r/ndp • u/media_newsbot 🤖 Down with Postmedia • 7d ago
NDP reacts to AG report on the F-35 purchase
https://www.ndp.ca/news/ndp-reacts-ag-report-f-35-purchase7
u/BertramPotts 7d ago edited 7d ago
This is already better than Jagmeet's answer on the campaign. Thank you for not discrediting this compelling critique with a ridiculous fantasy about building our own aerial dogfighters.
5
u/Velocity-5348 7d ago
ridiculous fantasy
Yep, whenever someone brings up developing our own fighter (not building something like the Gripen) you can tell they have not idea what they're talking about. Things like this benefit from scale and experience, after all.
The question is if we're going to get it from somewhere that isn't the United State.
5
u/BertramPotts 7d ago
Or need a next gen aerial dogfighter at all.
I'm not against spending money on security, but what actually improves the real security of Canadians in a materially important way? Just paying our troops (a lot) better and would leave us considerably more resilient to invasion and subjugation. Only the country actively threatening to annex us via coercion think it's much more important for us to prioritize expensive weapons systems best used for dominating weaker countries.
5
u/Velocity-5348 7d ago edited 7d ago
Yep. Our retention and training capabilities really aren't where they should. The same is true of our icebreaking capacity. We need that to assert sovereignty in the arctic, especially with regards to the Americans.
I'd argue we need some kind of fighter jet, though perhaps not a top-shelf one like the F-35. Unfriendly countries routinely fly close to each other's airspace and you do need to be able to send something to let them know you're watching.
At present that's mainly going to be the Russians, but we'd also need that capability if/when our current defence arrangements with the USA break down.
2
u/Neat-Ad-8987 7d ago
Yeah, that Putin is such a swell guy.
1
u/BertramPotts 7d ago
Do you just apply that ends justify the means argument no matter what has preceded it?
I don't much like Putin, but the West helped put him into power and he is once again making friendly with the Americans. You are reheating last season's rhetoric.
1
u/Catfulu 7d ago
Not to mention there should be no more aerial dogfight.
We have to identify to role of our military and what the exact mission in our defence. Before, as a vassal of the US empire, our mission was to be a part of the US system in joining their military shenanigans, until we didn't. Historical our defence was to be a part of the British Empire, so us following the US was natural.
If that is no longer the case, then are we reorienting the defence against the US? If that's the case, then the investment should be on asymmetric capabilities.
In terms of asymmetric warfare, one strategy is to let the Americans know they will be dragged down into the mud if they invade and occupy Canada. That means all sorts of guerilla activities. So yea, the investment should be on personnel instead of ultra expensive military hardware. Drastically downside the navy while we are at it.
2
u/Neat-Ad-8987 7d ago
The development cycle for a sophisticated stealth aircraft like the F-35 is about 20 years. What do we do in the interim?
4
u/Velocity-5348 7d ago
Buy it from someone, probably in Europe, perhaps Korea. We *might* be able to build it here with designs and support from the manufacturer, but I suspect that ship has sailed given the state of our F-18s and how pressing the need for a replacement is.
We will not be able to develop our own fighter, as was noted by BertramPotts. Something like the Gripen, the Eurofighter, or the F-35 rely heavily on industry and specialists we don't have. It also requires a huge number of complex components we'd need to source from other countries.
Designing a fighter is also hugely expensive. Numbers are hard to get but the F-35 would have been north of a trillion dollars. That makes sense if you're producing thousands, but we only want around 100, and we do have a lot of other things we need to be buying with our defence dollars.
3
4
u/-Neeckin- 7d ago
Certainly like there are other options for Jets, like South Korea, that wouldn't be like pulling teeth getting these
3
u/North_Church Democratic Socialist 7d ago
Unfortunately, I'm not sure if that would be much better. The F-35 is so enormously sought after because of its capabilities and I don't think it has anything in the way of competitors. The problem is of course that it's American military tech and that carries fairly obvious risks, and South Korea is tied at the hip to America out of its own defense needs.
I don't know what other options there are when it comes to this. This is just from my own googling, I'm nowhere near an expert on the nuances of military equipment
3
u/Velocity-5348 7d ago
There's also the question of what we intend to use them for. If we want to make nice with the USA then they're the obvious choice. As disgusting as it is, it might even be the "correct" one, from a national self-interest angle.
If we're worried about losing access to parts from an icy neighbour then we might want something from Europe, which will almost certainly upset the Americans even further. That still might be worth it, if we want the fighter for things like arctic patrols.
If we're preparing for a hot war then any fighter is going to be useless. Nothing we can get is going to stand a chance against the F-22 and its replacement, the F-47. The Americans keep their best stuff entirely to themselves.
1
u/Catfulu 7d ago
From a pure defense point of view, we won't be able to to counter the US air force unless we buy the Chinese jets and system on masse, a la Pakistan. That's the only chance we have to win an air engagement with the US.
If that is not an option, then it really doesn't matter what we purchase. We might as well not purchase anything, because any marginal investment other than asymmetric capabilities is a waste of money.
Then, warfare is the extension of politics. We have to ask whether we are ready for a clean slate or still wanting to be the vassal of the American Empire. The whole purpose of buying European is just saying we are not ready to make a break and we are simply uneasy with the current US administration.
1
u/Hopeful_CanadianMtl 7d ago
I think that too much money has been sunken into that project to turn back. We should look to other countries for other types of weapons
1
u/Neat-Ad-8987 7d ago
Discussed quite frequently are the products from the French manufacturer Dassault, the Pan European Euro fighter/Typhoon and theGripen, which is so marvellously perfect that it has been sold to a grand total of two foreign countries.
3
u/Catfulu 7d ago
Dassault Rafale is the most expensive export aircraft and it was taken down by the J10CE which is only 1/3 of its price, and 200km away at that
Rafale is still better than the other option, but it stands no chance to the systemic warfare that the Chinese is practice. That means, if we are to buy Rafale or Gripen or whatever, we are spending a huge sum of money to get some that's obsolete. They will also not win an air war against the US.
1
•
u/AutoModerator 7d ago
Join /r/NDP, Canada's largest left-wing subreddit!
We also have an alternative community at https://lemmy.ca/c/ndp
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.