merkel?

interesting stats in Syria... ever since Russia joined in bombing, the U.S. has significantly curtailed its bombing numbers... oh my... is Obama retreating?

.

Posted

I provided two links with the cost of the additional purchases, in addition, the USNI link provided the breakdown for the more costly USN/USMC aircraft......simple math Waldo.........I have zero inclination to go through a ~2000 page US Government budget document to provide you with further proof.

you don't get to take an article, read a quoted price... do some D2.0 math and declare that an official "flyaway cost"! Besides, like I 'needled' you... is that with or without an engine? Surely you remember that extended period of time where you kept touting the cost only to have it pointed out to you it didn't include the cost of an engine! Your declared "simple math" is not an official source for the "flyaway cost".

Posted (edited)

Trudeau sunny ways and 50 cents wont even get you a cup of coffee. Trudeau may well be a great and nice guy, but he is in waaaaay over his head. And this country is going to pay dearly for this mistake. And I would not call our missions by the air force symbolic, especially when they are the best in the world but it does show how liberals think. So when trudeau said a leaner military, I see a gutting coming. And with the Obama is retreating remark , is more like he was swatted to the side lines by the Russians.

Edited by PIK

Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.

Posted

No, I provided a previous news item quoting the French Government that they would purchase no further Rafales absent additional orders, as the production line would no longer be viable.

no - you stated 2013 and I countered saying French military Rafales were on order on through to 2019... you supplied your own linked article to confirm exactly what I stated. Just what is it you think you're "arguing/discussing" here? :lol: (Again, that didn't even factor the Egyptian order)... and now, subsequently, there are Rafale orders from India and Qatar. Please adjust your "Rafale production line closing date" accordingly!

Posted

More delays? The program is finally on schedule........I still await comment from you on why, despite upcoming funding pressures the Pentagon feels the F-35 program offers the most combat capability for money spent?

:lol: "finally on schedule"! You mean the latest iteration of the schedule, right? That was the point of highlighting that U.S. GAO graphic... it only showed 3 of the iterative procurement plans on that graphic... there have been several others, yes? As I said, I fully expect there will be another iteration coming down the pipe given the most difficult/complex testing has yet to be undertaken... and you know what happens in a strategy that develops/produces while testing is still being done, right? Oh wait - are you ready to step-up and categorically state there will never be another schedule change... another shifting of F-35 numbers "down and out"? Down by numbers per year and extended out by numbers of years? Is that what you're prepared to state now? Sure you are!

.

I notice Trump is quoting the same sources used by the F-35 detractors here.........quite telling that he would cancel a multinational defense program, with 44 of 50 States contributing to, that has found bipartisan support since the Clinton Admin, based on a blog report that was quoted here numerous times :lol:

sorry, I don't know U.S. President Trump's sources in his declaration to "fire" the F-35 program! I just know what he's stated from profiled news accounts... and highlighting that is just gravy! Apparently... Trump doesn't like pork! And, don't forget, Putin says he's a very talented man! (ya just can't make this kinda stuff up... it's gold, real gold!)

.

Posted

And I would not call our missions by the air force symbolic, especially when they are the best in the world but it does show how liberals think

they truly are symbolic in terms of participation rate and resulting impact. The historical tracking typically has the U.S. bombing rate at or near 80% of the total bombing... with that remaining at or near 20% realized through coalition partner countries, with the majority of that coming from France and the UK. Again, Canada has participated in less than 3% of the total bombing campaign... and... again, 2/3rd of the time those CF-18s come back without dropping any bombs at all. If not symbolic in participation rate/impact, what term would you prefer?

unofficial estimates of over $1 billion dollars cost are being offered for Canada's participation in the coalition to-date. The Trudeau Liberal government has stated an intent to better maximize a contribution return for the monies being spent; again, as a military contribution, increased training and continued reconnaissance, refueling and transport.

.

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,898
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Flora smith
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...