this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
499 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

9130 readers
1567 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Prime Minister Mark Carney has asked for a review of Canada’s plan to purchase a fleet of F-35 fighter jets.

The deal with Lockheed Martin and the U.S. government is for 88 planes at a cost of about US$85 million each.

A spokesperson for Defence Minister Bill Blair said Carney has asked Blair to look into whether the F-35 contract is the best investment for Canada, or if there are better options.

β€œWe need to do our homework given the changing environment, and make sure that the contract in its current form is in the best interests of Canadians and the Canadian Armed Forces,” Blair’s press secretary Laurent de Casanove said.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Punchshark@lemmy.ca 86 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Fuck yeah! Canada will vote with its dollar!

[–] hikuro93@lemmy.ca 64 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Heck yeah. Go Carney.

With love from Portugal. πŸ‡΅πŸ‡ΉπŸ€πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦

[–] Kyle_The_G@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

Welcome to the carnival!

or

CARNAGE!

[–] brax@sh.itjust.works 48 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Seems stupid to buy defense resources from a country that could become hostile. Do any European companies have anything to offer? I get that GOS and a lot of resources are still probably going to come from the USA but right now, the less the better.

[–] CircaV@lemmy.ca 38 points 1 week ago (4 children)

It also seems stupid to keep importing on a mass scale the culture, news, entertainment, media, and media platforms of a country that wants to invade Canada. Yet here we are.

[–] fourish@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I would be thrilled if all American social media was blocked 100%. Sweep the trolls back into their caves.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)
[–] slingstone@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I read somewhere they operate with a licensed American engine, and that some European nations are trying to replace it with a non-American one.... Yeah, it's a development of an F-18 engine.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AFC1886VCC@reddthat.com 44 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Can I interest you in a Eurofighter Typhoon?

[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Me personally? I'd love to say yes, but I'm a bit skint atm.....could I get it on IOU?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There was the "kill switch" rumour recently that trump (any president) can remotely disable any/all f35s they wanted to

It's probably not true, but the truth is just as disasterous for foreign buyers.

A shutdown of parts out of US does essentially the same and is much easier to do on a whim and withhold the solution in negotiations.

People weren't just buying US because "we're the best" it's because we could be relied on for support, because no one fucksnwith the US military industrial complex

trump is tho, and that's a hell of a lot more dangerous for a politician than pissing off day traders

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 week ago (4 children)

They require maintenance in the US. How well would that work if the US was invading us?

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

...

Yes, that is the point I am making, and the argument your government is making for canceling the contract.

If trump were to cut off logistical support for that or any other whim, they would have to be mothballed.

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 week ago

The SAAB would be much better as they allow local parts manufacture and local maintenance.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 31 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Canada could do the funniest thing rn by buying J-35s at half the price.

[–] BetaBlake@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It would be funny, but damn I would not want to buy military equipment from china

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (11 children)

China is Canada's second biggest trade partner, unless they're planning to follow America to war with China, what's the problem? Especially because it's for a military that was designed for the singular purpose of defending itself from an American invasion over the last 70 years.

The Canadian public isint ready to swallow it yet but that's where it's going to end up at. China and Iran have been preparing for this scenario for the last 20+ years.

They have all the kit and more needed, and in the right quantity too. In time. People still don't really belive Trump would push the button. The closer he gets the more open to this reality people will become.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

USA: We want to annex Canada. We are not joking

Canadians: Ooh China is very scary.

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Yeah, those are definitely safe from tampering.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The purpose of buying jets from someone other than America is to reduce America's influence over Canada, why would China sabotage that?

Edit: Why is this controversial? Do you think America tampers with the weapons we send to Taiwan?

[–] homesnatch@lemm.ee 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The US can remotely disable an F-35.. China, I'd expect can do the same for a J-35.

[–] wizzor@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't think the above poster doubts their ability, only that they might be less incentivized to do so compared to, say a country that has repeatedly voiced their wish to annex Canada.

[–] homesnatch@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nobody expects China to remotely disable J-35's on a whim... But they might do it as they prepare to invade Taiwan.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Tm12@lemmy.ca 31 points 1 week ago

Something we can train on and maintain within our borders please.

[–] Sixtyforce@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 week ago

He's keeping up decorum but yeah these jets are done. You can't buy military equipment from an enemy and the jets would have to be serviced in the USA over their lifetime.

[–] nao@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 week ago

maybe don't rely on fighter jets than can possibly be disabled remotely by someone talking about invading you

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

Messing with the military industrial complex is not the smartest move for Trump. All that will do is turn the military against him.

[–] Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It always seemed strange that Canada would agree (how much arm twisting?) to buy a plane that won't work well in our Arctic. We are committed to buying 16 jets but it would probably be better to buy the rest elsewhere or put our money into homegrown solutions. Maybe drones or other machines.

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 week ago

Excuse me sir, may I interest you in Gripen? Cold weather tested, fascist free, and oh so stylish. Book your test flight today!

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Maybe we should be looking at what we need for city close quarters defenses and guerilla fighting.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 17 points 1 week ago

Lockheed Martin β€” ”We specialize in destroying the lives of brown people, come fly with us”

[–] kbal@fedia.io 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

For the $70 billion it would apparently cost in total to have these super fancy fighter jets, they could instead build a million new low-cost housing units and still have some money left over to work on inventing innovative air defence systems that aren't so expensive..

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 week ago

6 months ago I would have agreed with you. Unfortunately now we have to focus on saving Canada.

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 week ago (3 children)

They could also build a high speed rail from Toronto to Quebec, something the people could actually use.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Grimpen@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

F-35 is the most advanced aircraft currently available. We've also already sunk enough money into the program to pay for the first 16 IIRC. This puts us in an awkward position, considering the possibility of degraded functionality of the F-35 without US assistance^1^.

One of the worst ways to balloon military spending without getting anything in return is to keep changing your mind and hanging procurement up in endless indecision. Combined with the money already spent, I think we have to stick with F-35 for at least a bit.

I like the Gripen, and I'd suggest a switching some of our 88 fighters to Gripen's, but apparently Gripen's aren't that much cheaper.

Long term though, I think Canada should get in on GCAP, the Global Combat Air Program. It's not expected to deliver until 2035 if everything sticks to plan, so we'd still need the F-35 or Gripens I was mentioning in the interim.


^1^ My understanding is that the "kill-switch" myth is pretty much that, a myth. There are software systems that depend on the US, apparently ALIS/ODIN, plus the MDF file updates. The possibility of a kill-switch can't be totally excluded IMO though, there is a lot of software in the F-35, and the US writes and patches it all. Even if there isn't a kill-switch, the US knows what vulnerabilities they are patching, and if any of them where exploitable, I'd imagine they'd know.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Saab is offering to move part of the production to Canada, Trump might prevent US defense contractors from having facilities outside the US... So... Yeah

[–] Grimpen@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 week ago

This is one of the reasons I really liked the Saab offer. Supporting a domestic aerospace defence industry is probably a good strategic aim.

GCAP would also offer a chance to foster our domestic aerospace industry.

There are other combinations that achieve much the same though. FCAS (Future Combat Air System) is similar to GCAP, a joint France, Germany and Spain project, but it isn't scheduled to deliver until 2040.

I am in no position to know what's "best", but it's undeniable that there are some good options. It's unfortunate though that there will be a cost to pay that we went with F-35 all those years ago. Still don't have a Canadian F-35 in the air.

Another piece of trivia, that I really don't know if significant is that Sweden nearly joined GCAP. If we went with Gripen and GCAP, and Sweden rejoined GCAP there might be opportunities for long term partnerships. Then again I think there are similar opportunities with Eurofighter and FCAS.

[–] Greg@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

F-35 is the most advanced aircraft currently available

As long as you can service and maintain them. Without a reliable supply chain for parts and servicing, they’re just expensive decorations.

[–] bulwark@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Absolutely. This is the true "kill switch". Turning off support for most US made weapons means killing them.

[–] Fluke@lemm.ee 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

As I've said elsewhere the ECM pod updates can only be done by US staff. Without this week's pod frequencies to hit the latest radar frequencies, the plane is a liability in the air because of it's cost.

There is no way the US is going to code "enemy" planes' ECM.

The F-35 program may well flatline from this upset.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago

F-35 is the most advanced aircraft currently available

in west, but it may also be too advanced as root cause of its reliability and maintenance cost problems.

sunk enough money into the program to pay for the first 16

should demand refund for those 16.

apparently Gripen’s aren’t that much cheaper.

$85m vs $109m is a fair bit cheaper. Again, the maintenance costs and flight readiness metrics matter significantly.

There are software systems that depend on the US, apparently ALIS/ODIN, plus the MDF file updates.

We don't need to focus on whether there is a "mid air kill switch or not", when we know there is a "make this a paper weight switch". Naive or disingenuous of you to say "if Lockheed finds a kill switch, they would surely patch it out"

[–] Fluke@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The key thing you're missing here is that the programming of the ECM pod, the thing that makes the F-35 able to do what it does, the thing it's just an average 6th gen fighter without, is only done by US personnel.

Even if you could make the entire plane locally, parts wise, the US will not ever give out the pod code. Ever.

Because without it, the plane is worth less than nothing, it's a liability.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments