Tories To Waste Billons On New Fighter Jets

[El Barto]

At the price Canada bought those new Leapords , just the transportation cost was more than the initial purchase.
Did you know after the first gulf war the Americans left thier tanks there? Either they knew they were going back or the price was too steep to ship them back.

 

[CDNBear]

At the price Canada bought those new Leapords , just the transportation cost was more than the initial purchase.
Did you know after the first gulf war the Americans left thier tanks there? Either they knew they were going back or the price was too steep to ship them back.

They aren't planning on leaving the Leopards EB.

Relics post was vague and misleading, hence my curt response.

Canada has no intention of leaving any heavy equipment in Afghanistan, and the only reason why it was even considered, was because the Afghan Army asked if we would.

Not because the Harpo-cons are the boogieman.

 

[relic]

Wouldn't it make a difference that the americans build their own stuff and Canada has to buy it ? Weapon makers have a lot of political drag in the states,they build expensive stuff they don't need or doesn't work all the time, our military is lucky to get stuff that isn't too old{like our sub fleet}
Meby they did get the tanks cheap,are the replacements going to be cheap too ?

 

[El Barto]

They aren't planning on leaving the Leopards EB.

Relics post was vague and misleading, hence my curt response.

Canada has no intention of leaving any heavy equipment in Afghanistan, and the only reason why it was even considered, was because the Afghan Army asked if we would.

Not because the Harpo-cons are the boogieman.

My response was more of a finacial point of view. I would probably leave them there . IMO we are far from out of Afgahnistan. Besides I am sure the desert really wears out a tank. I'd buy more off the Germans and have it sent directly here instead. At the price they sell them ,if there's any left, is a steal .

Ironic what i said , talking about spending more money.

 

[CDNBear]

Wouldn't it make a difference that the americans build their own stuff and Canada has to buy it ?

I don't understand your question.

Weapon makers have a lot of political drag in the states,they build expensive stuff they don't need or doesn't work all the time, our military is lucky to get stuff that isn't too old{like our sub fleet}

That was likely the thought behind not buying second hand our lessor aircraft from a source that has little to support program. Whereas the US market has support programs built in.

Meby they did get the tanks cheap,are the replacements going to be cheap too ?

We didn't get anything cheap, we just cut corners expenses by not getting all the bells and whistles.

My response was more of a finacial point of view. I would probably leave them there . IMO we are far from out of Afgahnistan. Besides I am sure the desert really wears out a tank. I'd buy more off the Germans and have it sent directly here instead. At the price they sell them ,if there's any left, is a steal .

Ironic what i said , talking about spending more money.

LOL.

I would support leaving the Leopard 1's behind, they're junk and any of the Vietnam era equipment we're still running.. Other than that, we should bring the bulk of it home.

 

[El Barto]

I don't understand your question.

That was likely the thought behind not buying second hand our lessor aircraft from a source that has little to support program. Whereas the US market has support programs built in.

We didn't get anything cheap, we just cut corners expenses by not getting all the bells and whistles.

LOL.

I would support leaving the Leopard 1's behind, they're junk and any of the Vietnam era equipment we're still running.. Other than that, we should bring the bulk of it home.

Bear correct me if i am wrong but didn't Canada buy a few leapord 2 a something....these tanks are fairly new and easily up to par with the Abrahms. If i recall they were sold for 600 k us .

 

[CDNBear]

Bear correct me if i am wrong but didn't Canada buy a few leapord 2 a something....these tanks are fairly new and easily up to par with the Abrahms. If i recall they were sold for 600 k us .

Yep, we bought 100 non combat ready Dutch surplus hand me down A5's and A6's, at a cost of 650 mil Canadian, and borrowed 20 combat ready German A6's

 

[El Barto]

Yep, we bought 100 non combat ready Dutch surplus hand me down A5's and A6's, at a cost of 650 mil Canadian, and borrowed 20 combat ready German A6's

hmmm ok
I suggest if we leave anything behind it should be those subs we bought from England

 

[CDNBear]

hmmm ok
I suggest if we leave anything behind it should be those subs we bought from England

Good idea.

The tanks that were asked for by the Afghan Army, were the Leo 1's we first arrived with. Which as far as I know, are sitting in Kandahar, gathering sand, and have been for a few years now.

Still, the Feds said no and are bringing them home. I would have said yes. Would have saved us the trouble and cost of transport.

 

[Cliffy]

"Have you ever met any of those 'military brass"? How do you know what they feel? They didn't just 'appear' at the top, making decisions, they all started at the bottom. How can you make the assumption that they don'y know and they don't care? How do you know what they feel - how they make decisions? I know some of these people - they care. The people that actually make the decisions? They're the politicians and bureaucrats - the military can only advise and for the most part, their advise falls on deaf ears.

As Burt Lancaster said in Go Tell the Spartans, "Military Intelligence is an Oxymoron". It is the law of nature that what usually rises to the top, in the military, political, corporate and bureaucratic worlds, is pond scum. To get ahead in any of those worlds requires professional ass kissing.

I realize you have an emotional investment in the military but so do I. Only difference is that they are at the opposite ends of the spectrum. My dad was in WWII. He was an emotionally locked up, prone to violent outbursts, authoritarian Catholic who was incapable of expressing his feelings in any other than negative ways. He was a product of that war, which explains one of the reasons why I am diametrically opposed to war for any reason. I won't get into all the other reasons that I consider war stupid. The military should only be used for self defense. A warrior's life should be dedicated to the protection of women, children and the elderly. As long as Harpo or other leader insists on using our military for any other purpose, I will remain unapologetically critical.

 

[CDNBear]

I realize you have an emotional investment in the military but so do I. Only difference is that they are at the opposite ends of the spectrum. My dad was in WWII. He was an emotionally locked up, prone to violent outbursts, authoritarian Catholic who was incapable of expressing his feelings in any other than negative ways. He was a product of that war, which explains one of the reasons why I am diametrically opposed to war for any reason. I won't get into all the other reasons that I consider war stupid.

That's sad Cliffy, but hardly the only example of the returning Vet.

My Grandfather, a man morally apposed to needless death, murder and the taking of life without extreme justification, voluntarily enlisted, became a Corpman, in both the European and Pacific theater's. He never spoke of the war to us, but in the years since his death, I've met some men who knew him during those dark days. They described a man that not only ran through the fires of hell to give aid to the fallen, no matter what side they were on. But had on a few occasions, lifted his rifle and defended himself and those around him, without so much as a thought of his morality or his life. Not only did he not fall apart from this, he continued to serve well after the end of WWII (LWF), he served in Korea (LWF) as well as being a first responder to all manner of natural disasters and accidents across Canada and the US, for many years to follow, while rising through the ranks.

Not only did he finally leave the Service a stable, albeit functioning alcoholic, Catholic, he had the patience of Job, was active in his community as a volunteer, as a mediator, as a leader and as a roll model.

He is lovingly referred to and remembered to this day, as the "Peacemaker".

The military should only be used for self defense. A warrior's life should be dedicated to the protection of women, children and the elderly. As long as Harpo or other leader insists on using our military for any other purpose, I will remain unapologetically critical.

You're so right. Thank goodness there's no old people, women or kids in Afghanistan, so you can hang on to that thought.

 

[Cliffy]

You're so right. Thank goodness there's no old people, women or kids in Afghanistan, so you can hang on to that thought.

We are not there to protect the women, children or the elderly of Afghanistan. We went there on a hunting trip and to protect the poppy fields and secure the pipeline corridor. The altruistic reasons were dreamed up after the decision to invade a sovereign nation were made. How many innocent women, children and elderly has NATO killed in the last 8 years over there?

 

[CDNBear]

We are not there to protect the women, children or the elderly of Afghanistan. We went there on a hunting trip and to protect the poppy fields and secure the pipeline corridor. The altruistic reasons were dreamed up after the decision to invade a sovereign nation were made.

I won't argue that, in fact, if you go way back in my "threads", you'll find a short essay on my belief in US "Manifest Destiny" in the 21st century, centering on Iraq and Afghanistan.

How many innocent women, children and elderly has NATO killed in the last 8 years over there?

Not even remotely close to the millions under their protection.

Women able to breath free, children or both genders having access to an education, the elderly being treated medically, and so on.

You and I could trade links to our perspectives all day long. It would be pointless. I'm well aware of the US protecting its interests, and Canada's culpability as an ally. The major difference being, I don't negate the up side in the process, or look for weak arguments to diminish it either.

I fully respect your distaste for war, illegal or otherwise. Oddly enough I share it with you, but I won't shy away from it.

 

[petros]

I won't argue that, in fact, if you go way back in my "threads", you'll find a short essay on my belief in US "Manifest Destiny" in the 21st century, centering on Iraq and Afghanistan.

Getting into Afghanistan for commercial purposes was more a Canadian idea than US.

 

[CDNBear]

Getting into Afghanistan for commercial purposes was more a Canadian idea than US.

Just out of curiousity, what do you base that idea on.

 

[petros]

Just out of curiousity, what do you base that idea on.

In the 90's when I worked with a company who had already been working heavily in central Asia, getting into and surveying Afghanistan was one of their prime interests.

 

[MapleOne]

You and I could trade links to our perspectives all day long. It would be pointless. I'm well aware of the US protecting its interests, and Canada's culpability as an ally. The major difference being, I don't negate the up side in the process, or look for weak arguments to diminish it either.

I fully respect your distaste for war, illegal or otherwise. Oddly enough I share it with you, but I won't shy away from it.

Damn that's a great response, I could not have said it any better

 

[#juan]

Back to the new fighter. When we bought the CF-18s we agonized over the number of engines. At the time there was a
segment of people in this country who wanted to buy the F-16 because for the same money we could a lot more aircraft.
The thinking that won at the time was that if an F-16 was patrolling our Northland and lost an engine for any reason, the aircraft
was lost because the number of runways that the F-16 could land on were very few and far between. The F-18 was picked, at least partly because it had two engines. Now the Tories want to buy an unproven single engined aircraft that has only marginal
stealth capabilities and is not as fast as the F-18 that it would be replacing. Perhaps the Tories could tell us how buying 65 F-35s is good for us.

 

[Downhome_Woman]

I won't argue that, in fact, if you go way back in my "threads", you'll find a short essay on my belief in US "Manifest Destiny" in the 21st century, centering on Iraq and Afghanistan.

Not even remotely close to the millions under their protection.

Women able to breath free, children or both genders having access to an education, the elderly being treated medically, and so on.

You and I could trade links to our perspectives all day long. It would be pointless. I'm well aware of the US protecting its interests, and Canada's culpability as an ally. The major difference being, I don't negate the up side in the process, or look for weak arguments to diminish it either.

I fully respect your distaste for war, illegal or otherwise. Oddly enough I share it with you, but I won't shy away from it.

Really, really well said.

 

[El Barto]

the F 15 was a way more suitable role for our northen patrol at the time IMO.
How much was the generals opinion in this ever taken then and now?