Canadian Defence News

[I am Groot]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

We'll, you should present your evidence for that conclusion to the IPCC because it flies in the face of what the vast majority of experts are saying.

It will cost countries near the equator a lot more. The estimates I've seen for Canada is that it will be either neutral, or perhaps -1-2% of GDP. We'll get more floods and drought but also longer growing seasons and more arable land.

Besides, like I said, it's not working. CO2 continues to rise driven by those equator countries building more coal plants.

Edited Friday at 08:26 PM by I am Groot

[I am Groot]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I honestly don't understand this. I feel like if there was one element of defense that we could develop an industry for and be competitive as a world leader it would be drone technology. It's not like we don't understand it or we don't have experts, it's not like we're not studying how they're being used in the Ukraine right now, I feel like it would be easy for the gov't to put together a company or team to develop our own products and technology and innovate.

I mean we have Canada geese, we're already an experts in small highly destructive search and destroy platforms that act autonomously

I agree. We're even setting up a factory to build drones for Ukraine! Why not set up a second one to build drones for us!?

[Army Guy]

Nor sure if this link will work, but i think there is a bit of everything in it.

https://publications.canadianarmytoday.com/v10i1/?_gl=1*nbhd56*_ga*OTY5MTU4MDY1LjE3ODAwODc5MzA.*_ga_P3XDLWQJW0*czE3ODAwODc5MzAkbzEkZzEkdDE3ODAwODkxMzMkajYwJGwwJGgw

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

It will cost countries near the equator a lot more. The estimates I've seen for Canada is that it will be either neutral, or perhaps -1-2% of GDP. We'll get more floods and drought but also longer growing seasons and more arable land.

Besides, like I said, it's not working. CO2 continues to rise driven by those equator countries building more coal plants.

Where do you think all these folks around the equator will go?

[User]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Where do you think all these folks around the equator will go?

Why would they need to go anywhere?

[eyeball]

12 minutes ago, User said:

Why would they need to go anywhere?

The same reason other species are already moving to cooler climes.

AGW is always like a brand new concept to you people isn't it?

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

You never fact check yourself before you weigh in on things do you?

Sure i do. Although honestly just disagreeing with you gives people about a 99.3 percent chance of being right  

Adoption is vastly cheaper and not only that it's a great way to take lemons and make lemonade by leveraging climate change where possible. There will be benefits to Canada

[eyeball]

20 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sure i do.

No, you clearly don't. You simply have ask how much more will adapting to AGW cost versus action.

Try it yourself.

[User]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

The same reason other species are already moving to cooler climes.

AGW is always like a brand new concept to you people isn't it?

So... again, the question was "need"

I love the weather in San Diego. I do need to move there. 

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, User said:

So... again, the question was "need"

Yes I saw that - what didn't you understand?

Scientists estimate that the range of approximately half of all species have already shifted towards cooler climate to escape rising temperatures and altered habitats.

You didn't know that? Why are you weighing in on this as if you knew what you were talking about?

[User]

28 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Yes I saw that - what didn't you understand?

Scientists estimate that the range of approximately half of all species have already shifted towards cooler climate to escape rising temperatures and altered habitats.

You didn't know that? Why are you weighing in on this as if you knew what you were talking about?

Not an issue of understanding. 

You have offered nothing to explain why you think they (humans) will need to leave. 
 

[eyeball]

27 minutes ago, User said:

Not an issue of understanding. 

You have offered nothing to explain why you think they (humans) will need to leave. 

Oh, your eyes must have rolled up so far in your head you missed where I said;

The same reason other species are already moving to cooler climes.

Are you seriously suggesting this  answer is beyond your ken? Even bacteria know enough to move away from something that gets too hot.

 

[I am Groot]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Where do you think all these folks around the equator will go?

That would depend on how weak the government is. I know they wouldn't come here if I was in charge.

[User]

25 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Oh, your eyes must have rolled up so far in your head you missed where I said;

The same reason other species are already moving to cooler climes.

Are you seriously suggesting this  answer is beyond your ken? Even bacteria know enough to move away from something that gets too hot.

 

Humans are not all the other species. It isn’t going to get too hot to live there. 

This is your stupid argument to make. 
 

You said “need” and you can’t back it up. Like usual. You assert stupid ignorant shit. 

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, I am Groot said:

That would depend on how weak the government is. I know they wouldn't come here if I was in charge.

You figure the Americans will pay much attention to that? There's 50 million in the southwest already facing severe drought and drawn down aquifers that will take thousands of years to become naturally replenished.

Much of the rainfall they do get evaporates before it even has a chance to seep through the surface.

Oh, and Americans will also be fleeing the millions of AGW refugees who'll be pressing in from even more uninhabitable regions.

Some 1.5 billion humans are expected to be on the move by 2050 - it's already well under way.  It's probably more realistic to say most equatorial regions will have already been evacuated by 2050.

And you figure just a 2% hit to our GDP?

LMAO!

[eyeball]

Just now, User said:

Humans are not all the other species. It isn’t going to get too hot to live there. 

So what species will humans sustain themselves with if all the others have fled or perished?

[User]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

So what species will humans sustain themselves with if all the others have fled or perished?

Why would “all” the others leave?

Why would “all” the others perish?

Humans are not hunter gatherers anymore living in caves going out to forage berries and lizards to eat.

Why are you so ignorant? 

[eyeball]

16 minutes ago, User said:

You said “need” and you can’t back it up. Like usual. You assert stupid ignorant shit. 

Perhaps they just didn't get the memo that climate change is a hoax.

11 minutes ago, User said:

Why would “all” the others leave?

Why would “all” the others perish?

AGW.

[BeaverFever]

On 5/26/2026 at 12:53 AM, CdnFox said:

We haven't done anything. And that's a fact.  No new gear,

That’s is not a fact.  You just have just concocted ridiculous excuses not to count anything. According to you it doesn’t count until it’s actually delivered and you make absurd claims of how long it should take for orders to be delivered. You don’t know what you are talking about. You think it’s like ordering on Amazon with next day delivery you have no idea of what’s involved.

 

On 5/26/2026 at 12:53 AM, CdnFox said:

no 'raise' that wasn't clawed back

Also a lie. Raises were much bigger than the adjustments toe temporary allowances. . Furthermore raises were for everyone and permanent while temporary allowances are temporary and were only for some  

Again hard to tell when you’re speaking out of ignorance and when you’re speaking out of dishonesty, you’re equally capable of both. 

 

 

[BeaverFever]

On 5/26/2026 at 12:55 AM, CdnFox said:

That would make the battery a secondary source which would mean i was 100 percent correct. 

Fcuk you're stupid. You literally just piped up and demonstrated i'm right. 

LMAO NO it doesn’t make you correct about anything and it still shows that you are the stupid one pretending to he smart, The MAGA Hallmark.

TO BE CLEAR: “Barrels of gasoline” even if we hilariously pretend you were referring to “natural geological cavern filled with natural gas” as your dumbass support animals claim, do not provide electricity during peak hours and building a completely separate gas plant just to run a few hours per day is not cheaper than adding battery and it makes the cost per kwh of that electricity even more expensive 

 

CDNFOX TROLL TACTIC  NO MATTER WHAT THE OTHER PERSON SAYS JUST REPLY WITH “YOU JUST PROVED ME RIGHT”

 

 

 

[BeaverFever]

On 5/27/2026 at 10:19 PM, Army Guy said:

There are plenty of potential orders for the P-8, not only that, there is a constant need for Aircraft spares....The E-7 is paused for now, you or i can not say for any certainty there is NO orders out there or ever will be...The US still has not decided on which direction it will go...Neither has NATO...

Boeing already said if they don’t get more orders soon they are shutting down the line forever. That was back a couple years ago before Canada had hopped on board in Feb 2024. Since then time has not been kind to Boeing or buying American. The only new P8 order in the past 2.5 years is 4 planes for Singapore.  
 

THE USAF does not want E7. They want an exclusively ground and space-based system and canceled their or dor 26 planes. Congress is forcing them to buy 7 due to lobbying. I thought you were opposed to politicians forcing military to buy kit they don’t want, especially expensive kit.  I guess that only counts for Canada?
 

NATO has officially cancelled its E7 order and selected Globaleye. So has France.  The P8 at least has the advantage of not having any real competition but E7 has not one but two competitors in Saab and L3Harris, both of which are mounted on a Bombardier Global 6500. 
 

 

On 5/27/2026 at 10:19 PM, Army Guy said:

I never said that....what i said is we had a chance to buy the global 6500 witch was the P-8 competition and yet we picked the P-8...because at the time no body hated trump.....funny how now we pick the global 6500, because it is a Canadian aircraft....Why did we not pick the global 6500 the first time....and yet today announcement we need to buy Canadian because we don't like the trump....that is the only reason...Stop pushing your narrative...this is a political decision...

1) Ok first of all the there was no 6500 alternative to the P8. Just a concept on paper, no prototype, no testbed not even a desktop plastic model. Just designs on paper. Designs by the way that included an internal weapons bay which has never been done on a Global before so it was a proposal for WAAAAAAY off in the future while P8 was already in service. 
 

2) Yes it was back when US was a trusted ally not a sovereignty threat and of course that changes everything. Of course our strategic posture with USA has changed since Trump launched his economic war against us and weaponized our dependencies. We need to buy Canadian because we need to support our economy and build our own defence industry and our own sovereignty. It doesn’t change after Trump leaves. How do you not understand?

 

On 5/27/2026 at 10:19 PM, Army Guy said:

Building more Military infra structure is part of the NATO deal....1.5 % on military infra structure....which includes anything the military may use....i explained this many times why is it so hard to understand....in most cases it is accounted for in the overall expenditure accounting....

I think you guys were the ones claiming this kind of expenditure doesn’t count. I fully understand that it does.  And to be correct the 1.5% is for DUAL USE infrastructure like highways etc  Military facilities like barracks and hangars in air bases aren’t dual use, they’re part of the other 3.5%  

 

On 5/27/2026 at 10:19 PM, Army Guy said:

I'm not one of those guys complaining about military expenditures.......And if you have ever been on a military base you would see just how old the infra structure really is....So why would any military person complain about money being feed in to the military....Most of the PMQ's were built in the 50's....how old is your home ?....they should have been replaced decades ago...but it is just military people...such a small demographic..

Carney has spent tons on base renovations, new hangars , new housing and you guys keep saying it’ doesn’t count and it’s some sort of trickery to inflate the defense budget. 
 

On 5/27/2026 at 10:19 PM, Army Guy said:

My point would have been on the logistic side of the house, all the spares are not held in one place, there are 2 major depots one in Alberta, and another in Toronto and each base has a major supply warehousing structures....because of the common spare parts, there would be more parts available, in many locations across the country...now we have two separate aircraft with no commonality meaning parts will be fewer... 

Actually there will br commonality with the other Global 6500 fleet we just bought so we’re not actually adding complexity to the fleet mix here  And the aircraft is still in widespread commercialAnd the maker being domestic means we will have better access to the parts and better access to the company we’re not going to get screwed over like the way Sikorsky lost our phone number and stopped replying to our DMs after selling us the Cyclones  and decided to discontinue the line  Canada was was just some insignificant small fry to them with our puny order of 28 bespoke  and discontinued aircraft   
 

On 5/28/2026 at 6:48 PM, I am Groot said:

But nothing with guns.

The new guns they just bought is something with guns.

Spike ATGMs and RBS 70s are missiles but I assume that counts 

And as I mentioned HIMARS is already ordered 

River Class destroyers are already under construction. 

P8s already being built (will have missile and torpedoes not guns)

CQ9Bs already being built  

And Stay tuned. Sub announcement is due end of June.

Sime of the ACSVs rolling odf the line will have guns or mortars 

I would argue The millions they just poured into building and expanding munitions factories should also count. 

Edited Saturday at 03:21 AM by BeaverFever

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

No, you clearly don't.

I very clearly do.

 

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

No, you clearly don't. You simply have ask how much more will adapting to AGW cost versus action.

Try it yourself.

Well lets use our brains abit here.  Sorry... lets use my brain a bit here, i forgot you're 'brain challenged'  

So, first question, if we eliminate all of canada's GHG what difference does it make

 

The Bottom Line

If Canada completely eliminated all of its greenhouse gas emissions today, it would avert approximately \(0.008^{\circ }\text{C}\) to \(0.012^{\circ }\text{C}\) of global warming by the year 2100.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=If+Canada's+emissions+are+entirely+eliminated+what+difference+would+it+make+to+global+warming+specifically&oq=If+Canada's+emissions+are+entirely+eliminated+what+difference+would+it+make+to+global+warming+specifically&gs_lcrp=EgRlZGdlKgYIABBFGDkyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQ6wcYQNIBCTI2ODY1ajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&source=chrome.ob

 

Just to be clear, that's nothing.  

In other words, EVERY SINGLE PENNY SPENT ON IT IS WASTED.  

So in our first case because no matter how much we spend it's a complete waste unless the same is true of adaption then adaptation will be the winner. 

 

Now, we know every dollar is wasted trying to fight climate change but how much does it cost?

The federal government has committed over $160 billion to fight climate change and build a clean economy since 2015

How much money has Canada spent trying to fight climate change - Google Search

WAAAAT!?!?  THat's 16 billion a year and we got NOTHING FOR IT. 

 

And that does NOT include the damage to our economy and the losses of revenue!!!!

 

So. Adaption

Adapting to global warming will cost Canadian municipalities an estimated $5.3 billion annually.

How much will it cost Canada to adapt to global warming - Google Search

 

Holy shit that's cheap in comparison!!!

 

So to successfully adapt to climate change, we need only spend 5.3 billion  year. 

And that actually works!  Further:

The Return on Investment (ROI)

While the upfront costs are substantial, the economic benefits of climate adaptation are significant.

• Research shows that investing in resilient infrastructure provides a return on investment of $6 to $15 for every single dollar spent.
• Proactive adaptation in vulnerable regions like the North can reduce annual climate-induced costs by 74% to 88%. [1, 2, 3]

 

WOAH!!! Holy shit, not only does it cost less but... it actually works AND MAKES US MOEY IN THE LONGER RUN!!!!!!!! And by being proactive we can reduce the costs by a huge percent!!!!!

 

You are comfortably one of the dumbest people here. You know that I know my crap, you know that I don't open my mouth unless I know I'm right and you still say something as stupid as 'derp!!! Look it up!!'  

ROFLMAO!!!!  

It is a SMALL FRACTION of the cost to adapt and adapting actually works, 

You lose kid  

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

That’s is not a fact.  

 

 

Oh? It isn't? we DID get large amounts of new gear?

What gear did we actually get that wasn't already scheduled for delivery? what new gear was delivered?

new tanks? new planes? new boats? New rucksacks so that we don't have to borrow from some soldiers to cover other soldiers?

New firearms perhaps?  New AA systems? 

You're a lying sack of shit

 

[eyeball]

24 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The Bottom Line

If Canada completely eliminated all of its greenhouse gas emissions today, it would avert approximately \(0.008^{\circ }\text{C}\) to \(0.012^{\circ }\text{C}\) of global warming by the year 2100.

The real bottom line is that the CO2 emissions from burning oil is some 9 times greater than the emissions from extracting it.

As I said you people think like old asbestos industry executives who argued they have no responsibility for the effects of their product once it's in the hands of others.

Alberta and Canada missed the big oil boat back when they couldn't make nationalization work. Now we stand to miss the bigger alternative boat because...climate change is a hoax.

LMAO!

Edited Saturday at 04:11 AM by eyeball

[User]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Perhaps they just didn't get the memo that climate change is a hoax.

AGW.

More of your non-answers.

You just spew BS. 

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

CDNFOX TROLL TACTIC  NO MATTER WHAT THE OTHER PERSON SAYS JUST REPLY WITH “YOU JUST PROVED ME RIGHT”

As opposed to your cowardly tactics to just run away? 
 

Never admit your ignorance? Double down and lie?