$274M for Canadian military vehicles to be built in U.S

Tyr

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
TenPenny said:
That's oddly reminiscent of our infamous helicopter deal. After Chretien cancelled the deal, and Canada lost out of the opportunity to be a true partner in manufacturing them, the military revised the specs, and went out for bids. Oddly enough, the same helicopter won. That was too embarrassing for Chretien, so they revised the specs, and went out for bids again. I believe they repeated this farce several times, with the same helicopter winning the evaluations time and again.
Click to expand...

After numerous revisions to the procurement specs. They ended up choosing the 2nd best option - The "Cyclone".

It is far from the best equipment, unproven (Canada is the 1st customer) and never flight certified
 
Tyr

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
Zzarchov said:
Few faults with that, Russia wasn't our ally, they were part of Comintern we were not. Germany didn't start being our ally until after we conquered them and forced them to be.

America is either our ally or our overlord. The scale difference and size difference means its pretty pathetic to pretend otherwise.

Reality bites sometimes.
Click to expand...

Can we use the example of Russia being our ally in 1944 and Germany being the enemy? That's really not that long ago and I don't believe that's the situation today.... only 64 yrs later. In fact Germany went from enemy to ally in ten short years

Few faults with that, Russia wasn't our ally, they were part of Comintern we were not. Germany didn't start being our ally until after we conquered them and forced them to be.

The USSR was part of the Allied Forces oppossed to the Axis in 1944 (WWII).

The Comintern was dissolved in 1943 and re-invernted as the Cominform in 1947.

Germany became part of NATO in 1955

Today, we have a alliance with the USA and NATO. Will that be the case 10 years from now..... maybe. We could end up as the 51st state before then
 
Tyr

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
Cannuck said:
I have no idea...why don't you enlighten us?



I'm not sure what your point is. Do you have evidence that shows the plant is being shut down because of this decision and not because it is incapable, old, run down and/or inefficient?
Click to expand...


News > Headline News > 12/11/2008 Nearly 500 workers cut from Navistar Chatham plant
12/11/2008
Does the continuing fall in various Ont-Que manufacturing sectors worry you?
​
http://www.todaystrucking.com/news....3&resultsOnly=1&CFID=1430816&CFTOKEN=16870759
CHATHAM, Ont. -- Navistar International has determined it will layoff 479 workers from its Chatham, Ont. plant, effective Jan. 31, 2009.
Company spokesman Roy Wiley told Canadian Press 460 hourly and 19 salaried workers at the southern Ontario facility. That's on top of the 100 workers the company let go this past fall.
Wiley said the total number is less than originally forecast.
The company announced several weeks ago it would be laying off workers. The news led to meetings between the truckmaker and local politicians who want to know the company's future plans for the plant.
Daimler Trucks recent announced it is closing its St. Thomas, Ont. Sterling plant. At the time, Wiley insisted that there would be no domino effect at Navistar resulting from its rival's decision to close its own plant.
 
Cannuck

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
"I'm not sure what your point is. Do you have evidence that shows the plant is being shut down because of this decision and not because it is incapable, old, run down and/or inefficient?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom