The coming $26 billion windfall for the Canadian Armed Forces. What to buy? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Thread starter
- #63
Admiral Beez
Major
Smart move on Portugal's part.
Opinion: It may provoke Trump, but Canada should cancel the purchase of F-35 fighter jets from the U.S.
The problem is that Canada will never have full control over the heavily computerized planes
www.theglobeandmail.com
As per this arricle, there's now a once inconceivable risk that the US could refuse to release software updates or other upgrades unless the client nation acquiesced to Washington's demands on trade. With that in mind, what would it take to remove and replace the US tech and components in the SAAB Gripen?
Last edited:
Thumpalumpacus
Lieutenant Colonel
Smart move on Portugal's part.
Paywall free: https://archive.is/tv4n5Opinion: It may provoke Trump, but Canada should cancel the purchase of F-35 fighter jets from the U.S.
The problem is that Canada will never have full control over the heavily computerized planes
As per this arricle, there's now a once inconceivable risk that the US could refuse to release software updates or other upgrades unless the client nation acquiesced to Washington's demands on trade. With that in mind, what would it take to remove and replace the US tech and components in the SAAB Gripen?
View attachment 821355
I don't see that as "inconceivable". Switzerland denied 35mm rounds for German Gephardts a couple of years ago in Ukraine, after all. All nations restrict usage of their tech, to one extent or another.
That doesn't mean I agree with that instance, but a nation producing critical parts has the right to disallow those parts to be used in operations it does not support.
- Thread starter
- #66
Admiral Beez
Major
Yes, but that's not what I referring to. My concern is that the US could deny software updates to Canada's F-35s if Ottawa doesn't acquiesce to US demands on trade, such as "open your markets to US dairy or no patch from Lockheed-Martin for your shiny new Lightnings." That sort of thinking was inconceivable until POTUS47, where US trade and foreign policy is now entirely transactional, where Washington's only focus is seeking leverage over other nations, friends and allies included, where formal agreements and pacts with America, like USMCA or NATO are increasingly not worth the paper they're written on.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #67
Admiral Beez
Major
Those are sunk costs, with the fallacy reminding us that throwing good money after bad is always folly. It's not about the money already spent or the industrial credits and jobs to come, it's about the risk to Canada should Washington one day shut off support for the RCAF Lightings as leverage in a trade dispute. The US can no longer be trusted - that is what must impact any decision.
Thumpalumpacus
Lieutenant Colonel
I understand your concern, and find it well-placed, but whether it's hardware of software, a nation has a say in the use of its proprietary stuff.
A brief aside pertaining to the dairy tariffs: Canadian 250%+ tariffs only apply to US imports if those imports surpass an agreed to threshold ... one which the US has yet to even reach. The US has yet to pay such a tariff because until the threshold is reached they don't pay any tariff meaning all talks about "its so unfair / US dairy is tariffed to the high heavens" is false. I suppose this inconvenient fact goes agaisnt the official party stance on the issue.
The US produces vastly more milk than Canada, and that milk tends to be of poorer quality (400-750k somatic cell count SCC vs the 200k-400k SCC in Canada).
CUSMA (Canadian acronym for USMCA) chapter 3, Article 3.6: Domestic Support, section 2: "If a Party raises concerns that another Party's domestic support measure has had a negative impact on trade between the Parties, the Parties shall share relevant information regarding the domestic support measure with each other and discuss the matter with a view to seeking to minimize any negative trade impact."
It is actually CANADA which operates at a trading deficit with the US in the dairy sector (US exporting $877.5 million CAD in dairy products to Canada while importing $357.9 million CAD from Canada in return: Statement from Dairy Farmers of Canada regarding announcement of potential tariffs on Canadian dairy | Dairy Farmers of Canada), further showcasing how ridiculous the allegations are.
Back doors to the above agreements are in place, one which the US is exploiting in the form of diafiltered milk.
Now, if the above ridiculousness will be used to cripple our jets that just goes to show its not about the dairy sector ... some ally that is.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #70
Admiral Beez
Major
If we include capital flows, where US-owned subsidiaries produce and sell products in Canada, or provide services (insurance, banking, tv/gaming streaming services, etc.) in Canada but send all profits to their US head offices, there could be no reasonable talk of a trade imbalance.
In the U.S., dairy prices are lower because there's no Canadian-style supply management, but this results in lower revenue for farmers. To prevent collapse, the U.S. government provides massive subsidies—meaning taxpayers fund dairy even if they don't buy it. In Canada, supply management (including blocking imports from the US) keeps dairy prices higher, but only for consumers who purchase it, without relying heavily on taxpayer support. It's not unfair trade, it's just a different way of running things.
In the U.S., dairy prices are lower because there's no Canadian-style supply management, but this results in lower revenue for farmers. To prevent collapse, the U.S. government provides massive subsidies—meaning taxpayers fund dairy even if they don't buy it. In Canada, supply management (including blocking imports from the US) keeps dairy prices higher, but only for consumers who purchase it, without relying heavily on taxpayer support. It's not unfair trade, it's just a different way of running things.
Last edited:
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Like Switzerland.
Thumpalumpacus
Lieutenant Colonel
- Thread starter
- #73
Admiral Beez
Major
I think we should go through with the full F-35 purchase and any other projects underway or contracted. There's less than 211 weeks until Trump's gone, the last of Canada's F-35 probably won't be delivered until afterwards. It's a thirty plus year commitment, POTUS47 through 50 will be long gone.
en.wikipedia.org
But for future projects we should avoid US firms unless we have no better options.
Planned Canadian Forces projects - Wikipedia
But for future projects we should avoid US firms unless we have no better options.
Last edited:
Can the F-35 and build about 500 F-20 Tigersharks in Canada.I think we should go through with the full F-35 purchase and any other projects underway or contracted.
Planned Canadian Forces projects - Wikipedia
But for future projects we should avoid US firms unless we have no better options.
- Thread starter
- #75
Admiral Beez
Major
The Canadair CF-5 was the last fighter aircraft assembled in Canada. It was a long line, from Goblins, Hurricanes, Canucks, Sabres and Starfighters. Maybe we could have switched the CF-5 line the single engine F-20.
Canada buys JORN - Australian Defence Magazine
Canada will acquire an Over-the-Horizon Radar Network through a partnership with Australia | Ewen Levick
www.australiandefence.com.au
Australia's 'biggest defence export' was meant for the US first, but Canada snuck past Trump
For months, senior officials have been discussing exporting Australia's world-leading JORN radar technology to the United States, but after Donald Trump's return to the White House, Canada saw an opportunity and leapt.
www.abc.net.au
Thumpalumpacus
Lieutenant Colonel
1985 called, it wants its airplane back.
The F-20 was then, and would be now, competitive with the F-16.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I've got the Advent calendar.
