Linked National Post on purpose. Given their bias I believe they’d present the worst case scenario.

E: Apparently the article is from 2016 so the cost is likely higher today.

  • Aconite@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Fuck it. They’re an intelligence hazard and that’s cheap in government terms.

    • chuck@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      No say will cancel it and then pause it then cancel the landing gear then pause that then cancel it pause it till it comes back looking like the avro arrow

      • AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago
        1. But it continues the notion that we should rely on them for information, when they have most certainly poisoned Canadian culture and politics.
        2. Also, by sending users to an American site, it increases their revenues, when this money could have gone to a Canadian media site.
        3. And if you aren’t already aware, Canadian owned media is deliberately neglected because it’s contrary to a particular elite group in this country… And yeah, we should support and grow Canadian owned media regardless of political party.

        But if you still insist on supporting American media…

    • CircaV@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Exactly. Canada should just choose to ignore it. Just like the US is ignoring international deals they’ve signed with other countries. Thing is: Canada has honour and our actual signature means something when we sign agreements. I don’t think Canada will sink as low as the US.

  • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’d be hoping that Trump’s time in power would be far outlived by the F-35 program and would be only a footnote in the history of friendship between Canada and the US. But nobody who knows what the future has in reserve.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Trump won’t outlive the F35, but the distrust of the US will.

      The US cut off military supplies to a country (Ukraine) during an active conflict. Trump did this as leverage in a negotiation. That’s a line that can’t be crossed, and he crossed it. There were no articles of impeachment, and most Americans didn’t pay it any mind. So this is how Americans do business now.

      So we should expect the US to use military supplies as leverage in negotiations going forward. Using US equipment means CAF’s readiness is in constant peril for the foreseeable future. Currently it’s at the whims of a deranged old man. But it will always be a bargaining chip for future US Presidents.

      The only way to ensure CAF readiness is to end the use of all US equipment. It’s not solely about Trump, it’s about what the US has become.

    • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Significantly. The F-35 programme is a 50-year one. Trump won’t even be alive in half that.

  • Nils@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    These are numbers from 2016. Is there any place where we can read these contracts? Maybe with the current situation, conditions are changing. Hopefully, people put a clause in case of animosity between countries.

  • FaceDeer@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    America is currently at war with us, declared abruptly and out of nowhere. They just decided one day “we want to annex Canada!”

    Even if Donald’s presidency is short-lived and a new slightly saner and less stupid administration takes control, I don’t think it’s a good idea to be trusting the Americans any more.

    We need to disentangle ourselves from any military dependence on such ridiculously unreliable “allies.” I’m all for this.

    • Reannlegge@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Even if Donald’s presidency is short-lived and a new slightly saner and less stupid administration takes control

      I know the hamburglar has got his sights on Trump but if he takes his shot during the next 4 years the US gets JD Vance. Vance will be a lot worse than Trump, I do not know how Musk or Teil will handle Vance.

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Do you mean Thiel?

        Vance may be much smarter than Trump (low bar) and have actual plans for evil, vs. doing awful things on a whim. But, JD Vance doesn’t have Trump’s cult of personality. Whoever comes after Trump will return to the same normal relationship that a president has with their party. With the modern GOP that means intense squabbling and infighting. I doubt a president Vance could get much if his evil plan passed, even if the GOP did still control all the branches of government.

    • pretzelz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      You would imagine there would be a clause in the contract for exactly this scenario. If there’s not, it’s going to be a common one in contacts going forward…

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think everyone is thinking the same way. I think the probability of the US invading is low, but there is a probability.

      Even if the US never uses their military against us, there’s a very real chance they withhold parts for military equipment as leverage in a negotiation. They are already withholding military aid from Ukraine as leverage after all. That alone makes it imperative we end Canada’s dependency on the US defense industry.

    • PenguinMage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      As an American I sadly agree. This is an overreach that shouldn’t be ignored. And if it is OK now it’s obviously not off the table sometime down the road… this isnt something g you just shove under the carpet.

  • Grimpen@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’ve been advocating joining GCAP, an effort by Japan, UK and Italy to make a 6th gen fighter. It isn’t scheduled to deliver the final design until 2035 though, so we would still need a stopgap.

    Still, it would send a pretty strong signal and also allow as a path to reinvigorate our domestic aerospace defence industry.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      This looks like a good idea. We do have people in Lunenberg, NS that have experience with working with stealth materials which could be a significant contribution to that project.

      Could we call it the Arrow? Though I’d also be cool with it being called Spitfire.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      and also allow as a path to reinvigorate our domestic aerospace defence industry.

      Avro Arrow centenary edition in 2059.

  • Global_Liberty@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Of course Canada needs to leave. Do Canadian politicians think the US will supply it with parts as it invades?

    Buy some Gripen and/or Eurofighters and join GCAP.

  • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    That’s less than the total incurred costs of Ford’s decision to break the contract with The Beer Store a year earlier than scheduled.

      • crabigno@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        And investment. 1/5 of my lifetime economies are now in European aerospace and military companies shares. Something I would have never thought I would do, as a fundamentally anti militaristic person. I don’t even care if I don’t get any economic benefits out of it.