Select Company Escorts

Boing out

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,964
6,108
113
Much of NATO are fellow pretenders.
The US is certainly the most awesome fighting force in history. Having said that they spend way too much money on hardware and no amount is ever enough for the GOP. They are equipped to fight yesterdays war,
 

FAST

Banned
Mar 12, 2004
10,069
1
0
The US is certainly the most awesome fighting force in history. Having said that they spend way too much money on hardware and no amount is ever enough for the GOP. They are equipped to fight yesterdays war,
And Killaries.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
93,363
23,241
113
The US is certainly the most awesome fighting force in history. Having said that they spend way too much money on hardware and no amount is ever enough for the GOP. They are equipped to fight yesterdays war,
Exactly, think how much more effective Putin's weapons were against the US for so much less money spent.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
An idiotic decision.

So the Trudeau fils Government (acting just like dear old dad in screwing the Armed Forces), doesn't want to purchase F-35's fine, however, there are other much better choices than purchasing clapped out 28 to 34 year old aircraft (there is a reason why the RAAF is getting rid of them). To mention just two non-U.S. fighter-interceptor aircraft: the Eurofighter Typhoon, and the Saab JAS 39 Gripen/Griffin

p.s. it is Boeing
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,635
5,093
113
An idiotic decision.

So the Trudeau fils Government (acting just like dear old dad in screwing the Armed Forces), doesn't want to purchase F-35's fine, however, there are other much better choices than purchasing clapped out 28 to 34 year old aircraft (there is a reason why the RAAF is getting rid of them). To mention just two non-U.S. fighter-interceptor aircraft: the Eurofighter Typhoon, and the Saab JAS 39 Gripen/Griffin
You are not paying attention. Canada only bought the F-18's for parts (so to speak), will make a decision later on new fighter jets. I hope Canada avoids the F35 duds.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
You are not paying attention. Canada only bought the F-18's for parts (so to speak), will make a decision later on new fighter jets. I hope Canada avoids the F35 duds.
Saying that "some of the Australian aircraft would be used for spare parts" certainly implies that they intend to keep the rest flying for some time. If Trudeau fils doesn't want the F-35 or the Super Hornet then now is the time to decide what he does want to purchase -- not just keep dribbling the ball down the field.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,748
7,690
113
The cancellation of the 65 F-35 jets was the best move that Mr. Trudeau did to save the country around $9 billion dollars initially, and then the whole equipment and upkeep of these jets would have costed Canada around $50 billion. A big saving for better spending.
There is definitely no need to rush to buy any fighter jets from the USA after Trump's attacks and penalties on Bombardier.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
There is definitely no need to rush to buy any fighter jets from the USA after Trump's attacks and penalties on Bombardier.
It isn't rushing, but a decision needs to be made sooner rather than later. If Trudeau fils wants to purchase from Europe I've already given two possible candidates.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,555
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
It isn't rushing, but a decision needs to be made sooner rather than later. If Trudeau fils wants to purchase from Europe I've already given two possible candidates.
Or not, maybe a never ending delay is a way to disarm.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,635
5,093
113
It isn't rushing, but a decision needs to be made sooner rather than later. If Trudeau fils wants to purchase from Europe I've already given two possible candidates.
I don't see any reason to rush a decision. Nobody is sending bombers our way. But by all means let us buy a few saab jets to make everybody happy.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,748
7,690
113
It isn't rushing, but a decision needs to be made sooner rather than later. If Trudeau fils wants to purchase from Europe I've already given two possible candidates.
Yes, so it takes time to assess the next choice. After all when you are talking about tens of billions of dollars, it is better to get it right the first time.
I agree with cancelling the boeing jets, especially after the unfair tax that Trump wants to implement on Bombardier.
 

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
23,076
1,769
113
You mean universal health care and reliance on the US and our other allies for any real national defence. We're like that neighbour that's out drinking hundreds of dollars of booze at the bar every weekend, but is too cheap to buy a lawnmower, so he's always borrowing yours.
who is gonna attack us other then the USA?
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
It is just plain silly to argue that it was not and is not in Canada's interest to be part of NORAD.
 

Bud Plug

Sexual Appliance
Aug 17, 2001
5,068
0
0
who is gonna attack us other then the USA?
National Defence does not only take place on home soil. Unless you call all the UN operations that Canada supports acts of aggression? There are certainly some who hold that myopic view.
 

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
23,076
1,769
113
Saying that "some of the Australian aircraft would be used for spare parts" certainly implies that they intend to keep the rest flying for some time. If Trudeau fils doesn't want the F-35 or the Super Hornet then now is the time to decide what he does want to purchase -- not just keep dribbling the ball down the field.
Why the rush to decide? there are several fighter programs that may suit canada much better.
 

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
23,076
1,769
113
National Defence does not only take place on home soil. Unless you call all the UN operations that Canada supports acts of aggression? There are certainly some who hold that myopic view.
The typical people attacked do not need top of the line planes.
 

Bud Plug

Sexual Appliance
Aug 17, 2001
5,068
0
0
The typical people attacked do not need top of the line planes.
You appear to be unaware of the range of UN operations. Even leading edge technology planes are sometimes shot down in the course of these operations. No technology is completely invulnerable.

However, the objective is zero casualties. Better equipment reduces the casualties suffered by Canadian forces. I can think of no reason not to equip forces that we ask to go into combat with the best possible technology. Our soldiers deserve that much at least.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,748
7,690
113
It isn't rushing, but a decision needs to be made sooner rather than later. If Trudeau fils wants to purchase from Europe I've already given two possible candidates.
A pragmatic non-rushed decision is the best option. What is the reason for rushing it?
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts