Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced on Wednesday that his government would not purchase early-warning-radar planes from the United States, opting instead for a European model.
Canada will purchase Swedish Saab’s GlobalEye, which is based on the Canadian-manufactured Bombardier Global 6500 jet.
Tensions between the US and Canada have been high since Donald Trump launched a trade war against the US’ northern neighbor and even suggested that Canada should become the 51st US state, which caused widespread outrage in Canada, just as Carney was seeking the post of prime minister and succeeded in getting elected to it.
Since then, the Canadian government has also opted ot review the planned purchase of US F-35 fighter jets to explore other options.
Gripen is next. With a factory coming to Canada to produce them, under the wise guidance of our Swedish friends. Win-win for Canada, although buying war machines is a lose-lose for humanity.
I agree with you friend, that buying war machines is a lose-lose, but I also think is necessary, to avoid situations like the invasion from greedy old men, like what Russia attempted with Ukraine
My wife has a good way of putting it; “We can’t be a progressive country if we’re not a country at all.” It sucks that we live in a world where such things are necessary, but they are necessary no matter how much we wish they weren’t. You don’t have to be pro-war to be supportive of a strong enough military.
It isn’t strategic for Canada to invest in its airforce, because it is mostly useless for the types of wars Canada may find itself into:
-
A foreign (non-American) adversary attacks Canada: won’t be necessary since the United States will intervene automatically as it doesn’t want to have a (probably nuclear capable) enemy at its border.
-
The United States attacks Canada: The airforce will probably be destroyed on the ground as they did with Iran. Asymmetrical warfare will be Canada’s best leverage here.
-
Canada attacks a foreign nation for some reason: This is just going to fail abysmally. Reminder that Canada doesn’t even operate an aircraft carrier. If it attacks as part of a coalition, the CAF won’t be the determining factor in victory or defeat.
It is strategic for Canada to invest in its air force because:
- Hmm, what happened in that far northern area? We should go check it out. Oh wait, we don’t have planes to do that.
- Russia attacks Finland. Finland calls for help from its NATO allies. Canada sends its air force.
- Every single flight from Europe to the US west coast flies over Canada. Even flights from Europe to Mexico City pass over Atlantic Canada. One of those flights stops responding and there’s a fear it was hijacked. Oh well, I guess the USAF can check it out once it crosses the border… if it crosses the border.
You can see some of the absurdities of not having a proper air force in Switzerland. They used to have an Air Force that only operated during daytime business hours. In 2014 an Ethiopian Airlines pilot hijacked his own plane and landed it in Geneva. Italy and France scrambled to escort the plane through their airspaces. Switzerland had to just let it do what it wanted because their Air Force didn’t operate 24 hours a day.
In fact, for a huge and nearly empty country like Canada, the air force is arguably the most important military branch. Since prehistoric times, the size of a country / kingdom / empire was defined by the region in which it had a monopoly on the use of force. If Canada wants to claim sovereignty over the entire North, and not just the Montreal to Toronto corridor, it needs to be able to notice an invasion in the north, attack anybody there tying to claim its territory, and transport soldiers up there if necessary. That’s all Air Force stuff.
A modern Air Force might not mean fighter pilots in supersonic planes. As things in Ukraine have shown, it might instead be mostly drones.
Or Canada responds when an ally activates article 5 of the NATO treaty. Then an air force will be needed
So coalition scenario. Then it will need more allies that just itself anyway.
-
If Canada buys the Gripen, it’s basically an admission that they have no plans of using them on a modern battlefield, as their survivability would be extremely low. The same goes for any sub 5th generation platform.
And you know what? That’s probably okay. The only modern war Canada would be likely to engage in, is one where they’re fighting alongside the United States, and that doesn’t seem like it would happen anytime soon either.
The F-35 is very underwhelming and unreliable. They don’t perform as advertised. Everyone should stay away from them.
If Canada buys the Gripen, it’s basically an admission that they have no plans of using them on a modern battlefield,
Correct, we don’t.
What I should have said, is that buying the Gripen is an admission that they are voluntarily forfeiting their ability to fight a modern war.
And i’m not saying that’s a bad thing. What I am saying is that an acquisition program for a 4th generation fighter in the year 2026 is an incredible waste of resources.
Might as well hold out and wait to acquire a 6th gen European platform, which should be available in the early 2040s.
What I should have said, is that buying the Gripen is an admission that they are voluntarily forfeiting their ability to fight a modern war.
I should have put it differently as well; what I meant was that Canada simply doesn’t have the capability to fight a modern war, and it never will. There’s too great of a differential between our main adversaries ( historically the USA, more recently Russia, and in a more far-fetched way China and India) and Canada; the metrics will never match up.
Come to think of it, Canada has never fought a war per se. It has only assisted in wars, usually as part some sort of Anglo-American coalition. I argue that we shouldn’t get involved in British or American wars (like we recently declined with Iran) and hence we wouldn’t really need any fighter capability. But in any case, even as part of an allied coalition, Canada will not be able to be the difference maker in the fight. We cannot determine the outcome of a war, that will be up to what our allies can make happen.
And therefore, we will not be starting any war; we might begrudgingly join one, in which case our allies will have to carry the day. None of these cases requires a powerful fighter fleet.
Might as well hold out and wait to acquire a 6th gen European platform, which should be available in the early 2040s.
Relying on the Europeans to achieve anything is basically a waste of time. Sure they may be able to do it, after long delays, but as I mentioned, 6th gen isn’t the point. The recon planes are a better asset that will actually see practical use; I would have preferred to see the E-3 Sentry get selected over this radar mounted on a business jet thing, but no one is going to cry over Boeing missing a contract. Maybe the Americans could put some duct tape on the ones they “damaged” in Iran and call it refurbished?
You shouldn’t. But you should have the capability to fight a modern war in case you or your allies come under attack. Neither Russia nor America look all too friendly right now, having a capable defensive military seems less and less optional.
Carney is going F-35, sunk cost fallacy from Harpo and Trudeau.
We are stuck with 16 F-35s, we can’t back out of that order AFAIK. There is enough political pressure, especially with threats by the US that they will disable any US built jets if they have to, that we will get the rest as Gripens.
Being stuck with the F35s sucks but good on Canada for standing up to their deals and not wriggling out of them.
Lockheed was unable to deliver F35s to the US Navy.
We are even honoring a massive LAV III sale to the Saudis. How are you supposed to operate in good faith if you break deals/contracts? Nobody is going to want to business with you anymore.
Exactly. That’s where trump wrecked it for his own country. Doing business with a rip-off artist is a fool’s game.
I did not even tie that basic business principle to him on purpose. Back in the day grocery stores, gas stations, etc. Used to have collections of pictures of people that wrote bad cheques to tell the employees who was blacklisted from paying with cheques. It usually took more than one bad cheque to get your picture on the wall too. The concept is so simple.
This is starting to become a movement: countries going with Non-US tech or converting from it, and that’s probably for the best, given the general lack of ethics and insatiable greed of US-based tech companies and the people who lead them.
Yeah, I mean as a US citizen I don’t really care TBH. I just hope the planes they bought/are buying are better in some way, buying crap out of spite isn’t a good reason. I really hope the US economy collapses and we get to spit roast all these piece of shit politicians. So please, stop buying US anything.
Thé base plane is made on Canada. Its also a job création d’or Canada.
rEpUbLiCaNs ArE bEtTeR fOr BuSiNeSs
Good. Put the Untied States on economic time out until it behaves
Why are there so many people in this thread simping for the United States?
Yeah. So many sad fans of expensive support heavy trash
Canada will purchase Swedish Saab’s GlobalEye, which is based on the Canadian-manufactured Bombardier Global 6500 jet.
It’s a form of subsidy.
by that logic any item i buy is also a subsidy
US is planning to take over Canada and Greenland for their resources , like they did with Venezuela
US wants to take over these countries but have 0 plans lol. They said they would take Iran in 24 hours, good luck taking Montreal.
guess we’ll have to wait and see
If you are inept at making deals then this is the only thing that makes sense. Deal-making is relatively simple though, unless you are quite stupid and heavy with bluster.
Canadian airmen are not going to be pleased with this one. Although the small lapse in reconnaissance capability is probably well worth the long term strategic planning and sovereignty benefits.
What makes you think they’d be unhappy about it?
Heh!
Heh! Heh! Heh!
Sure, I’ll take you to a good place!
Heh! Heh! Heh!
Makes sense. Endless grafting with no real innovation has made US mil tec questionable. F-35 was downed in its first actual combat mission that was not a balloon.
So much going on in that little comment of yours. The F-35 borrowed from the F-22 while reducing cost to become the JSF. It was effectively a downgrade on purpose
The F-22 was optimized for
- air superiority
- speed
- maneuverability
The F-35 was optimized for
- multirole strike missions
- affordability (relative to the F-22)
- exportability
Also, your claim the F-35 was “downed in its first actual combat mission that was not a balloon” is not true. (A) There is still no confirmed combat shootdown of an F-35. And (B) F-35s have conducted non-balloon-related combat operations for years in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
So… not sure what you think you know, but it seems to be incorrect.
Iran shot down the F-35
They said they did. Still no proof
The f-35 is an indescribable wastage of money
You’re getting downvoted by simps who don’t know the history of this turd, they keep quoting design stats as if they are true.
F-35s were stuck over a year at Lockheed on software glitches, and they can’t fix it. Pentagon report.
US Navy even rejected them and refused to accept delivery.
This is a fucking Edsel.
There is still no confirmed combat shootdown of an F-35.
And you think you’re going to have this data made available during a war?
And (B) F-35s have conducted non-balloon-related combat operations for years in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Against an enemy with no air defense. A biplane wouldn’t have been shot down either.
Sure, how about from the folks who shot it down. That wasn’t parts from a different plane, or AI generated.
Sure, how about from the folks who shot it down.
Put it next to the claims of simultaneous laundry fires aboard US warships.
I mean that’s just incorrect. I hate the US military industrial complex as much as the next person, but the US has easily some of the best tech in the world, in most military aspects. Space-based, air, land, sea surface, and undersea.
Now, is it extremely overpriced and really bad value for the tech? Absolutely, the corruption has seeped in from the complete government capture of the MIC.
It had…had…
Respectfully, I don’t think you really even understand this field. Has the leadership fucked things up to a huge extent? Yes.
Does that destroy all of the massive R&D investments in military tech over the last 2 decades (since 9/11 specifically)? Of course not.
