498
Carney orders review of F-35 fighter jet purchase from U.S.’s Lockheed Martin (www.ctvnews.ca)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/canada@lemmy.ca
80 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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.

“We 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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 1 year ago* (5 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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    There’s also the downgrades and quality control issues you get with buying Chinese.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The quality can't be that much worse than the plane that can't fly in the rain and has a risk of decapitating pilots on ejection. It's not as good at killing American soldiers as the Osprey, but it's not exactly the epitome of quality.

    In any case, Chinese manufacturing builds to specification. The reason they're perceived as low quality is that you're buying goods designed to be literally as cheap as possible, both in the development and manufacturing costs, and companies wouldn't make a profit outsourcing if they spent the same amount manufacturing the product in China.

    When your cheap electronic fails because a .5 cent capacitor explodes after a month, it's not because the country with the biggest manufacturing sector didn't have access to 5 cent capacitors or the country with the most engineers didn't have the engineering man-hours available to design it correctly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    There are much larger, systemic issues with Chinese manufacturing that goes beyond just building to specification. Systemic corruption is the number one killer of their high end manufacturing market. The easiest example I can give you is steel. High quality steel is hard to order from China, steel you do order will be improperly marked as hogh quality but in actuality will be lower. This is a foreign and domestic issue, and is the reason why thr Chinese rail lines are constantly under construction.

    The Osprey is a dangerous aircraft and everyone knows it, while Chinese aircraft are dangerous while pretending to be safe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    What's the problem?? China has shown its intent in other parts of the world with its 'belt and road' initiative and, tbh, Canada has little incentive to join that. Never mind the fact that the scumbag Stephen Harper locked us into a decidedly one-sided, 31 year long FIPPA with China that can't end until 2045.

    Added to that is all the money laundering and fraud that China committed here beginning in the '90s.

    Most Canadians are aware of this stuff, so are wary of joining forces with China in any way, shape or form.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    China has shown its intent in other parts of the world with its ‘belt and road’ initiative

    That intent being mutual development so other countries are less dependent on China's enemy and their economies can't be leveraged against China?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    No. Their manipulation of poorer nations where China 'lends' them the money to complete projects that primarily benefit China, leaving the nations forever in China's debt.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    You're just describing the IMF's model and pretending China is doing it. When countries were unable to pay back the loans, China has refinanced or forgiven them.

    Having good relations and a country that isn't dependent on the west benefits China a lot more than slightly reduced costs to transport goods to a country, that every other country also reaps when a port or railroad is built.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago*

    Here's me pretending, with data.

    From trains and highways to power plants and ports, Chinese funding has helped to accelerate Africa's economic growth and bridge infrastructural gaps.

    However, although these loans have accelerated growth, they also present obstacles that may impede long-term development. These obstacles take the form of debt default.

    The volume of borrowing from China has generated concerns over debt sustainability in some African countries.

    • Angola .... $64.8 billion
    • South Africa .... $21.3 billion
    • Ethiopia .... $20.4 billion
    • Sudan .... $18 billion
    • Egypt .... $15 billion
    • Nigeria .... $14.5 billion
    • Zambia .... $13.5 billion
    • Democratic Republic of Congo .... $13.1 billion
    • Kenya .... $12.7 billion
    • Ghana .... $9.8 billion Source
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent