Cancellation of the F-35 contract is now a necessity: when and how, not if

[Dougie93]

Just now, xul said:

No, I didn't.

What I said was to buy nukes to prevent an invasion. It is self-defense. 

but attempting to acquire nuclear weapons from North Korea would be the justification for America to invade,

even the Democrats would authorize it in that scenario

[Dougie93]

7 minutes ago, xul said:

 Whom they are against depends on who wants to invade Canada. 

all these fantasies about Canada presenting an existential threat to America ;

they amount to national suicide in of itself ; burning the village to save the village

[xul]

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

but attempting to acquire nuclear weapons from North Korea would be the justification for America to invade,

even the Democrats would authorize it in that scenario

Invading a country of such large size isn't as easy as playing video games, otherwise Trump would have given order to Pentagon this evening and he would get the 51st state of US tomorrow morning.

On the contrary, buying nukes may be far faster than US gathering enough troops for an invasion. There will be many great powers want to shield Canada with their nukes from an US invasion even if they are not friends of Canada at all.

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, xul said:

Invading a country of such large size isn't as easy as playing video games, otherwise Trump would have given order to Pentagon this evening and he would get the 51st state of US tomorrow morning.

On the contrary, buying nukes may be far faster than US gathering enough troops for an invasion. There will be many great powers want to shield Canada with their nukes from an US invasion even if they are not friends of Canada at all.

I would suggest that the threat is not invasion, but rather blockade

how long could Canada last if America sealed the border and blockaded the Canadian maritime approaches ?

[xul]

25 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

all these fantasies about Canada presenting an existential threat to America ;

they amount to national suicide in of itself ; burning the village to save the village

Such kind of mindset will bring US down sooner than it is supposed to be.

If US treats anyone who don't want to be US's obedient servant as its enemy, US will soon become the enemy of the world.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, xul said:

 US will soon become the enemy of the world.

bad news for Canada then ; being no man's land in that war

[Doowangle]

1 hour ago, xul said:

No, I didn't.

What I said was to buy nukes to prevent an invasion. It is self-defense.  Whom they are against depends on who wants to invade Canada. 

This is so outlandish. You realize the Americans likely have every possible communication line of Canadian leaders tapped right? Do you think the US would not see such a transaction or the attempted transfer of those nuclear weapons? The moment the US even catches wind of such talks happening alone, they would invade. If they actually see Canada moving a nuke towards the US coast? Dresden. 

Edited March 11 by Doowangle

[xul]

42 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

I would suggest that the threat is not invasion, but rather blockade

how long could Canada last if America sealed the border and blockaded the Canadian maritime approaches ?

Since Canada can produce far enough food and fuel to support its population, I think Canadian can survive many decades without importing TVs from China and perfumes from France.

Besides, having the strongest naval forces doesn't mean US can bring Canada to its knees by blockade. The Cuba Missile Crisis for instance:  If Soviet's goal was only to prevent Cuba from US invasion, the goal was achieved by its nuclear deterrence.

The blockade can only take effective if other great powers in the world think Canada is so insignificant that it isn't worth them to risk a nuclear war. Obviously Canada isn't that type since if US annexes Canada, it will give US huge advantage over them. So the blockage will definitely trigger another Cuba Missile Crisis. And regardless how US fake news agencies like CNN, FOX.. may present the results of the crisis like they did to the old one, the blockade will be left and Canada will still be there intact.

Edited March 11 by xul

[Doowangle]

32 minutes ago, xul said:

Such kind of mindset will bring US down sooner than it is supposed to be.

If US treats anyone who don't want to be US's obedient servant as its enemy, US will soon become the enemy of the world.

How do people still believe this? Who lifted a finger for Gaza? Who would have lifted a finger for Ukraine if the US had not intervened? Have you not noticed that the world does not tend to do much of anything other than issue condemnation statements via the UN? There is exactly one country aggressive enough to threaten to, and start war on behalf of other countries, and it's the very country you are pretending 'the world' will somehow keep in line. 

It's utter fantasy. 

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

That isn't realistic but it could give the US control over who else we can use them against. Like Russia or any other dictatorship Trump falls in love with.

The US sells fighter planes all over the world. 

If anybody has to worry about "cheat codes" disabling their planes it's places like Saudi Arabia, but the second the US pulls a stunt like that with anyone, their days of being weapons brokers are over. 

Who's to say that they wouldn't use that technology to detonate missiles that are still attached to a plane in flight, or detonate some warheads down deep inside of a magazine in a ship that has hundreds of them? 

I'm not saying that they don't have tech like that on weapons and vehicles that they sold abroad, but if they did, they wouldn't use it until they were at war against the people they sold that stuff to. 

If they're at war with Iran, and then they do that to some weapons in Iran's possession, no one's going to believe Iran. But if they threaten Canada with something like that, and it gets leaked, "Uh-oh!"

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, xul said:

Since Canada can produce far enough food and fuel to support its population, I think Canadian can survive many decades without importing TVs from China and perfumes from France.

Besides, having the strongest naval forces doesn't mean US can bring Canada to its knees by blockade. The Cuba Missile Crisis for instance:  If Soviet's goal was only to prevent Cuba from US invasion, the goal was achieve by nuclear deterrence.

The blockade can only take effective if other great powers in the world think Canada is so insignificant that it isn't worth them to risk a nuclear war. Obviously Canada isn't that type since if US annexes Canada, it will give US huge advantage over them. So the blockage will definitely trigger another Cuba Missile Crisis. And regardless how US fake news agencies like CNN, FOX.. may present the results of the crisis like they did in the old one, the blockade will be left and Canada will still be there intact.

if you say so,

I honestly don't worry about that which is beyond my control

[Doowangle]

20 minutes ago, xul said:

Since Canada can produce far enough food and fuel to support its population, I think Canadian can survive many decades without importing TVs from China and perfumes from France.

Besides, having the strongest naval forces doesn't mean US can bring Canada to its knees by blockade. The Cuba Missile Crisis for instance:  If Soviet's goal was only to prevent Cuba from US invasion, the goal was achieved by its nuclear deterrence.

The blockade can only take effective if other great powers in the world think Canada is so insignificant that it isn't worth them to risk a nuclear war. Obviously Canada isn't that type since if US annexes Canada, it will give US huge advantage over them. So the blockage will definitely trigger another Cuba Missile Crisis. And regardless how US fake news agencies like CNN, FOX.. may present the results of the crisis like they did to the old one, the blockade will be left and Canada will still be there intact.

Buddy, you think there is any country in the world that would even threaten conventional war, let alone nuclear war, for Canada? Jesus Christ I would kill to have your level of optimism.  

[Army Guy]

On 3/10/2025 at 2:45 PM, myata said:

If your adversary can disable them in few keystrokes, what would be the point of the cost? You seriously can't think clearly any longer only in cliches?

F-35 can not be disabled by the US or for that matter anyone else, do you really think our air force would buy a fighter that can be turned off....It is false news............The US controls software updates, which require US approval, like every piece of equipment it sells, who ever thought of the turn off switch is smoking high grade...

Believing such a thing would even be possible, is lacking some critical thinking skills...  

[Aristides]

47 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

The US sells fighter planes all over the world. 

If anybody has to worry about "cheat codes" disabling their planes it's places like Saudi Arabia, but the second the US pulls a stunt like that with anyone, their days of being weapons brokers are over. 

Who's to say that they wouldn't use that technology to detonate missiles that are still attached to a plane in flight, or detonate some warheads down deep inside of a magazine in a ship that has hundreds of them? 

I'm not saying that they don't have tech like that on weapons and vehicles that they sold abroad, but if they did, they wouldn't use it until they were at war against the people they sold that stuff to. 

If they're at war with Iran, and then they do that to some weapons in Iran's possession, no one's going to believe Iran. But if they threaten Canada with something like that, and it gets leaked, "Uh-oh!"

Saudi's by a lot of their stuff from Europe as well as the US, it has a mixed fighter fleet of F-15's, Tornado's and Typhoons.

[Army Guy]

On 3/10/2025 at 3:33 PM, TreeBeard said:

Do you think it is wise to have fighter jets where another country has total control of the software?  Including disabling them?

Again no one can disable anything, that's false news, and yes they have control over software, something most companies have, that produce high grade military equipment, like a US nuclear sub where all major maintenance has to be done by the US...it is to protect the product from others that do not have access to it...

[Dougie93]

21 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Saudi's by a lot of their stuff from Europe as well as the US, it has a mixed fighter fleet of F-15's, Tornado's and Typhoons.

yeah, that's what India does as well ; never source all your kit from one vendor, in case you get sanctioned

but by that strategy, Canada wouldn't cancel the F-35,

rather you would operate more than one platform,

two Squadrons with F-35 ; 410 Cougar, 416 Lynx

two Squadrons with Eurofighter Typhoon ; 409 Nighthawk, 425 Alouette

with the added advantage that F-35 is way better for strike, while Typhoon is way better air to air

otherwise known as a High-Low Mix, same as HM RAF

Edited March 11 by Dougie93

[Aristides]

Typhoon and Rafale seem pretty evenly matched from a performance point of view, Gripen E would probably do OK air to air against other 4th and 4.5 gen  fighters. It would have been neat to see an actual fly off between the three. None would match the F-35's stealth for strike.

Two types would be more expensive but that's what we had before the F-18. Sabre/CF100. F101/F104.

[Dougie93]

44 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Typhoon and Rafale seem pretty evenly matched from a performance point of view,

Rafale is closer to an F/A-18, optimized for multirole

A2A the Rafale relies on high angle of attack, two circle pitch fight,

Typhoon is closer to F-15, air superiority first, strike as an afterthought

pulling 9g sustained in a one circle rate fight, Typhoon beats an F-16

Typhoon is also more NATO compatible;

operated by Britain, Germany, Italy & Spain

Typhoon can carry both Canada's existing inventory of AIM-120 AMRAAM as well as MBDA Meteor

while Rafale can only carry the French MICA & MBDA Meteor

early models of Typhoon have a Passive Electronically Scanned Radar on a mechanical repoistioner

while the Rafale came with an RBE2 Active Electronically Scanned Radar, fully phased

but the latest Typhoon's have the Euroradar CAPTOR AESA

Edited March 11 by Dougie93

[xul]

2 hours ago, Doowangle said:

How do people still believe this? Who lifted a finger for Gaza? Who would have lifted a finger for Ukraine if the US had not intervened? Have you not noticed that the world does not tend to do much of anything other than issue condemnation statements via the UN? There is exactly one country aggressive enough to threaten to, and start war on behalf of other countries, and it's the very country you are pretending 'the world' will somehow keep in line. 

It's utter fantasy. 

I think you confused two different things. For example:

If a kid used to bully a weaker kid in his school, the weaker kid may have lots of sympathy words from other kids in the school, but he can't count on other kids to fight the bully for him, especially when the bully kid is cunning and always befriends with those kids who are strong enough to fight him.

But if the bully kid tries to bully every kids in the school, it is a mater of time that he gets beaten by all other kids.

[Dougie93]

15 minutes ago, xul said:

But if the bully kid tries to bully every kids in the school, it is a mater of time that he gets beaten by all other kids.

that is how it works with chimpanzees, the alpha is always taken down by an alliance of two challengers,

but I've never witnessed the nerdy kids at school gang up on a kid who can fight, that never happens

[myata]

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

F-35 can not be disabled by the US or for that matter anyone else, do you really think our air force would buy a fighter that can be turned off....It is false news............

Good stuff, non sequitur.

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

The US controls software updates, which require US approval, like every piece of equipment it sells, who ever thought of the turn off switch is smoking high grade...

Yeah that one. You're about to take off and puff no critical mandatory upgrade imagine? And not even surmising it, already happened. Did you sleep throw it by any chance? If they think you shouldn't engage can make you not to. Is that such a great deal?

[xul]

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

F-35 can not be disabled by the US or for that matter anyone else, do you really think our air force would buy a fighter that can be turned off....It is false news............The US controls software updates, which require US approval, like every piece of equipment it sells, who ever thought of the turn off switch is smoking high grade...

Believing such a thing would even be possible, is lacking some critical thinking skills...  

How could RCAF be so sure since  the software wasn't programmed by Canadian?

Nowadays software can do many things which is beyond your wildest imagination. For example: If you are flying a F-35 or even a F-18, you will find that its radar screen no longer shows some bright green spots to represent the aircrafts which it detects like F-104's radar screen. It shows not only where these aircrafts are but also what (like Su-27 or F-16) they are. How could a radar do this? It is because the software running inside its signal processing computer constantly processes the signals from antenna and compares them with the known aircraft information in its storage.

If the programmer embedded some codes in the signal processing software. When a certain signal pattern is received by antenna, it will trigger a certain reaction, then the programmer can gain control of the aircraft since all computers on board are connected by some kind of data bus.

So if RCAF uses the aircraft for drilling, it will appear perfectly normal since the triggering signal isn't received. But if RCAF uses it against USAF, American pilot just need to push the red button, then...who know what the software inside RCAF's aircraft would do? Perhaps it will just let the screen black, or make the plane uncontrollably dive like a 737max, or it is even capable of showing RCAF aircrafts as USAF's to make RCAF pilots killing each other...

Of course I don't know if F-35 or F-18 has such kinds of backdoors. But technically, it is possible if American wants.

[xul]

56 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

that is how it works with chimpanzees, the alpha is always taken down by an alliance of two challengers,

but I've never witnessed the nerdy kids at school gang up on a kid who can fight, that never happens

Because a human kid is smarter than a chimp. He knows he can't take on all others kids simultaneously, even if they all are nerdy kids.

 

[Dougie93]

10 minutes ago, xul said:

Because a human kid is smarter than a chimp. He knows he can't take on all others kids simultaneously, even if they all are nerdy kids.

 

nerdy kids don't attack simultaneously,

nerdy kids are terrified to engage in any violence at all, hence how they are easily bullied,

there is never any mass school rebellions against the bullies, that's not a realistic analogy

in fact, what actually happens,  is that the school rallies around the bully;  bullying vicariously

Edited March 11 by Dougie93

[myata]

4 hours ago, Doowangle said:

There is exactly one country aggressive enough to threaten to, and start war on behalf of other countries, and it's the very country you are pretending 'the world' will somehow keep in line. 

Sounds like a Gen Zedder, I'm owed that democracy, those freedoms, everything plus a fat piece of cake, or else or I ... what? Who you gonna cry to, where to run if someone big and ugly comes to take it from you? All of it, piece by piece and why not? Who's there to stop them?

Edited March 11 by myata