Photo credit: MCpl Angela Abbey © 2010 DND-MDN Canada
Further to Mark Collins’ post below, Lieutenant-General André Deschamps suggests [via the Globe] we need 65 new stealth fighter jets to protect our “sovereignty.”
“Nobody expects somebody to come in and roll ashore here in the next little while,” he said. “But it’s a question of being able to exercise your sovereignty. And you can’t do that sitting on the runway saying, ‘I wish I could go out there without these guys knowing I’m going to be there two hours before the intercept point.’”
As most people know, I’m a big supporter of supporting the military. But there have got to be better places to spend $9-billion than stealth fighters to patrol a part of our country that is not in territorial dispute. Let me repeat that: there are no claims from any country that dispute any part of our territorial ownership.
So why plunk down $9 billion on jets to protect a territory nobody is disputing isn’t ours?
“Who knows 50 years from now? Who knows what the North Koreans will be up to? The Iranians?” he said.
Who knows. That’s got to be the worst reason for government spending in the history of bad reasons.
Personally, I’d rather sink that money into our ailing veterans, or better armoured capabilities for our ground forces in Afghanistan.
All I add is that stealth is not also a requirement to deal with any actual attack/attack by any bombers now or in the foreseeable future:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,39415.msg968053.html#msg968053
Mark
Ottawa
I don’t much like spending piles of taxpayer cash either, and I’m not generally a fan of the “who knows” justification for spending, but if there ever was a reason to use such a justification, future defense needs is a pretty good one.
We know that our current fleet of fighter jets needs to be replaced in the coming years. We don’t know what threats we may face over the next 30 to 40 years, but we have to be able to face them as best we can, with versitile equipment that can handle many situations that may come up. National defense would be pretty easy if we always knew what enemies and situations we were going to face, decades before they present themselves. Too bad we don’t know.
We’re talking about equipment that takes several years to procure, so it’s not like we can just wait for the threat to occur before we equip ourselves. So then what do we do now?
I don’t know if these particular jets are the right ones for us. Then again, no matter what piece of equipment you might propose, I couldn’t say if it is the perfect choice either. But doing without is not an option I feel comfortable with.
If this were 2012, I might agree that the choices we face are myriad and difficult to prioritize. But $9 billion could very likely be better spent in mitigating the difficulties our current deployed face in combat in Afghanistan.
We don’t tell doctors how to best operate on their patients. We don’t tell engineers the best way to build their bridges. And we don’t tell Sears the best way to market their goods.
It amazes me that nevertheless everyone somehow feels amply qualified to tell the military how best to do their job in protecting our sovereignty, our nation, and basically our collective asses!
Yes, government we elect has a say in it. And if they’re intelligent, at least enough to leave the cheap and ignorant political gesturing out of it…think, f’rinstance, Sea Kings…they will take the best advice from the military on what needs to be done, and the tools required to best do it, and then do their best to facilitate.
Because the military knows, just like doctors and engineers and marketers, what they are talking about.
And the rest of us, by far for the most part, haven’t got a foggy clue about any of it…and, frankly, don’t really want to have one, either. Mostly because wars and conflicts are nasty business about which we’d all prefer not to concern ourselves.
But, God forbid we ever have to, we damn well better be ready and prepared to kick some serious ass, or else!
Just sayin’…
First off, I don’t see how anyone would expect the Air Force Chief to say any differently. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t considerable difference of opinion from within the military command itself.
And that’s the second point. We aren’t telling the military how to best do its job. We’re questioning whether there is military consensus of a need for stealth fighters for a dubious claim of “sovereignty” [which still doesn't make any sense], particularly when it seems the money could be better spent on upgrading the battle troops currently in the field.
There’s about 2500 F-35 on the order books, for Australia, Britain, and others, but mostly for the US.
Our F-18s, formidable as they have been, are approaching 30 years of service on their airframes, and by 2017 will be maxed out.
We’ve all seen first the contemptible fiasco of the cancellation of the E101 replacements for the Sea Kings, and then the subsequent even bigger fiasco begun by the Liberals in finally getting around to replacements with anything but the E101 due to the politically awful optics therein. It’s now 17 years later, and the first new chopper to replace seriously overextended Sea Kings has yet to hit the tarmac anywhere in Canada…for twice as much money for fewer units. And on a chopper that has yet to ever see military service of any kind no less!
Now the Liberals want to invoke a bidding war for fighter jets? One that will take a minimum of, if experience is any indication, three years to slog through…if we’re lucky???
Who seriously thinks we’d see a new fighter jet of any kind at all parked at CFB Cold Lake any time sooner than at least five years after the 2017 deadline on the CF-18? But probably longer???
For Christ’s sake, we’re talking about the defense of Canada here!!! And putting the right equipment in place that will serve us in that role until at least the year 2040…long after a great many involved in the decision today are dead and buried!
We are so damned spoiled rotten in this country, I can’t speak! We live in the shadow of the greatest power on earth, we get along with them, and we milk them for all they’re worth! Name one other nation on this planet that takes their security so for granted as do we!!! Even one!!
Australia? Forget it! They know what it’s like to have an attack on their soil when the Japanese attacked and bombed Darwin. The Aussies take nothing for granted. As neither do the Swedes, nor even relatively tiny little nations like Denmark!
But we do! Every day of our lives we look south and thank our damn lucky stars that it’s the Americans we see, and not some form of another Russia, or China, or Iran, or N. Korea, or whatever!
So much so that it’s become our national excuse, to the point of nausea, for being lame ass beyond words to sufficiently describe when it comes to defense of even our own soil, forget about defending the freedoms and rights of humanity against monstrous, murdering tyranny around the world!
No, I’m knocking our armed forces! They’re the best! Which is, IMHO, pretty damn amazing considering how pitifully they’ve been treated over the last several decades since the Diefenbaker years!!!
I am really tired of seeing the cost of military spending portrayed over the entire life of the item including all training and spares. It is a red herring, if you ask me.
Can anyone tell me how much their car costs? I mean, the total cost of owning the car, the cost for repairs over its 20+ year life. The cost to train techs to fix the car, the cost of spare parts to keep on a shelf so that when the car breaks it can back on the road in hours… you know the kind of costs that the media loves to print.
Have a look at the CF-18s we have folks, they are closing in on 20 years old, how many of you out there have a 20 year old car?
If we don’t spend on defence, someone else will spend and defend us. Most parasites have no problem hating America and leaching off of their defence budget, but I don’t.
Is the F-35 the best plane for the job? I don’t know, I may be in the Air Force, but I am not an expert on what we require. We have experts for that, shouldn’t we trust them?
It’s sad the Air Force has to play up the whole Northern Sovereignty angle to tout the F-35, as it’s the “cause de jour”. CF-18′s fulfill a myriad of other roles for our National Security, examples of which were the recent G8/G20 and Vancouver Olympics.
What no one can say about the F-35 without getting skewered in the press is that in the last 20 years CF-18 have been used overseas on offensive operations twice – Gulf War 1 and the Balkans. In both cases the advanced stealth and interoperability with coalition forces that the F-35 brings to the table is a big plus but then again you can’t say that in Canada because you can’t hide it behind a peacekeeping label.
I don’t know if the F-35 is the right choice but I’m willing to be bet that no matter what we bought the total life cycle cost would be similar no matter what the airframe.
One other point is that the insinuation in all the media furor is that it’s “the most expensive toy the boys can buy” without looking at capability. It’s a slap in the face to the CF and the Air Force that they wouldn’t have the slightest idea of what they need in a jet, nor that they’ve actually looked at all the options.
I’m just surprised that a Government in this country has had enough forethought to implement a plan for a fighter replacement so that it will actually arrive when it’s needed. Unlike the Joint Support Ship, Submarines, Leopard 1 replacements, DDH replacements, fixed wing SAR, maritime helo, strategic air to air refueling…..well, you get the drift.