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.

  • Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Prime Minister Carney, I have several better solutions. Cancel the F-35 and examine the Saab JAS-39 Gripen, Dassault Rafael, or the Eurofighter Typhoon.

    • Frostbeard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Tbf. The F35 owns the sky. The Typhoon wins in a dog fight, but the way the F35 operates it eliminates the threat long before the dog fight. I would love for a European fifth generation planejme the F35 tho’

    • Sturgist@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      10 hours ago

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

      • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 hours ago

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

          • wizzor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            6 hours ago

            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
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 hours ago

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

      • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        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.

        • HellsBelle@sh.itjust.worksOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          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.

          • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            44 minutes ago

            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?

            • HellsBelle@sh.itjust.worksOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 minutes ago

              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.

        • Yeather@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 hours ago

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

          • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            21 minutes ago

            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.

        • AnarchoDakosaurus@toast.ooo
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          14 hours 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.

        • vga@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          I’m sure they weren’t planning on getting into a war againt USA either.

  • brax@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    21 hours ago

    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.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

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

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        21 hours ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          20 hours ago

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

  • Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    19 hours ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      18 hours 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      18 hours ago

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

      • LostWon@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        If they do plan on invading, it will probably involve them coming from the North as well, and not just the South-- especially if they were to occupy Greenland first.

  • Sixty@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    21 hours 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.

  • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    20 hours ago

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

  • Tm12@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    22 hours ago

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

  • nao@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    21 hours ago

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

  • DogPeePoo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

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

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    20 hours ago

    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…

      • kbal@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 hours ago

        You’re underestimating the size of $70 billion. It’s more like high-speed rail to every major city in the country.

        • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          Nah, $70 billion is about right, and that’s a conservative estimate. If it turns out anything like california high speed rail then it could definitely go into $100 billion territory.

          Common law countries like the u.s., Canada and u.k. are really inefficient at building hsr due to property rights issues. California is still struggling to build its hsr even though it’s scope has been reduced, its budget keeps ballooning. Similarly, the hs2 project in England to connect London to Manchester has also been cut back to just Birmingham, and it’s also over budget ringing in £ 50 billion for just that section.

          If this were china then yeah you could probably get a Vancouver to Quebec line for $70 billion, but the Canadian central government isnt that strong and would have to deal with a lot more regulations.

          • kbal@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            California is the textbook case of paying way to much for that sort of thing, isn’t it? It’s always the one they go to when they want to make a crazy inflated budget look reasonable by comparison. But yeah, I was seriously underestimating the cost anyway. Maybe we should just go with medium-speed rail.