I'm still in a bit of a writing slump, so I'll let others do the talking for me.
Canada should adopt a fighter jet which best meets the need for one that is cost-efficient, works well in our northern climate and falls within our control for easy maintenance and software.
I appreciate that some military officials favour the F-35 and believe while the U.S. administration is antagonistic to Canada, close co-operation with the U.S. military is possible. I think that trust is misplaced.
There is concern over a mixed fleet, but many of our allies have such arrangements. The air force currently operates more than 20 varieties of aircraft, so objections to adding Gripens to this fleet seem puzzling.
The Saab proposal to manufacture them in Canada sounds like a win-win that would allow us to rebuild our aeronautical capability. The F-35 does have better stealth capabilities, so buying the number already committed to may have merit.
Beyond that, I think the Gripen better suits Canada’s overall interests.
Carey Johannesson Victoria
And a Star reader reflects on the hypocrisy of Pete hoekstra
No doubt the questions will rage for some time, but the bottom line has to be that we can only retain our sovereignty by making assessments and needs that reflect our country, not the whims, passions and prejudices of foreign entities.U.S. Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra was not merely hypocritical for blaming Canada for “political interference” because of American propaganda seeking to influence politics abroad, as Éric Blais points out. The U.S. has, through use of military — either covertly or overtly, with or without allies — tried to force political change in other countries. In this century, America has exercised at least some level of political persuasion in Afghanistan (2001-2021), Iraq (2003-2011), Libya (2011), Syria (2014 to present), Pakistan (2000s to 2010), Yemen (2002 to present), Somalia (2007 to present) and the Philippines (2001 to present), not to mention Venezuela. There are dozens more examples if we go back through the previous century, including covertly supporting or waging actual violence against democratically elected regimes (Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, Chile in 1973).
And let’s not forget the gratuitous insults against our head of state when U.S. President Donald Trump referred to Justin Trudeau as very dishonest and weak, two-faced, and “governor” while challenging Canadian sovereignty.
Hoekstra has opposed reproductive rights, gay adoption rights and gay marriage, parental leave for federal employees and expanding health care for kids. He has an A rating from the NRA for opposing gun control. He’s a true Trumpian, including the staggering hypocrisy he shows in his criticism of an ad that was simply truthful.
Barry Kent MacKay, Markham, ON
I think the idea of a jet fighter vs jet fighter engagement over the high artic is extremely unlikely.
ReplyDeleteMultirole aircraft are mainly used for attacking an enemy not defence.
The age of dogfighting is all but over , we need an aircraft that can intercept prowling Russian and maybe Chinese intruders over the high artic which are unlikely to be fighter aircraft.
The so called fifth generation fighters have been around since 2006 ; they are bordering on obsolescence, sixth generation aircraft are the new toy .
To purchase the F35 is to buy in to US lead foreign policy and keep us reliant upon US produced armaments at the expense of our own policies and manufacturing capabilities.
During WWII Canada prospered with aircraft production that was almost wholly built here and post WWII developed its own aircraft and engines.
It can , and is, argued that US interference destroyed the Avro Arrow and the British TSR2.
Building the Gripen under license could be a fresh start for a once proud and successful industry.
TB
"To purchase the F35 is to buy in to US lead foreign policy and keep us reliant upon US produced armaments at the expense of our own policies and manufacturing capabilities."
DeleteI completely agree, TB. We either are an independent nation or we aren't. and trying to placate the Americans any more than we already have is a fool's errand.
At the end of the day , do we need 'the best" ?
ReplyDeleteIn the closing year of WWII Germany had a huge qualitative advantage over the allies with their jet and rocket aircraft.
The allies won , in part, because of their numerical superiority.
With the F35's abysmal availability rate we would always have more aircraft in the air!
TB
Point well-taken, TB. 'Needing' the best sounds far to American for my liking. I'll take competence as my measure.
Delete