Canada can't compete in NATO air exercise because none of our aircraft can fly

[I am Groot]

25 NATO nations are participating in a huge NATO exercise in Europe intended to show the Russians NATO's air power and commitment.

But not Canada. We don't have anything to send. Our forty-year-old aircraft, those that are still flyable, are all down for repairs. But don't worry! We've ordered new ones and should get them in a decade or so!

 

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/canada-missing-crucial-nato-exercise

[Nefarious Banana]

Must be a few water bombers available . . . . Oooops, forgot about Canada burning up at the moment, all due to 'climate change.  Another fuel tax will soon settle those fires down, then 'off into the wild blue yonder' with our water bomber(s).

Truly a wtf moment.  Stand proud Canada!

[Guest]

Need to increase taxes.  We can't meet out NATO commitments without an air force.

[Dougie93]

6 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Need to increase taxes.  We can't meet out NATO commitments without an air force.

 

but Canada's national imperative is indoctrinating school children to be drag queens

not to mention that Canada is clearly a proxy of the Chinese Communists in Beijing

making Canada the not so secret enemy within the NATO ranks

hence raising taxes to fund the air force makes no sense at all

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

 

but Canada's national imperative is indoctrinating school children to be drag queens

not to mention that Canada is clearly a proxy of the Chinese Communists in Beijing

making Canada the not so secret enemy within the NATO ranks

hence raising taxes to fund the air force makes no sense at all

Sure it does.  Paranoia notwithstanding.

[CdnFox]

19 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Sure it does.  Paranoia notwithstanding.

The libs have raised taxes many times. Still no planes.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The libs have raised taxes many times. Still no planes.

Yeah, we should just keep raising them until we get some.  Maybe if we vote the Conservatives in?

Those F35s look nice.  Probably not cheap though.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Yeah, we should just keep raising them until we get some.  Maybe if we vote the Conservatives in?

Why, haven't they had enough chances to order something when they were in power?

If they had we'd probably be getting the first ones as we speak and joining in the NATO festivities conservatives are whining about missing.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Why, haven't they had enough chances to order something when they were in power?

If they had we'd probably be getting the first ones as we speak and joining in the NATO festivities conservatives are whining about missing.

They would be F111s.  We have to aim higher.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Yeah, we should just keep raising them until we get some.  Maybe if we vote the Conservatives in?

Those F35s look nice.  Probably not cheap though.

I think the more they raise them the more they don't want to buy planes.

[myata]

And in the meanwhile our good uncle Xi can be contained with.. you know what. Hope the allies will keep looking the other way.

[Dougie93]

9 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Sure it does.  Paranoia notwithstanding.

Canada has the 6th largest defence budget in NATO already

quite clearly the money is not spent on equipment

so where does it all go then ?

no country spends more to get less

clearly the political class in Canada is deliberately sabotaging its own armed forces

but to what ends ?

[I am Groot]

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

Canada has the 6th largest defence budget in NATO already

quite clearly the money is not spent on equipment

so where does it all go then ?

 

Corruption and incompetence, of course. Why do you think we're building frigates that cost more than aircraft carriers? Why do you think every piece of military equipment we buy is the most expensive on planet Earth?

 

12 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Yeah, we should just keep raising them until we get some.  Maybe if we vote the Conservatives in?

Those F35s look nice.  Probably not cheap though.

We still have several score F18s. Maybe if we spent the money for parts and maintenance some of them would be working.

Edited June 15, 2023 by I am Groot

[Guest]

Okay, I'm converted.  I never realised it was that big a deal. 

I apologise for trying to just be irritating about taxes.

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Corruption and incompetence, of course. Why do you think we're building frigates that cost more than aircraft carriers? Why do you think every piece of military equipment we buy is the most expensive on planet Earth?

 

 

They are expensive but not more expensive than aircraft carriers.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Corruption and incompetence, of course.

Is it just me or does everyone seem to be as universally incompetent when it comes to doing anything about corruption?

[blackbird]

A retired CanForces general said on politics broadcast the other day the southeast pacific alliance called AUKUS, made up of Australia, the United Kingdom, and the U.S., won't allow Canada to join because Canada has not kept up to it's military commitments.  Canada spends 1.3% of GDP, while the UK spends at least 2%, Australia at least 2% and the U.S. spends about 3.6% of GDP.  Canada is far behind and can't be trusted.  He said Canada has a very small military force compared to the others.  It would be nonsensical to admit such a lackadaisical country.

Edited June 15, 2023 by blackbird

[CdnFox]

8 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Is it just me or does everyone seem to be as universally incompetent when it comes to doing anything about corruption?

Corruption is very hard to weed out once it's in. There has to be STRONG public support to do so.

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Corruption is very hard to weed out once it's in. There has to be STRONG public support to do so.

Well, If this place is any indication you can probably rule out getting support anywhere else. 

[Dougie93]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Corruption and incompetence, of course.

I no longer believe that to be the case

the Government is actively crippling the entire national security apparatus by design

thus at this point I would suspect deliberate sabotage on behalf of the Chinese Communists

[TreeBeard]

21 minutes ago, blackbird said:

A retired CanForces general said on politics broadcast the other day the southeast pacific alliance called AUKUS, made up of Australia, the United Kingdom, and the U.S., won't allow Canada to join because Canada has not kept up to it's military commitments.  Canada spends 1.3% of GDP, while the UK spends at least 2%, Australia at least 2% and the U.S. spends about 3.6% of GDP.  Canada is far behind and can't be trusted.  He said Canada has a very small military force compared to the others.  It would be nonsensical to admit such a lackadaisical country.

Good.  We should spend the money helping our citizens here at home.  What do you think Jesus would rather spend on….  military?  Or helping children in poverty?

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Well, If this place is any indication you can probably rule out getting support anywhere else. 

Because there's so many left wingers here? I see your point...   (lol)

Joking aside Canadians seem to be poised to finally be sick of justin's and the liberals corruption and give PP a strong mandate along those lines. But honestly the first SNC scandal should have been the end of the libs if we as canadians were serious about stopping corruption. We gave him two more gov'ts and every time there was more corruption. Not just bad policy or the like but actual corruption.  What message does that send to politicians.

[Dougie93]

24 minutes ago, blackbird said:

 the U.S., won't allow Canada to join because Canada has not kept up to it's military commitments. 

that's not the reason

Canada is barred from AUKUS

because AUKUS views Canada as being fifth column under the influence of Beijing

Justin Trudeau, the Manchurian Candidate

[eyeball]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Because there's so many left wingers here? I see your point...   (lol)

The lefties are just as opposed to transparency as anyone else. I've never noticed any difference.  Everyone appears to be equally convinced it's impossible if not undesirable.

There is a very real tangible non-partisan undercurrent of thought around here that believes corruption and especially the secrecy that facilitates it is a very necessary component of our governance and that things would be much worse without it.

I think John Crosbie summed it up perfectly when he said "if we told you what we were going to do you'd never vote for us"

We're all getting the governments we deserve.

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The lefties are just as opposed to transparency as anyone else. I've never noticed any difference.  Everyone appears to be equally convinced it's impossible if not undesirable.

Actually - in Canada there's strong evidence it's not the 'left' - its' the liberals.  

For whatever reason liberal supporters will tolerate any amount of corruption and pockting of cash as a rule.

However - the NDP has a history of trashing the hell out of govt's that show any sign of that.   I would point to BC where Harcourt was forced to redign over bingogate which was severely weak tea as far as corruption goes and the ndp voters all but wiped out the ndp after clarke's deck fiasco.

The right wing parties have a long tradition for it. The now dead PC party, Alyson redford, etc etc etc. 

But the libs (actual libs not just parties with that name) are pretty much free to do as they like.

Canadians are generally better about it than the us so far - but the libs get away with murder and it's ony a matter of time till the other parties say "why the hell are we bothering to play by the rules then?"