verrip1
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:41:19 GMT -5
Posts: 2,992
|
Post by verrip1 on Jul 9, 2011 12:12:22 GMT -5
I've been waiting for someone to browse around the link provided in the OP. It's obvious now that nobody bothered.
The blog that posted the article in the OP has a certain ... slant ... on things ... Which would be incredibly important if we were discussing the article in the OP, which we really aren't. Without regard to the bias of the article that reports it, Canada is buying the planes. Good use of their funds or not? That is the question. I see. You want to ignore the article the OP references. Do you get many pelvic bruises shooting from the hip like that?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:14:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2011 12:18:35 GMT -5
Didn't you hear? We moved. France is now your Northern neighbour.
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 9, 2011 12:24:31 GMT -5
Didn't you hear? We moved. France is now your Northern neighbour. ...lol...
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 9, 2011 13:02:37 GMT -5
Here is a wicki on fighter aircrafty..if you scroll down to the bottom you will come to the section on the 4th , 4.5 generation and the fifth generation fighters.. I also wonder why Canada would have to go to a fifth generation fighter..possible if upgrades to their air arm are needed , upgraded the most modern of the 4th and 4.5 generation fighters would be sufficient for them, considering the type of actions they might be involved in..and at much less cost and the extra $ spent used to bring up to date, capabilities of the new battle field of the future. Peace keeping, that Canada might be involved in, as they are now. Safe transport for the troops from improvised bomings, urban battlefields they would probably find themselves actually involved in, airlift capabilities, battle field communications , all the advances that would probably be utilized in the type of actions the small but very capable Canadian military would be involved in..attack helo..for example and other items that only their military could identify as needed, but with a expenditure like this..they would never be able to afford. I am not even sure we can afford the F-35, I know we can't afford the F-22, thus production has been stopped on that aircraft. I know the Chinese and Russians are developing the 5th generation fighter, but to develope and then to be able to afford it , built in sufficient #'s to actually be a deterrent or a active part of their military, that is another story. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 9, 2011 13:13:25 GMT -5
>>> I know the Chinese and Russians are developing the 5th generation fighter, but to develope and then to be able to afford it , built in sufficient #'s to actually be a deterrent or a active part of their military, that is another story. <<< ...it's not the size of your surfboard that counts, but the motion of your ocean...
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 9, 2011 13:14:45 GMT -5
I've been waiting for someone to browse around the link provided in the OP. It's obvious now that nobody bothered. The blog that posted the article in the OP has a certain ... slant ... on things. Here is another gem of an article: "The ICC issues warrants against Col. Qaddafi and his son while US/NATO bombs civilians and their 'rebels' force cannibalism on captured Libyan soldiers" and: "Right-wing Unleashes Campaign Against Democracy in Latin America" let's not let this one go unnoticed: "Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Democracy – fair and square" Viva Chavez! Long live Ghaddafi! Let freedom ring! Credibility is for wussies! I did, indeed, browse around the site, verrip. That, coupled with the fact that I don't consider myself all that knowledgeable about what Canada needs, or should do, should explain my failure (to now) to post on this thread.
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 9, 2011 13:17:35 GMT -5
...aw, man, now I have to browse around the website...
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,513
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 9, 2011 13:20:34 GMT -5
Which would be incredibly important if we were discussing the article in the OP, which we really aren't. Without regard to the bias of the article that reports it, Canada is buying the planes. Good use of their funds or not? That is the question. I see. You want to ignore the article the OP references. Do you get many pelvic bruises shooting from the hip like that? It is an opinion piece on a web site with a definite left leaning bias. What more is there to discuss about the article and/or author of it? I read it, took it for what it was, and integrated what it had to say with my understanding of the world. I then proceeded to discuss the issue of Canada buying the planes from the US. The message, not the messenger is what is important to me.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 9, 2011 13:23:01 GMT -5
AS a final here..Possible a older but improved plane.. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F/A-18E/F_Super_Hornetat a fly away cost of $55 million each might suffice for our Canadian friends to feel safe at night..just a thought.. Am with mmhmm on her feeling about the op ..it's a discussion of the reasoning behind Canada's purchase of the plane.. Just to inish my thoughts..I realize the F/A-18E/F_Super_Hornet f Is a Navy plane, not possible suited to the Canadians so offer another they might have considered.. McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle[One of the newer updated models produced] at a cost, fly away about $31 million[1999 costs] Point being there might have been other upgrades to their Air force to consider that would have fit their finances better..which was what I thought the op here was about, really needed, for the missions Canada would be involved in in military matters..
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 9, 2011 13:31:40 GMT -5
The editorial choices we make have no hidden agenda and are not attached to any particular ideology or political organization. ... We readily confess our own set of presuppositions: Our world view consists of ideals for world peace; democracy (i.e. self-governance by the people); self-determination of all nations (people); respect for national sovereignty; noninterference in the domestic affairs of any nation by foreign governments; fair and just economic systems; responsibility for the preservation and protection of nature and compassion for ourselves and our fellow human beings. ... We identify "Corporate Global Empire" as our common foe and the enemy of the people. We believe that all current, viable political parties in the U.S. are in service to the empire and do not represent the people. We are not to be identified as "Democrats", "Republicans", "Capitalists", "Communists" or "Socialists", "Progressives" or with any label that can be reduced to a religion, organization or any other "ism". We offer no such target for attack by the enemies of the truth. ... The mission of Axis of Logic is to provide our readers with selected news and commentary which are often ignored or whitewashed by the mainstream media. ... Axis of Logic Staff come from a rich variety of professional backgrounds and life-experiences. All are published authors. All are social and political activists in one form or another. We represent a cross-section of disciplines including homemakers, economists, writers, psychologists, IT professionals, military veterans, former clergy, health care professionals, educators, lawyers and labor leaders. Several of us are entrepreneurs, owning or having owned our own businesses, employing others. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ...gotta love their "mission" and "about us" pages...
|
|
verrip1
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:41:19 GMT -5
Posts: 2,992
|
Post by verrip1 on Jul 9, 2011 14:11:31 GMT -5
Countries like Canada will spend less money going to the latest in air technology by buying the best available when their old planes (F-18s) reach the end of their useful lives. The F-35s will be ready when the F-18s are ready for the boneyard. Buying other old technology simply accelerates the time in which another complete turnover of the air force is required. If you want to consider the cost of such things, consider costs such as maintaining inventories of spare parts and re-training of maintenance staffs and pilots. Ain't cheap. Canada needs, and can only afford, just one type of fighter, and it's not surprising that they are looking at the same aircraft being favorably considered by much of NATO and other countries.
As to the relative uncertainty of cost, that's not surprising. The costs to produce an F-35 depends partly on just how many will be made. It's like trying to price the cost for the next generation I-phone until it's design is final and the volume of sales is defined. There is considerable history demonstrating the uncertainty of pre-defining the price to produce aircraft. It's not all incompetence, lying and greed: it has a lot to do with how successful initial design meets performance.
A sort-of-an-alternative tossed out was for Canada to stop having an air force, aka "let the Murricans do it". A nice little table of frequency of use of the Canadian Air Force since WWII was presented to suggest that there really is no need for it at all. I suppose isolationism and burying one's head in the sand is an alternative. Kinda. The no action alternative is usually presented as a comparative tool, but some apparently want to have it seriously considered. Who'd a thunk?
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 9, 2011 14:41:40 GMT -5
Countries like Canada will spend less money going to the latest in air technology by buying the best available when their old planes (F-18s) reach the end of their useful lives. The F-35s will be ready when the F-18s are ready for the boneyard. Buying other old technology simply accelerates the time in which another complete turnover of the air force is required. If you want to consider the cost of such things, consider costs such as maintaining inventories of spare parts and re-training of maintenance staffs and pilots. Ain't cheap. Canada needs, and can only afford, just one type of fighter, and it's not surprising that they are looking at the same aircraft being favorably considered by much of NATO and other countries. As to the relative uncertainty of cost, that's not surprising. The costs to produce an F-35 depends partly on just how many will be made. It's like trying to price the cost for the next generation I-phone until it's design is final and the volume of sales is defined. There is considerable history demonstrating the uncertainty of pre-defining the price to produce aircraft. It's not all incompetence, lying and greed: it has a lot to do with how successful initial design meets performance. A sort-of-an-alternative tossed out was for Canada to stop having an air force, aka "let the Murricans do it". A nice little table of frequency of use of the Canadian Air Force since WWII was presented to suggest that there really is no need for it at all. I suppose isolationism and burying one's head in the sand is an alternative. Kinda. The no action alternative is usually presented as a comparative tool, but some apparently want to have it seriously considered. Who'd a thunk? You raise a good point..Singapore right now is having that argument..thinking of spending many Billions for a interim plane till the F-35 is ready, they have been doing year of testing the different models available, not all US by the way, and seem to have settled on the F-35 from last mentioned unless they have changed their mind.. In Canada's case, they have limited $ for defense available, it seems to me they are putting so much of those $ into one weapon system and I am wondering why..thinking of how their military could possible be involved in the future and by who. I know no one really knows what will be, but I will guess that we and Canada will always be friends and allies..[I know there can be disagreements but still..} and if threatened by a foreign force they, Canadians will be able to initially defend them selves and we would be there in a instant to do all we can to defend them..if for no other reason, a threat to Canada would be a threat to us..and I don't see us in any time soon or latter, not being as powerful a military presence as we are now. I do see Canada playing a role that we can not in the world..being in peace keeping roles as a force to keep things under control in the world..something a major power really has a hard time fulfilling..with out taking sides and in peace keeping one has to be some what in the middle..more suitable to lesser powers..as it seems to be played out now under the offices of organizations like the UN..and I wonder how important a F-35 fighter would play in those roles, where as advanced helo capacity, vehicles that can protect troops from the type of attacks most likely in those situations, communications on the battle field, reconnaissance ability, air lift capacity...health and welfare capabilities, a Hospital ship for example..would be more in tune for their needs..just a thought here..
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:14:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2011 14:45:55 GMT -5
We have a Conservative majority. Of course our military spending is going to take a big jump.
|
|
verrip1
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:41:19 GMT -5
Posts: 2,992
|
Post by verrip1 on Jul 9, 2011 17:11:09 GMT -5
Dezi, the F-35(A) designation is for the standard fighter configuration. There is an F-35(B) configuration for an STOL version. Each would have it's own purpose.
The Russians have a fighter, of sorts, for sale. The French also have a fighter that is beloved for its state-of-the-art design ........ beloved among the French, that is.
Later, don't you think that Taliban Jack would be buying some F-35s too, if the election results had gone otherwise? Or would he have wanted the 'beloved' jet? lolol
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 9, 2011 17:55:10 GMT -5
The man would stuff cinnamon hearts and NDP flags into our air-to-surface missiles, fire them into Taliban strongholds, and expect--expect--all Afghan hostilities to end promptly and indefinitely.
I'm no fan of the F-35 purchase, but Mr. Harper said he'd do it. I voted for him anyway. A vote for Jack was a vote for national suicide. His policies are the same ones that have Greece presently circling the drain.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 9, 2011 19:16:07 GMT -5
Virgil I have no idea of the Canadian Politicles..as most of us here are also unaware of the issues..not saying that in pride by he way, just the way it is with most Americans, we are clue less , both with our own politics and definitly our bneighbors..
My posting on the original OP was just my thoughts..a lot of $ spent and wondering , why?
Virrip I know there are two actually three versions of the Jet I beleive..one for the Navy too..my whole post was just a feeling that they might have made , for them, a better choice, especially because of their $ constraints..strickly from a laymans perspective..
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:14:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2011 19:33:35 GMT -5
I dislike Harper intensely. But he did not have serious competition for the last election. I don't have the same opinion of Jack that Virgil does, but the NDP was seriously unprepared for the opportunity the Liberals gave them this time out. Their candidates were too inexperienced and would not have handled the "politics" of being in power well.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 9, 2011 20:25:20 GMT -5
Oh later. Later, later, later, later. Mr. Layton is one of only three men on Earth that can make me sick when I listen to him. Interviewer: Mr. Layton, what will your party do for Canadians? Layton: We're offering Canadians our Whatever Plan, where we vastly increase pension funding, school funding, social security funding, arts funding, all public employee salaries; create a national childcare program; give homeowners massive tax breaks; and give tax breaks to small business owners. Interviewer: And how much are these changes going to cost? Layton: Canadians deserve the NDP Whatever plan. When I'm Prime Minister, I will vastly increase pension funding, school funding, social security funding, arts funding, all public employee ... blah ... and give tax breaks to small business owners. Interviewer: Some Canadians might be worried about the expense. Do you have any figures to give them? Layton: I know. Canadians are worried about expenses these days. Hard-working single moms wondering how they're going to pay the bills. That's why when I'm PM, I'm going to help them out with the NDP Whatever plan. We'll vastly increase pension funding... ... blah blah ... ...breaks to small business owners. Interviewer: Moving on. A recent Ipsos Reid poll indicates that the ballooning Canadian deficit is Canadians' number one concern this federal election. What do you plan to do to reduce the deficit? Layton: Canadians are concerned about the deficit. What we need to do is get more Canadians back to work, and give tax breaks to small business owners who create jobs. We can do that with the NDP Whatever Plan... blah blah... small business owners. It will go on and on until I want to stick a screwdriver into my ear. Bob Rae and the NDP destroyed Ontario when they got into power provincially. They destroyed it. That is not a metaphor. They sent professionals running to the US faster than you can say "brain drain" and Ontario still hasn't recovered. They ran up debts at such a colossal rate, it puts even California to shame. They didn't simply cripple Ontario--they destroyed it. Jack Layton will happily spend your money, and mine, and everyone else's; he will borrow until Canada is the new Greece; and he will sink our nation in an orgy of deficit spending and anti-corporate policies. I can understand why you don't like Harper. I can sympathize. But for the love of Canada, I beg you to vote for the Greens, or the Liberals, or the Bloc, or any other party than the NDP. The NDP's policies are exactly what has Greece on the precipice of utter economic ruin, begging for handouts from the ECB. The NDP's policies are exactly what got California into its present state of auctioning off its state parks and municipal buildings just to stay solvent. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face. If a politician will not tell you how much something costs--how he/she plans to pay for it--boot his/her sorry arse out the door. *huff huff* That's all.
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 9, 2011 22:21:44 GMT -5
...feel better?
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 10, 2011 1:56:21 GMT -5
at least it wasn't another.." Layton and the NPD sucks because I said so "..good post, don't understand the politics by the way, but you convinced me in case I apply for citizenship, very good rant a for you.
|
|
ktunes
Senior Member
show your world to me...
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:10:29 GMT -5
Posts: 3,885
|
Post by ktunes on Jul 10, 2011 2:12:51 GMT -5
that would be a mistake to overlook that...russia and china will be an allegiance that will have to be dealt with...
|
|
moon/Laura
Administrator
Forum Owner
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:05:36 GMT -5
Posts: 10,052
Mini-Profile Text Color: f8fb10
|
Post by moon/Laura on Jul 10, 2011 7:47:09 GMT -5
i think you mean prost Rate (To put or throw flat with the face down, as in submission or adoration).. a prostate is a gland sorry.. i just couldn't help it ...lol...
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 10, 2011 8:02:29 GMT -5
picky, picky..tsk, tsk...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:14:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2011 8:11:00 GMT -5
Virgil Ontario is far from destroyed. That is shameless hyperbole. Though that is darn close to what Harris did to us! Ray and friends were only in for one short term. The Liberals and Conservatives have run the show for decades. You really can't lay any of Ontario's issues at the NDP door. Harris got in for 2 terms and turned the whole place upside down. Forcing change for the sake of change with no understanding of what the effects will be. Downloading responsibilities to the municipalities but giving them no authority on the best way to implement those changes. So right after we have the Conservatives who cut services we get the Liberals who increase taxes and start passing a crazy amount of regulations. You will get lots of support on this board for Harper. He is moving us that much closer to becoming the 52nd (?, can't remember how many states there are) The Conservatives get us into trade agreements that hand the farm over to them and do nothing to enforce what few rights we do have under said agreements. Don't even get me started on Mulroney! Saskatchewan has had an NDP government for decades and they are doing wonderfully. The NDP would be our saving grace.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 10, 2011 8:44:29 GMT -5
As a non Canadian I am not touching this subject, but for my fellow Americans here, who most are , I bet , are as ignorant of Canadian politics as I, sorry Canadians, it's just the way it is, I am posting a wicki on the NPD. To show my ignorance, I had no idea of and you all are throwing the initials around like we all are familiar with the party, its political stance, and I hate to tell you , I , and I believe most who are reading here , have no clue as to what you are discussing. If I am wrong on that, knowledge of political of Canada , it won't be the first time I was mistaken here, but heres the link anyway, just in case I am correct. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democratic_Party
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:14:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2011 11:35:56 GMT -5
LOL No problem dezi. I think we are kinda doing that to you guys on purpose. It is funny that most of you know the politics of the Middle East better than ours.
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Jul 10, 2011 11:56:56 GMT -5
Canada's biggest downfall was decades ago when they elected Pierre Elliot Trudeau. He was the biggest mistake in Canadian politics, and the country's still not recovered from the mess he left behind in his wake.
|
|
verrip1
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:41:19 GMT -5
Posts: 2,992
|
Post by verrip1 on Jul 10, 2011 12:24:21 GMT -5
Years of Liberal governments, including Trudeau's, left a lot of political dissatisfaction. And not all to the benefit of the Conservatives, either. The Bloc's more successful years were also a result of that dissatisfaction. It's rather unfortunate that it led to Harper, but one can hope that a more robust Conservative will emerge. It's odd that Harper seems to be under attack from his opponents because of things he either hasn't done or just things they think he might do in the future, because there sure are a number of things he actually did for which he should be taken to task.
The fact is that he won the forced election soundly. Perhaps it would be better said that the Conservatives won soundly, and Harper just happened to be the guy in the right place at the right time. The NDP/Liberal schism is pretty deep right now, and the focus of the last month of electioneering was sniping between those two parties. The Liberals refuse to accept that their attempts to rule somewhat towards the middle severely alienated much of their ideological supporters, creating the incentive for NDP growth.
Layton really wasn't the charismatic guy that was hoped for. The Liberals ran a stiff whose lousy English language skills were only exceeded by his lousy abilities at French. He also had the charisma of a cuspidor. Fortunately, he will never be heard of again. The Bloc gave up ridings not just to Libs and the NDP, but also, amazingly, to Conservatives. Except for minor groups like the Marijuana Party, there was no one else to fill the vacuum except Conservatives.
That's how I see it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 11:14:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2011 13:48:31 GMT -5
dezi, I think SL and verrip just told you to speak for yourself lol
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 10, 2011 14:00:29 GMT -5
well I think it's good that you guys brought this up..that we know so little of the politics of the North is kind of stupid and your right , for me, I do have a better feel for the middle East, but then again, that's were the action is. We have many, many Canadians here , where I live, in my little community, snow birds..I do know that right now, for the past few years, the difference between the Dollar and the Canadian has been good for them, and remember when it wasn't so. Many are French back ground which makes sense ..closer to get here, and they are valued members of the community, lots of life and fun..also leaders in our own community..one especially, a former banker..wonderful level headed guy..handles all our finances does Chris.
|
|