RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,168195,00.html

Once again Canada wants to go it on the cheap and shift more responsibility to us. Their so-called conservatives are more interested in ill-advised social welfare programs than they are in defense, choosing to abrogate on the backs of American taxpayers.

quote:

Originally posted by CTMountaineer:
RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,168195,00.html

Once again Canada wants to go it on the cheap and shift more responsibility to us. Their so-called conservatives are more interested in ill-advised social welfare programs than they are in defense, choosing to abrogate on the backs of American taxpayers.

The Liberal Politicians of Canada have always despise their military! When you combined their Army, Navy, and Air force personnel the total is around 50,000! Second largest country and practically NO MILITARY!

quote:

Originally posted by SSGDuke53:

quote:

Originally posted by CTMountaineer:
RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,168195,00.html

Once again Canada wants to go it on the cheap and shift more responsibility to us. Their so-called conservatives are more interested in ill-advised social welfare programs than they are in defense, choosing to abrogate on the backs of American taxpayers.

The Liberal Politicians of Canada have always despise their military! When you combined their Army, Navy, and Air force personnel the total is around 50,000! Second largest country and practically NO MILITARY!

More like 62,000, with 25,000 in the active reserves. Not everyone is interested in becoming a superpower ... it is a rather expensive hobby.

Incidentally, Canada is run by Stephen Harper's Conservative government, with cordial relations with the present administration.

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:

quote:

Originally posted by SSGDuke53:

quote:

Originally posted by CTMountaineer:
RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,168195,00.html

Once again Canada wants to go it on the cheap and shift more responsibility to us. Their so-called conservatives are more interested in ill-advised social welfare programs than they are in defense, choosing to abrogate on the backs of American taxpayers.

The Liberal Politicians of Canada have always despise their military! When you combined their Army, Navy, and Air force personnel the total is around 50,000! Second largest country and practically NO MILITARY!

More like 62,000, with 25,000 in the active reserves. Not everyone is interested in becoming a superpower ... it is a rather expensive hobby.

Incidentally, Canada is run by Stephen Harper's Conservative government, with cordial relations with the present administration.

Why should Canada spend money on defense, when they have the United States to protect them. As Canada feels comfortable under the umbrella of protection provided by the U.S. Military, they could use the defense budget savings to try to fix their failing socialized health care system.

These are Approximate numbers:

The United States spends $550 Billion a year on defense, whereas Canada spends $17 Billion on defense. The U.S. has 2,900,000 troops(active and reserve) where Canada has 90,000 troops(active and reserve). The U.S. defense budget is 3.9% of GDP, Canada's defense budget is 1.2% of GDP.

Canada has a ton of French..did you expect any different?

quote:

Originally posted by SSGDuke53:

quote:

Originally posted by CTMountaineer:
RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,168195,00.html

Once again Canada wants to go it on the cheap and shift more responsibility to us. Their so-called conservatives are more interested in ill-advised social welfare programs than they are in defense, choosing to abrogate on the backs of American taxpayers.

The Liberal Politicians of Canada have always despise their military! When you combined their Army, Navy, and Air force personnel the total is around 50,000! Second largest country and practically NO MILITARY!

WADR Sarnt, Horseshit!

The Canadian Army, Navy and Airforce reached their greatest size ever under the Liberal administration of Mackenzie King.

Some of the most lasting damage to Canada's military establishment was done by Conservative prime ministers such as John Diefenbacher. I would include the incumbent as someone who has done harm to the military. The world needs a well trained and effective peace keeping force more than it needs another combat outfit. Canada will have a hard time recouping that loss of credibility.

PS I think the F-35 is overpriced and more the product of an advertising department than an effective design department. Given a 20 -year development it should be exceptionally advanced, and it ain't. The Canadians should shop elsewhere - more bang for the buck.

quote:

Originally posted by popsiq:

quote:

Originally posted by SSGDuke53:

quote:

Originally posted by CTMountaineer:
RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,168195,00.html

Once again Canada wants to go it on the cheap and shift more responsibility to us. Their so-called conservatives are more interested in ill-advised social welfare programs than they are in defense, choosing to abrogate on the backs of American taxpayers.

The Liberal Politicians of Canada have always despise their military! When you combined their Army, Navy, and Air force personnel the total is around 50,000! Second largest country and practically NO MILITARY!

WADR Sarnt, Horseshit!

The Canadian Army, Navy and Airforce reached their greatest size ever under the Liberal administration of Mackenzie King.

Some of the most lasting damage to Canada's military establishment was done by Conservative prime ministers such as John Diefenbacher. I would include the incumbent as someone who has done harm to the military. The world needs a well trained and effective peace keeping force more than it needs another combat outfit. Canada will have a hard time recouping that loss of credibility.

PS I think the F-35 is overpriced and more the product of an advertising department than an effective design department. Given a 20 -year development it should be exceptionally advanced, and it ain't. The Canadians should shop elsewhere - more bang for the buck.

I hope the Canadians will shop somewhere else, I would like to see them buy Russian myself, that way when we have war games, it will give reliable practice against actual hostile aircraft.
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Why should Canada spend money on defense, when they have the United States to protect them. As Canada feels comfortable under the umbrella of protection provided by the U.S. Military, they could use the defense budget savings to try to fix their failing socialized health care system.

What makes you think that the Canadians are so paranoid as to feel that threatened? Who exactly is a threat to Canada? If anything, that "umbrella" of which you speak places Canada in more jeopardy than they would be without it.

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:

quote:

Why should Canada spend money on defense, when they have the United States to protect them. As Canada feels comfortable under the umbrella of protection provided by the U.S. Military, they could use the defense budget savings to try to fix their failing socialized health care system.

What makes you think that the Canadians are so paranoid as to feel that threatened? Who exactly is a threat to Canada? If anything, that "umbrella" of which you speak places Canada in more jeopardy than they would be without it.

The only 'real' threats Canada has ever faced has come from you know where. Now imaginary threats - Harper's got those in spades.

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:

quote:

Why should Canada spend money on defense, when they have the United States to protect them. As Canada feels comfortable under the umbrella of protection provided by the U.S. Military, they could use the defense budget savings to try to fix their failing socialized health care system.

What makes you think that the Canadians are so paranoid as to feel that threatened? Who exactly is a threat to Canada? If anything, that "umbrella" of which you speak places Canada in more jeopardy than they would be without it.

Did I say Canada felt threatened or paranoid? No I didn't, in fact I said just the opposite. I intimated that Canada does not feel any real threat, hence no need for a sizable military and they desire to use their resources for domestic programs.

Canada is still part of the Commonwealth of Britain. Historically, any enemy of Britain was an Enemy of Canada. During the Cold War, the Soviets were a very real threat to Canada.

So, what are you trying to say? Are you saying,
barring the Canada/U.S. ally relationship, Canada faces no threat and they are only in jeopardy due to their close relationship to the
United States?

The bottom line is, most of our allies have depended on the U.S. to provide the bulk of the fighting force and resources for most of the world conflict since WWII. What would happen if we decided to downsize our military even more and have basically a small home defense force like most of our NATO allies? NATO would no longer be a viable fighting force.

quote:

Originally posted by popsiq:

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:

quote:

Why should Canada spend money on defense, when they have the United States to protect them. As Canada feels comfortable under the umbrella of protection provided by the U.S. Military, they could use the defense budget savings to try to fix their failing socialized health care system.

What makes you think that the Canadians are so paranoid as to feel that threatened? Who exactly is a threat to Canada? If anything, that "umbrella" of which you speak places Canada in more jeopardy than they would be without it.

The only 'real' threats Canada has ever faced has come from you know where. Now imaginary threats - Harper's got those in spades.

Ah, no Pops, where?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Visit Montreal sometime. You will see the chain of old forts protecting them from attack from the United States ... although I grant you the last time we actually invaded was in the War of 1812, we were making noises about it during the "Fifty-Four Forty or Fight" dispute in the 1840's during one of our periods of "manifest destiny" land grabbing.

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:
Visit Montreal sometime. You will see the chain of old forts protecting them from attack from the United States ... although I grant you the last time we actually invaded was in the War of 1812, we were making noises about it during the "Fifty-Four Forty or Fight" dispute in the 1840's during one of our periods of "manifest destiny" land grabbing.

Yeah, like we are making those noises today...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:
Visit Montreal sometime. You will see the chain of old forts protecting them from attack from the United States ... although I grant you the last time we actually invaded was in the War of 1812, we were making noises about it during the "Fifty-Four Forty or Fight" dispute in the 1840's during one of our periods of "manifest destiny" land grabbing.

BLAME CANADA, BLAME CANADA!

quote:

I hope the Canadians will shop somewhere else, I would like to see them buy Russian myself, that way when we have war games, it will give reliable practice against actual hostile aircraft.
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

trying really hard to make that a reality. they wont consider it. it would be money better spent when one can buy almost 3 Su-30MKC(c-canada)fighters($35M each) for the price of one F35($80M each) and the Su30 is far superior. heck, the MiG35 version of the MiG29 is better at only $26M each.

Canada better be careful, as the USA's leading oil supplier, and rift between the countries could find the USA willing to attack and occupy Canada for its oil! I think a strong air force able to slow the US invasion would be a smart move.

quote:

Originally posted by FlankerFlyer:

quote:

I hope the Canadians will shop somewhere else, I would like to see them buy Russian myself, that way when we have war games, it will give reliable practice against actual hostile aircraft.
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

trying really hard to make that a reality. they wont consider it. it would be money better spent when one can buy almost 3 Su-30MKC(c-canada)fighters($35M each) for the price of one F35($80M each) and the Su30 is far superior. heck, the MiG35 version of the MiG29 is better at only $26M each.

Canada better be careful, as the USA's leading oil supplier, and rift between the countries could find the USA willing to attack and occupy Canada for its oil! I think a strong air force able to slow the US invasion would be a smart move.

Yeah, but we will never invade Canada, that's like shooting your kid brother, ain't gonna happen...
LOL Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Yeah, but we will never invade Canada, that's like shooting your kid brother, ain't gonna happen...
LOL Respectfully, SUNLINER81

yeah, i know, just razzin ya. but then again i bet you never thought there would be a 9+Trillion federal debt either.

quote:

Originally posted by FlankerFlyer:

quote:

Yeah, but we will never invade Canada, that's like shooting your kid brother, ain't gonna happen...
LOL Respectfully, SUNLINER81

yeah, i know, just razzin ya. but then again i bet you never thought there would be a 9+Trillion federal debt either.

Yeah...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

'Specially to the PRC...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Perhaps if the military madness subsided, the US wouldn't be starting "wars" all over the world to justify spending more than half the GDP on the industrial/military machine; perhaps the US too could provide true universal healthcare, true universal education, AND good fishing for real WILD fish. Canadian PM Stephen Harper is a Bush lapdog not unlike his 1950/60's predecessor John Diefenbaker (another westerner) who sold out Canada's leading aviation/aerospace industry to the US. Remember Canada's Avro Arrow-without which the US would have never entered the delta wing jet age as soon as it did. Besides it was never intended that America should have a perpetual standing army/military. And yes Canada is our leading supplier of oil, water, actors, and Playmates of the year.

Also the Netherlands make pressure.

quote:

New Competition in the Netherlands?

The team is still on the way from Berlin to Hallbergmoos after one week of the Berlin Airshow, but the news continues to come in, some affecting Eurofighter Typhoon such as this one from the Netherlands. On Friday 30 May, The Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports: "In the Netherlands, one of the eight countries that have contributed funds to the F-35’s development, government officials hammered out a compromise Wednesday that leaves open the option of buying another aircraft.

Dutch opponents of the F-35 want to see the Gripen, the British-German Eurofighter consortium and the French-built Rafale also considered, as well as possibly Boeing’s F-18 Super Hornet. The uncertain cost of the F-35 has given critics room to press their case."

No need to comment the last sentence, but the Eurofighter consortium is indeed convinced that the Eurofighter Typhoon is best in the competition and the credible European alternative.

Source