John Stone Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 1 hour ago, eyeball said: The CCG is still a civilian agency and probably remain as far from combat as it did fisheries when the DFO and CCG amalgamated. The Tanu went from being painted gray to red and white is about all we noticed on the West coast. I think ur missing the intent of the amalgamation - it has nothing to do with efficacy and everything to do with fiscal deception re: our defense budget? All that said, I'm sure RCN would look forward eagerly to serving aboard CCG hulls. No one is fooled - oh, maybe a few civilians. Quote
CdnFox Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 7 hours ago, BeaverFever said: Close but no cigar. They said “this what we’re planning to do in the next year after the Americans have done it” and he said “I just got off the phone with the PM of Australia, we’re going do it now” He had nothing to do with it. He was told this is what we want to do and what we're doing, he said sure Again no matter who was prime minister the same thing would have happened at the same moment. Nice try kiddo 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Army Guy Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 5 hours ago, BeaverFever said: 1) Those countries placed their F35 orders a long time ago and are still plagued with all kinds of reliability issues with their fleets 2) Those countries already have mixed fleets of 4.5 gen aircraft like Typhoon and Rafale, they don’t need to order more. Spain, Portugal and Switzerland have cancelled their F35 orders just this year. US doesn’t make non-nuclear subs or Frigates (even they are using the European FREMM design for their new Constellation Class program) and I bet our military would prefer Abrams if the government would let them. It’s been widely reported that they are very cozy with the American military and their defence lobbyists and look up to Americans and the cool big brother they want to impress and emulate. And no, technically speaking its not the generals and admirals whose lives are on the line. Military answers to the civilian government, they have their own agenda and biases and they’re spending other peoples’ money. They are not concerned with broader geopolitical issues or guarding against US political economic and technological dominance of Canada. They place all their emphasis on the high-end war fighting end of the threat spectrum and pay little attention to whether it is wasteful to ise this high-eng gear for the other end of the spectrum where it will actually be used in real world operations for 90%+ of its service life. Furthermore the era of NATO countries being nothing more than an add-on accessory for America’s next war of choice is coming to an end. NATO nations are realizing they need capabilities that can be used independently of USA. That next war in Europe you mention may see Americans sitting on the sidelines or even rooting for the other side. Again Im not saying ZERO F-35s, Im saying mixed fleet. 1..Problems that are being worked out, problems that do not keep it from combat operations.... 2..Both typhon and rafale are much better than the gripen.....Both of these aircraft placed in the top three in all 3 of those competitions Canada held... But we are not thinking about those aircraft.... 3...Yes they have canceled their orders not because of faults with the aircraft but rather problems with trump and his policies...try again... My entire point is that we don't use US military equipment for all our needs the largest purchase this country is going to make is going to Germany or south Korea...The second largest is a British design made here in Canada....your point is blown out of the water... We have been using the leopard main battle tanks for decades....Why because our military likes it better than the Abrams... we don't have the logistical tail like the US, to feed it with fuel which it drinks like a drunken sailor... It was widely reported that Elvis was seen leaving the building, You don't understand how procurement works, it does not matter if our military was sleeping with American manufactures....they don't pick any of our equipment, it is set up that way because guys like you believe there would be bias of some sort... military writes up a spec sheet on what they want it to do, or accomplish....Civilians from our procurement dept scour the globe for equipment that fit that spec....military test it , writes up a report on what it found during testing ....The sitting government picks what they are going to buy....So sucking up to our American brothers by our military has zero effect...Maybe you got another theory... SO if I'm following your train of thought we should buy something that barely makes the grade, and if or when a war comes we could go to war in sub par equipment....Military always plans for the worse case situation, and adapts to all the rest...I mean these are Canadian lives we are talking about....And we have a long history of doing just that, buying cheap and burying our dead... Not sure where you got that, NATO is expanding faster now than anytime in it's history, NATO in Europe are preparing for the next WAR today....some countries invoking conscription or thinking about it, massive military spending...countering your augment. America will not be on the side lines....America wants the rest of NATO to stand up and be accountable, and invest into the organization they belong to....I'd like to see where you came up with that idea... Air Command past and present are saying NO, NO, and NO to a mixed fleet they are also saying NO to the gripen....The F-35 is the path they want ....it has more growth than any 4.5 gen aircraft already at it's end of life 1 Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 5 hours ago, BeaverFever said: Also, we’re not going to have fully operational F35s in that timeframe anyways, currently F-35 has a 50% availability rate due to glitches and extensive maintenance requirements. . Gripen is the only one who said they could start delivering fully operational aircraft in 3-5 years. Nobody knows when the F35s current glitches and reliability issues will be solved. So buy more....the F-35 has 100% more capabilities than the gripen...it has more growth than the gripen, it does a sh!t ton more than the gripen , why do you think the air force by passed it 3 times in a row....What people do know is in less than a decade when gen 6 aircraft are being produced gen 4.5 aircraft will be nothing more than targets....to anyone daring to fly them.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
TreeBeard Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 9 hours ago, Venandi said: Perhaps a grossly simplified analogy that everyone can relate to might help Your analogy makes no sense when there are examples of multiple NATO jets of different manufacturers that have no issues of interoperability. France, UK, etc have no issues operating with Americans. All three use different fighters. There doesn’t need to be a weird analogy about a family with different mobile phones when there are actual examples of it working between airforces. The analogy falls apart when you look at the real world. Plus, my family shares schedules just fine using different phones. 😂 Your hypothetical family is kind of dumb. Quote
Army Guy Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 6 hours ago, BeaverFever said: CAE signs new agreement with Sweden-based Saab to provide training services, devices MONTREAL — CAE Inc. has announced an agreement to be the preferred supplier of certain training and simulation equipment for Sweden-based Saab’s airborne early warning system. https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/article/cae-signs-new-agreement-with-sweden-based-saab-to-provide-training-services-devices/ Another deal that Carney’s government had “nothing to do with” I am sure it’s totally unrelated to the major state visit involving the king of Sweden, senior Swedish officials, deputy PM, and all of Sweden’s top industry leaders and the multiple visits that Carney and his officials have made to Sweden 🤣 If it’s not obvious to anyone yet, Canada will be getting the Saab GlobalEye AWACS plane, which is built on the Bombardier platform, although it hasn’t been formally announced. I’ve been hoping for this since the new defence strategy that came out under Trudeau called for AWACS but at the time it seemed we would get bullied into buying the Americans’ Boeing E7 Wedgetail since Uk and Australia operate it and NATO and France had it on order. But then once Trump drama started, began to suspect we wouldn’t be buying it. Then the USAF cancelled its E7 program this summer and it was supposed to be the “anchor customer”, totally screwing over UK Australia and the few other countries that have already bought tiny fleets of E7s. France has now cancelled its E7 order and switched to GlobalEye and Melanie Joly has been name dropping it in most of her speeches about building up Canadian industry so I’m convinced now we will be getting it also. NATO has cancelled its E7 order and is shopping for an alternative and GlobalEye is the only option while Germany has said it is eyeing the plane as well plus a fleet of other bombardier aircraft This makes no sense at all....we just purchased the P-8, which is on a 737 airframe, and over looked its counter part also on a 6500 airframe....now because it looks good politically and trump is such a bad man , we can't buy the wedge tail because we have a lip on.... Tell me how this is a military decision because they are cozy with their American counter parts....This is ALL political, and further illustrates just how powerless the military is when choosing it's own equipment... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
ExFlyer Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 1 hour ago, John Stone said: Suppose it could now be argued that NORAD is far more an issue for the U.S. than NATO? CCS will be the heart and soul of the River Class Destroyers....... What will they marry to it ........... don't want to be too offensive, eh? All that being said I'll be surprised if we get the full planned complement. ............ maybe defer to a few icebreakers for the CCG/RCN config. Yes....protecting home turf usurps foreign involvement. Combat control systems is the heart of any combat ship and interoperability is of the utmost importance. 1 Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
eyeball Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 51 minutes ago, John Stone said: I think ur missing the intent of the amalgamation - it has nothing to do with efficacy and everything to do with fiscal deception re: our defense budget? All that said, I'm sure RCN would look forward eagerly to serving aboard CCG hulls. Deceiving who? Americans maybe. I don't know why though, everything governments do is political and therefore deceitful by nature. When the CCG was amalgamated with DFO it was done to save money they said. Nothing was said about there not being much need for DFO anymore since they mismanaged most fisheries into oblivion - but no one around here was fooled. CCG guys hated the amalgamation with DFO. They didn't like being associated with such a reviled institution. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
John Stone Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 4 minutes ago, eyeball said: Deceiving who? Americans maybe. I don't know why though, everything governments do is political and therefore deceitful by nature. When the CCG was amalgamated with DFO it was done to save money they said. Nothing was said about there not being much need for DFO anymore since they mismanaged most fisheries into oblivion - but no one around here was fooled. CCG guys hated the amalgamation with DFO. They didn't like being associated with such a reviled institution. 4 minutes ago, eyeball said: Deceiving who? Americans maybe. I don't know why though, everything governments do is political and therefore deceitful by nature. When the CCG was amalgamated with DFO it was done to save money they said. Nothing was said about there not being much need for DFO anymore since they mismanaged most fisheries into oblivion - but no one around here was fooled. CCG guys hated the amalgamation with DFO. They didn't like being associated with such a reviled institution. ............. of course the Americans - not to mention NATO allies that are expected to cough up 5% honestly. Smoke and mirrors ........ rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic while the band played on? Quote
eyeball Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 1 minute ago, John Stone said: ............. of course the Americans - not to mention NATO allies that are expected to cough up 5% honestly. Smoke and mirrors ........ rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic while the band played on? Sure, it happens all the time. I see little to no reason not to believe our allies aren't all playing politics with their numbers too for much the same reason. I'm just as sure the people trying their hardest to shame Canada into spending more inflate the amount our allies spend. Then consider how underwhelming Russia's performance in Ukraine has been compared to the decades of fear mongering western populations have been subjected to. If anything our past spending has probably been right on the mark as far as any real defensive needs go. But like I've said many times, if there's a cogent plan to actually go put dictatorships around the world out of business once and for all, I'm all ears. 1 Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
John Stone Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 28 minutes ago, eyeball said: Sure, it happens all the time. I see little to no reason not to believe our allies aren't all playing politics with their numbers too for much the same reason. I'm just as sure the people trying their hardest to shame Canada into spending more inflate the amount our allies spend. Then consider how underwhelming Russia's performance in Ukraine has been compared to the decades of fear mongering western populations have been subjected to. If anything our past spending has probably been right on the mark as far as any real defensive needs go. But like I've said many times, if there's a cogent plan to actually go put dictatorships around the world out of business once and for all, I'm all ears. 28 minutes ago, eyeball said: Sure, it happens all the time. I see little to no reason not to believe our allies aren't all playing politics with their numbers too for much the same reason. I'm just as sure the people trying their hardest to shame Canada into spending more inflate the amount our allies spend. Then consider how underwhelming Russia's performance in Ukraine has been compared to the decades of fear mongering western populations have been subjected to. If anything our past spending has probably been right on the mark as far as any real defensive needs go. But like I've said many times, if there's a cogent plan to actually go put dictatorships around the world out of business once and for all, I'm all ears. I'm somewhat certain the so-called dictators would eat you last - you provide an advantage to them. Quote
John Stone Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 Just to be clear, Russia is fighting a war of attrition - the wearing away of Ukraine's defences - Russian's losses have been staggering! The thing is Putin faces no backlash within Russia - he can fight that type of war and win - what he cannot survive is losing or likely even negotiating a truce. Putin's strategy is that the West will lose interest in the war - the latest Peace Plan (suggested by Russia) hasn't changed a wit, the difference is that Trump is promoting it. If the so-called treaty prevails it will be a disgrace whose stench will linger for generations and there will be repercussions, likely beginning with the collapse of NATO. You seem to think that Canada can stand on it's own without allies - surely not? In closing I'll say the good ole days of relying on the U.S. to provide an aegis are gone - but relax, there won't be an invasion of Chinese or Russians, Koreans, Iranians - Canada will likely collapse thru the actions of a 5th political column. Quote
eyeball Posted November 23, 2025 Report Posted November 23, 2025 48 minutes ago, John Stone said: Canada will likely collapse thru the actions of a 5th political column. It's a little late in the day to be worried about that don't you think? There were commies under every bed 50-60 years ago. Since then we've infiltrated and taken over governments and institutions at every level, and the media too. All without having to fire a single shot I might add. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
BeaverFever Posted November 24, 2025 Author Report Posted November 24, 2025 11 hours ago, I am Groot said: So it looks like the military just got 52 more aircraft. For free! DND will be taking over the aircraft from Transport Canada for a reason no one seems willing to explain, but it seems obvious to me. It's another way of 'increasing' DND's budget without actually paying anything extra or buying anything. So on paper, our 'military' budget just grew without costing us anything. More accounting games from the Liberals. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/transport-surveillance-environment-drones-defence-9.6982250#:~:text=Show More-,Transport Canada will be surrendering most — if not all — of,in the recent federal budget. Yeah basically… as a nit/picking thing though the “military” didn’t get them, they are not becoming part of the CAF, they are still civilians, just now under Department of National Defence. Apparently around 3,000 civilian employees from various federal departments will move to DND because they do a job that can be counted as “defence” under NATO rules and therefore counted towards NATO targets. Quote
CdnFox Posted November 24, 2025 Report Posted November 24, 2025 32 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: Yeah basically… as a nit/picking thing though the “military” didn’t get them, they are not becoming part of the CAF, they are still civilians, just now under Department of National Defence. Apparently around 3,000 civilian employees from various federal departments will move to DND because they do a job that can be counted as “defence” under NATO rules and therefore counted towards NATO targets. This is in addition to the coast guard which they'd previously announced they'd move to defense, and again that spending will now count. 1 Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
BeaverFever Posted November 24, 2025 Author Report Posted November 24, 2025 (edited) 10 hours ago, Army Guy said: 1..Problems that are being worked out, problems that do not keep it from combat operations.... They do keep it from combat operations half the time. Being worked on with no ETA for completion how come you accept that answer here do easily but not when it comes to any other government projects that are way behind schedule and way over budget? 10 hours ago, Army Guy said: 2..Both typhon and rafale are much better than the gripen.....Both of these aircraft placed in the top three in all 3 of those competitions Canada held... But we are not thinking about those aircraft.... Yep but still 4.5 generation and still overpriced overkill for things like chasing weather balloons and flying over the grey cup which is a big % of the job 10 hours ago, Army Guy said: My entire point is that we don't use US military equipment for all our needs the largest purchase this country is going to make is going to Germany or south Korea...The second largest is a British design made here in Canada....your point is blown out of the water... No, my point is in the 2 examples you provided above there is no US option so your point isn’t valid. 10 hours ago, Army Guy said: We have been using the leopard main battle tanks for decades....Why because our military likes it better than the Abrams... we don't have the logistical tail like the US, to feed it with fuel which it drinks like a drunken sailor... The F35 has a huge logistical tail compared to Gripen also. And while I can’t prove it right now I believe the decision for Leos over Abrams came from politicians. The Air Force always buys American, Kingfisher and Cormorant are probably the only exceptions, with Lockheed having quickly withdrawn its c130 in the FWSAR option and Cormorant being highly politicized (and US not having a SAR helicopter in the desired size). 10 hours ago, Army Guy said: It was widely reported that Elvis was seen leaving the building, You don't understand how procurement works, it does not matter if our military was sleeping with American manufactures....they don't pick any of our equipment, it is set up that way because guys like you believe there would be bias of some sort... military writes up a spec sheet on what they want it to do, or accomplish....Civilians from our procurement dept scour the globe for equipment that fit that spec....military test it , writes up a report on what it found during testing ....The sitting government picks what they are going to buy....So sucking up to our American brothers by our military has zero effect...Maybe you got another theory... Of course they have their favourites and try to shape the outcome towards those through persuasive arguments. They want the fanciest high end warfighter naturally but i 90% of the real world applications during its service life….maybe 100%….the aircraft is not going to be doing that kind of work. 10 hours ago, Army Guy said: SO if I'm following your train of thought we should buy something that barely makes the grade, and if or when a war comes we could go to war in sub par equipment....Military always plans for the worse case situation, and adapts to all the rest...I mean these are Canadian lives we are talking about....And we have a long history of doing just that, buying cheap and burying our dead... I’ll say it yet again: A MIXED FLEET If this war comes the F-35s can be used. For chasing weather balloons, the Gripen is more than fine. 10 hours ago, Army Guy said: Not sure where you got that, NATO is expanding faster now than anytime in it's history, NATO in Europe are preparing for the next WAR today....some countries invoking conscription or thinking about it, massive military spending...countering your augment. America will not be on the side lines....America wants the rest of NATO to stand up and be accountable, and invest into the organization they belong to....I'd like to see where you came up with that idea... Yeah European NATO is expanding precisely because Trump and MAGAs have hinted they may abandon Europe to its fate or at least extract a very high tribute for continued American protection. People like Tucker Carslon are openly rooting for Putin which may make it politically difficult for America to intervene in a future conflict. Right now Trump is pressuring Ukraine to accept a “peace plan” that is a Xmas gift for Putin basically demanding Ukraine’s unconditional surrender. 10 hours ago, Army Guy said: So buy more....the F-35 has 100% more capabilities than the gripen...it has more growth than the gripen, it does a sh!t ton more than the gripen , why do you think the air force by passed it 3 times in a row....What people do know is in less than a decade when gen 6 aircraft are being produced gen 4.5 aircraft will be nothing more than targets....to anyone daring to fly them.... It only works half the time so just buy twice as many LOL quite the sales pitch, especially for the world’s most expensive jet. Again what I am proposing is not to replace the f35 with Gripen but to backstop it with an aircraft that can actually fly and do what we actually need it to do day to day in every situation other than a near-peer war, until a 6th generation option is available. 9 hours ago, Army Guy said: This makes no sense at all....we just purchased the P-8, which is on a 737 airframe, and over looked its counter part also on a 6500 airframe....now because it looks good politically and trump is such a bad man , we can't buy the wedge tail because we have a lip on.... Tell me how this is a military decision because they are cozy with their American counter parts....This is ALL political, and further illustrates just how powerless the military is when choosing it's own equipment... Wedgetail is dead now that USAF cancelled its order. They were supposed to be the anchor customer with 26+ aircraft. Now Australia and Korea are stuck with tiny orphaned fleets and all the costs associated just like how we ended up with an orphaned Cyclone fleet. They don’t even make the 737NG airframe anymore for commercial airlines, Boeing has just one production line to run off the existing P8 orders. Regarding P8 there was no counterpart on the 6500 airframe as an alternative to P8. Bombardier was trying to propose a preliminary design - basically just a CONCEPT - that only existed on paper and was still years away from full development much less production. Furthermore all of our allies were buying P8s and we didn’t want to be the ones operating an orphaned aircraft However this is different, now the wedgetail is the orphan and our allies are buying GlobalEyes which are or soon will be in production for Sweden, UAE, France and the NATO joint AWACS program, with Germany also likely to place an order To your question, the civilian government has final say on what gets bought, the military brass have their own preferences and interests, which they try to advocate for. 27 minutes ago, CdnFox said: This is in addition to the coast guard which they'd previously announced they'd move to defense, and again that spending will now count. Yep Edited November 24, 2025 by BeaverFever Quote
Venandi Posted November 24, 2025 Report Posted November 24, 2025 (edited) 17 hours ago, TreeBeard said: There doesn’t need to be a weird analogy about a family with different mobile phones when there are actual examples of it working between airforces. Ya, knew I'd regret that attempt... I tried (and perhaps failed) to point out that deliberately accepting proprietary barriers to information sharing based solely on saving 20 bucks or disliking a salesman might be worthy of a rethink. In the fullness of time, I think "real world" costs and data sharing/fusing limitations may come as something of a surprise to those who now advocate for a mixed fleet. There are proprietary limitations that go beyond link 16 that should be scrutinized a bit closer than what seems to be happening IMO. Even referring to the F35 as "the Trump F35" seems to be part of the sort of I/O effort discussed on another thread. I won't pursue this further other than to recommend a deeper dive into available information before commiting to a mixed fleet with long term implications. As I said before, I'm not a fighter guy, it's not my stovepipe and I have no depth of experience other than a minor supporting role in the kinetic end product... Billie is though, and since I know that I don't know I tend to consider the opinions of those who actually do before yielding to whispers from the good idea fairy. I'm not defending his opinion here, simply offering it for what it may be worth. You do you though and as always... I'm rooting for ya: https://billieflynn.com/the-gripen-illusion-why-canada-shouldnt-buy-yesterdays-fighter/ "Beyond cost and obsolescence lies a more fundamental problem: interoperability. The F-35’s greatest strength isn’t just stealth or sensors—it’s seamless integration with NORAD and NATO partners. We all fly the same aircraft, share the same classified sensor-fused data, and operate across the same Low Probability of Intercept (stealthy) networks that tie into F-35-linked battlespace systems. For allies, that means instant compatibility with US operations; every F-35 is a networked node in a shared digital battlespace; the platform serves as a force multiplier, creating a vast network of sensors and communications that acts as a deterrent. The United States will never grant Sweden access to these sacred classified networks, regardless of Canadian purchases. This means Gripen and F-35 fleets couldn’t even share data within Canada. We’d operate an orphan fleet at over €90 million per aircraft (approximately $104 million USD)—more expensive than the F-35—that cannot communicate wartime data with our frontline fighters. The Gripen relies on legacy Link 16 networks that broadcast basic information but cannot access the vital intelligence F-35 sensors collect about adversaries. The implications are staggering: non-stealthy aircraft, more expensive than F-35s, unable to integrate with NORAD or the rest of the RCAF, requiring duplicate infrastructure since they cannot be housed with uber-classified F-35s, and demanding separate recruitment and training for pilots, technicians, and logisticians. Nobody seriously believes this is realistic or possible." Edited November 24, 2025 by Venandi Quote
Venandi Posted November 24, 2025 Report Posted November 24, 2025 11 minutes ago, John Stone said: Sounds great... but in case it doesn't resonate with everyone maybe we should consider all the options: Quote
John Stone Posted November 24, 2025 Report Posted November 24, 2025 5 minutes ago, Venandi said: Sounds great... but in case it doesn't resonate with everyone maybe we should consider all the options: https://youtu.be/lTs6a0ORdQU Quote
TreeBeard Posted November 24, 2025 Report Posted November 24, 2025 4 hours ago, Venandi said: https://billieflynn.com/the-gripen-illusion-why-canada-shouldnt-buy-yesterdays-fighter/ "Beyond cost and obsolescence lies a more fundamental problem: interoperability. This guy is paid by Lockheed-Martin. 😂 Quote
SpankyMcFarland Posted November 24, 2025 Report Posted November 24, 2025 On 11/22/2025 at 7:58 PM, Army Guy said: F-35...everything else favors the F-35 a gen 5 aircraft with capabilities the Gripen could only dream off....it's sensors can spot enemy aircraft well beyond their own radar coverage, shooting first is a wining strategy and killing at distance is the F-35 domain...It has been battle tested by Israel and the US.... We only have 3 more years of trump....are we going to be that petty as to depriver our pilots defending this country by flying the best aircraft on the market right now.... We may have a lot more years of Trumpism or Trump-flavoured policies than that. It has been deeply unnerving to watch the US turn on its allies. Being a friend close by has made us more vulnerable, not less, something unthinkable a few years ago. Quote ‘How small we make our worlds. Gather them in, tighten them up into little castles of fear.’
SpankyMcFarland Posted November 24, 2025 Report Posted November 24, 2025 In the interests of debate I include this link. I don’t know who CL is and whether they know anything but writing from an Institute sounds a little better. They favour the both approach. Quote The relatively low maintenance requirements, advanced sensors and ability to operate in extreme conditions makes the Gripen the best fit for around the clock Arctic patrolling and potential incursions into our airspace. The integration of the F35’s advanced sensors that give it maximum situational awareness while remaining undetected, enables Canada to take the fight to the enemy should we need to. It promotes deterrence and allows us to seamlessly integrate with other F35 flying nations. Both the Gripen E and F35 offer the RCAF aircraft that have unique capabilities that would each greatly contribute to Canada’s national security in myriad ways. https://mackenzieinstitute.com/2025/07/why-not-both-the-question-of-canadas-next-fighter-aircraft-the-f35-or-gripen/ Quote ‘How small we make our worlds. Gather them in, tighten them up into little castles of fear.’
ExFlyer Posted November 24, 2025 Report Posted November 24, 2025 On 11/22/2025 at 2:34 PM, John Stone said: Threaten to give Ukraine 'teeth' ............. Russia will fold very quickly - at the least an Armistice. Additionally threaten to use the 1/4 trillion $$$ frozen assets to aid / rebuild / rearm Ukraine. China / NK / Iran are all contributing mightily to the Russian geo-conquest of Ukraine.......... largely goes unreported. "Threaten to give Ukraine 'teeth'"...Trump already did than and the next day Putin bombed Ukraine. Now there is a proposal...with 28 points to agree on? Gimme a break...oh and giving Putin Donbass and Crimea??? Putin laughs at everything Trump and his tribe do and say. 1 Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
SpankyMcFarland Posted November 24, 2025 Report Posted November 24, 2025 I was going to post a piece essentially by Saab but they put it behind a bloomin’ paywall! That’s not the way to get your point across. 1 Quote ‘How small we make our worlds. Gather them in, tighten them up into little castles of fear.’
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.