So if they don’t buy any we’re just gonna give them out free? That’s dumb.
The Art of the Deal.
With a pilot, apparently.
They’re gonna get in trouble for false advertising when it turns out the pilot was a cardboard cutout and did not, in fact, come with the “car.”
It does sound really weird, however, the way I see it is both countries are under obligation for defense forces anyway, and already go into each other’s air space in order to do this. So, by Canada not buying the jets( Which I agree with that decision at this point because the US has heavily dropped the ball while increasing prices.) that doesn’t change the fact that they were counting on those jets for coverage, which means that they need to gain that coverage from somewhere in order to uphold current agreements.
The ambassador was just stating that they will need to attempt to alter NORAD’s deal with them because if Canada isn’t going to supply the coverage, then if they were to keep the same coverage, the US would have to send more jets in which he is complaining about.
Honestly, the title of this article is clickbait to the point where I don’t even think the article title itself is accurate to the article anymore. It’s borderline misinformation at this point
It’s kinda loud in here, did the headline say ‘piece of shit fuckface Trump gives Canada reason #563 to stop trading with the US and increase trade with Europe, China, etc’?
Pretty much, yes. They just don’t get over there?! Whoohoohoo!!!
Everybody calm down. USA and Canada have an agreement allowing them to enter each other’s air space. They said that if Canada doesn’t buy enough F-35s USA will have to send more jests into Canada’s airspace to fill in the gaps. That’s it. It’s not “buy our jets or we will invade you”. It’s “if Canada doesn’t buy F-35 we will have to do more work in our agreement”.
This community really needs a clickbait title flagging process.
Our media needs to fucking quit the click baity titles.
Honestly, I’m a little surprised that this post wasn’t locked or had a comment pin stating that the title of this post is misinformation and that the actual body isn’t what the title indicates
The process is RTFA :)
return to fucking acronym. english is hard
Cute, but its obvious everybody checks replies first and you do so specifically to avoid giving clicks to bad actors so they can draw people in to sell ads
Bad headlines will get worse if you RTFA after falling for the clickbait. The incentives are fucked.
That’s why some of us have to do the hard work of reading before replying.
Which is why a flagging process creates a better incentive loop and reduces stupid incentives.
Sir, this is Lemmy. We thrive on clickbait headlines here :(
Seriously though. For all of Twitter’s awfulness, I think Lemmy could use a similar “reader added context” bubble right below the headline text. A corrective comment doesn’t really fix the engagement the headline gets.
But why isn’t Canada allowed to use whatever other jets it buys for that? Why does it have to be American made f-35s?
But Hoekstra warned that if Canada chooses to purchase Saab’s Gripen E jets, the U.S. would still need to reconsider how it works with its northern neighbor on security.
“If they decide they’re going with an inferior product that is not as interchangeable, interoperable as what the F-35 is, that changes our defense capability,” Hoekstra said.
“And as such, we have to figure out how we’re going to replace that,” the ambassador added.
---- (end quote)
They are just saying that if Canada changes its plans US will have to adapt. Looking at what’s happening in Greenland this can be somehow considered as a threat (if you can’t defend yourself we will have to take over…) but it’s really a stretch. US will probably decide to deploy more F-35s there or something which makes total sense.
Idk. Sounds like the US whining but I guess a news article also isn’t going to reveal exact security terms and threats. Canada was going to use the same number of planes but from a different country and manufactured on Canadian soil with Canadian jobs. I think thats the biggest “threat” trump is worried about.
Also you should consider seperating your opinion from the quoted text using mark up.
A better question is why buy a shitty jet that even the US Navy rejected?
These turds have been parked in LA on software bugs for TWO YEARS.
They are the Jeep Wranglers of the military.
They are saying it is because of compatibility issues I assume. Everything is likely tied together to communicate based on the planes being F-35s.
Seems like something easy enough to fix by installing those same communication systems into the other planes.
You are right. The title is so misleading and I can’t believe someone with the title journalist on their resume wrote it.
They’ve used everything they’ve learned to twist the words into bait
“Such a nice airspace you have here, it would be a shame if something would happen to it” Also doesn’t say they would invade… still it’s a clear threat.
Putting a correlation on “more fighters jets in your airspace” on them buying more planes that cannot really be used to protect from the US (for software limitations) sounds a lot like a threat.
But, sure, you are technically correct
Is that what the pundits said about the president and his appointee threatening canada again? Yeah he threatened them but what he meant was best friends forever! Kind of a hard sell at this point I’m afraid. The US is the enemy, they are deeply hostile make no mistake, in league with Russia to blow up Nato, and in a confrontation with the west over territory could trip the kill switches they have in high end military gear they sell, bricking those jets.
This is just robbery, we weren’t able to make our schedule and modified the price. “$27.7 billion in cost – up from its initial $19 billion.”
Yet expect them to just give us $7 billion dollars because we failed to meet the contract?
Duh. That’s how extortion works.
You think the mob ever delivered anything on time and under budget?
Now I want a short story where the Mob accidentally hires the most effective project manager ever
There’s actually an anime where a corporate worker gets summoned into another world because they need him to use his efficiency to get their shit together.
It’s called “Headhunted to Another World: From Salaryman to Big Four!”, and it’s pretty good.
This is how the mafia works. Its the only business trump knows.
Stupid motherfuckers haven’t learned anything from the past year. They actually think they can just bully and harass everyone into submission. They’re losing more and more influence every day.
To do what? Fly around, wasting tax payer money?
“Give us money or we will attack you” is generally not something you say to an ally you want to keep. Trump is literally insane, trying to start WW3.
It’s extortion, the only thing trump knows…
In his narcissistic mind, everyone else is just there for him to exploit. He literally can not comprehend any other way to do things.
“Buy or weapons or else…” Maybe we should look for a more reliable supplier and close our airspace to their jet fighters.
There isn’t one, the only stealth fighters are in the US or Russia/China. If you don’t have stealth fighters at all you will lose very badly in an air war against someone that does. That’s just how it is, you have an overwhelming advantage if you can shoot your enemy but they can’t even see you at range.
Buying weapons from a country that threaten to annexe you is not a long term solution neither. But yes it take time to build a new supply chain
Air superiority has never won a war.
Source: History.
It has contributed to it greatly in the past though. WW2 is a good example.
WW2 iwasn’t won until the Allied and the Russian armies rolled into Berlin
Whatever it takes to distract from the Epstein files sir!
I was walking past the 7-11 the other day and the manager came out and forced me to buy a slurpee by gunpoint. USA! USA! /s
He said if I didn’t, he’d forcefeed a slurpee down my throat, at his expense.
Basically: you are getting those F-35’s whether you want them or not.
I hate this timeline, but that’s funny
Buy our fighter jets or we’ll send you fighter jets
Sounds like free delivery.
For free(dom)
What
Buy our fighters jets or we invade with fighter jets ?
What absolute fuck is wrong with this country
Nobody reads.
No, I definitely read.
Canada doesn’t want to pay for the massive cost overruns. The US said “fine, but we’ll have to shore up the NORAD system by sending OUR fighters into YOUR airspace as necessary.” If there is no agreement as to how that occurs and the US does it anyway, that is an invasion. Quite literally.
Part of NORAD already allows both Canada and the US to enter each other’s airspace in the interest of dealing with threats. This is an existing negotiation.
What the ambassador is stating is that if Canada does decide to backtrack on the program (which full disclosure I agree with because they failed to meet their deadline and the cost overrun is through the roof), In order to “prevent gaps”, they would increase their f35 presence Which is also why they referenced that they would need to alter the current NORAD plan.
This is a quote from one of the sources that the article uses for its claims.
“NORAD would have to be altered,” U.S. Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra told CBC News in an exclusive interview at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona. He says the United States would likely need to purchase more of the advanced fighter aircraft for its own air force, and would fly them more often into Canadian airspace to address threats approaching the U.S. “If Canada is no longer going to provide that [capability], then we have to fill those gaps,” said Hoekstra.
The Posted article cherry-picks the hell out of its sources to try and make a mountain out of a mole hill.
The entire article could be summarized with “US ambassador states that if Canada backs out of F-35 deal, US will need to increase resources to fill the gap” But instead of doing so, the author decided to make a title that makes it indicate that the US ambassador is threatening to invade Canada over it. Disingenuous reporting.
That’s technically a declaration of war, right?
Not even close.
They’re suggesting that Canada won’t be able to defend its own airspace so US will have to be able to operate more freely in Canadian than they already do. They are saying that the NORAD agreement would need to be updated to accommodate this.
Pretty sure that is the exact explanation that Russia uses when it violates Finnish and Swedish airspace.
And neither Finland nor Sweden are at war with Russia. Bullshit scare tactic used by fucking putin yes, but it’s not itself an act of war. At least, it isn’t generally treated as such.
You seem to be applying a pretty strict definition to what is actually an arbitrary term. An act of war can be anything that any nation wants to call an act of war.
So I guess we should probably just use some of the countries involved in the real life case we are talking about.
Does anyone consider violation of airspace by a nations warplanes to be in-and-of-itself an act of war or at least a proactive action worthy of escalation and retaliation? Oh yeah, the United States does. And so does Russia.
I’m not applying a strict standard, I’m using the two examples you gave to illustrate my point that it’s much more complex than they thought. Finland and Sweden aren’t at war so no, at least in those two cases its not a declaration of war.
Just kinda decided to pretend we were talking about “declarations of war” now? I can see you are either not interested in having a grown up discussion or you’re genuinely unable to have one.
That’s the whole subject being discussed. Here’s the OP comment we’re all replying to:
Where they ask if this is a declaration of war. Not sure how that’s pretending anything.
Just because our politicians won’t accept it. We are currently at war with Russia. Have been for years. At least that’s what the Russians tell their own population. Then we have the constant sabotages in and around our territory by “totally not Russian military” people. When was the last time anyone formally “declared” a war? It isn’t the 1800s anymore.
For most countries in NATO the last time was WWII, fwiw.
That would be correct for the two countries at present. For the U.S., it’s 1942. For Canada, it’s 1941.
NORAD already has shared skies provisions. US jets can fly into our airspace as needed to intercept foreign attackers. We can do the same with them.
None of this constitutes a threat, despite Hoekstra’s weird, fumbling attempt to deliver it like one.
He basically said “If you don’t give us your business, we’ll have no choice but to protect your airspace even harder!” Oh, wow, scary. No, please, don’t do that.
Canada could do something really funny and start buying chinese anti-aircraft missiles.
Close. We should build our own, and if we happen to violate Chinese IP along the way, oh well.
Or just work with MBDA and Thales to set up a domestic production lines for Meteor and SAMP/T. And then collaborate with Europe more on aerospace and defense. And then make some deals with Korea and Poland for some of their hardware that they’re currently churning out. And then set up a joint production and rapid iteration project with Ukraine, since they’re essentially the best in the world at drone shit these days. And then talk to France, Germany, Sweden, and/or Japan about getting some attack subs and perhaps SSGNs.
There’s lots of possibilities once you free yourself from the economic yoke of the US. We did kinda wreck your defense aerospace industry (the Avro Arrow was the absolute tits, and it’s a damn shame we crushed the project). But now’s a great time to reinvest in that stuff.
A solid plan.
Korea, Japan
The US commands Korea’s military. Japan literally sacrificed their own economy to prop up the US in the 80s. You can’t achieve sovereignty from the US by making deals with other vassals, because the US can simply lean on them if they don’t like it.
Europe
I don’t see Europe becoming more independent at this point given 30 years of liberalism hollowing out their industry and welfare state while supporting US foreign policy unconditionally.
The US does not command Korea’s military. They’re a large contributor to SK defense posture, sure, but Korea is a major economic powerhouse in its own right (see: chip foundries), builds their own AEGIS-parity ships - and generally have some of the most advanced and productive shipyards in the world - and the largest standing army in the world at 3.6M active personnel. They have a thriving international military arms trade in terrestrial units and munitions (see: Poland). They are also beginning to roll out an indigenously produced 5th gen fighter, amongst many other interesting technological and military products and advancements.
Getting absolutely stomped twice in rapid succession (by Imperial Japan - saved by the fall of Imperial Japan; by NK - saved by UN (though primarily US) intervention) tends to focus one’s priorities on defense.
Also, strategically speaking, their huge chip foundries are an incentives for allies to pitch in, for the same reason Taiwan’s chip industry is a huge incentive for allies to pitch in - the entire rest of the economic world basically revolves around what they can make. And nobody wants their economy to crash, so there’d be a lot of assistance for SK if NK (or anyone else) decided to try to wreck them again.
Japan is to some degree in the same boat - though I dare say if the US pulls back from allies in east Asia, I do think there’s a good chance they’d set aside some of the historical animosity out of sheer pragmatism and the potential for mutual defense (a fringe benefit of being involved in the US-centric arms pipeline for so long is implicit system compatibility - if not direct, then much easier to adapt and modify for compatibility).
As to Europe: we’ll see how that goes. The EU seems to be partially waking up and taking things more seriously, but they’re also for the most part world fucking champions at bureaucracy-ing themselves to death. At the same time, the Brits and French have nukes, which, if they actually fully commit to continental defense (and if nukes proliferate more), is a bit of a trump (no relation) card.
The US does not command Korea’s military
The US takes control at will during times of war, as determined by the US, and the exercises occur with the US in command. The difference between this and the US commanding SK forces all the time is not meaningful.
-
Buying from America’s enemy sends a very different message. Just building your own missile looks like America’s vassal having pout; it’ll be used against NATO’s(read America’s) enemies anyway, essentially doing what Trump asked all NATO members and increasing their contribution to America’s sphere, for free. Cozying up to the other superpower signals that Canada is actually prepared to break it off if the US doesn’t cut yall a better deal.
-
Does Canada have the kind of military aerospace background to speedrun a program like that? Genuinely don’t know.
-
Do you think you can build it cheaper than the Chinese will sell it to you? Even if you had all the production documents, you can’t just replicate the half century of central planning that lead to cheap material, tooling, labor, engineering knowledge, etc that makes manufacturing in China so cheap.
- Does Canada have the kind of military aerospace background to speedrun a program like that? Genuinely don’t know.
60 years ago we did. The Avro Arrow program was unexpectedly killed just as production was getting read to ramp up. Why? Who the fuck knows.
-
We still do. That was a nascent effort, not some built up military industrial complex and it still exceeded all rivals at the time.
-
Why? Being a supplicant to a bully.
-
Do you think it could have been bribery? Lockheed and Boeing have a history of doing so, both legally and illegally. That time a porn-star 9/11’d a yakuza’s kitchen was revenge for this.
-
Going from supplicant to one abusive superpower to another sends the wrong message. Carney’s Davos speech spelled it out for you.
-
Yes. We have virtually all the skills, expertise and knowhow with a few notable exceptions. (Submarines, we could build them but at great cost and a learning curve.) We could build nukes in a year if we wanted to. The delivery system would take longer than the payload, but we could do that too.
-
Chinese goods are cheap because market function and the profit motive was not of central concern, neither human rights, labour rights or environmental rights. Your claim of “cheap” is badly distorted. There were costs born by the Chinese peoples across each of these domains that don’t show up on an invoice, but the bill always comes due and is paid in full. Your definition of “cheap” is a perversion of full cost accounting to suit a narrative.
one abusive superpower to another
So don’t put yourself into a situation where either can force abusive terms on you, not that China’s terms have been abusive, as evidenced by the development of countries who take chinese loans vs the eternal “developing” of countries which accept western “help”. I’m not even advocating entering China’s sphere, just having the threat available that the US can’t push any terms with no fear of consequences.
Chinese goods are cheap because market function and the profit motive was not of central concern
Correct, building the means of production was. Now they’ve done that, one unit of labor goes a lot further when you’re regularly setting up complex, automated assembly lines in days. If market function was the central concern, China would look like India or Africa; still exporting cheap resources and labor while your own people starve.
human rights, labour rights or environmental rights
Maybe 25 years ago when they had children working in machine presses and rivers that turned funny colors, it’s a different country now.
We could build nukes in a year
I don’t know if anyone’s ever set up plutonium extraction and refinement that quickly, even if you had design documents for the nuke itself.
-
-
Isn’t that similar to the shit that got Turkey kicked out of the F35 program?
Yes, except Russia instead of China.
To what extent it was the US sending other countries a message “Buy American or else” vs “We think you’ll let the radar systems send data on F-35s to Russia”, we don’t know, but if the second was a genuine concern, all the better for keeping F-35s away from your airspace.
IDK if it was the second tho, since the US flies F-35s near the North Korean border every spring, and if Russia wanted radar data, they’d just give one to the DPRK.
