The F-35 is not dead

[Rockie]

You see mcrit, it has to do with whether or not the government has any credibility whatsoever in what they say. Their record on truthfulness and disclosure stands for itself as does their treatment of government employees who go against message. And speaking of message, early in Reform/Alliance/CPC history the high number of loose cannons that were and still are in their party made Harper's life very difficult. So he learned how to control what they were saying and when...ruthlessly so.

So when it comes to the F-35, the environment, the economy or pretty much anything else they are just simply not believable. I really wish I could believe them but only a hopelessly gullible rube or willfully blind right wing ideologue would.

And just so you don't think I'm being partisan here, I don't think any of the other parties are any more believable. It's just that they aren't in power and the Harperites are. I promise to be as critical of the new government when these clowns are finally tossed out.

[Beefitarian]

http://www.airspacemag.com/multimedia/v ... eport.html

[mcrit]

You see mcrit, it has to do with ...snip ...ruthlessly so.

All fine and dandy, but more to do with your personal politics vice the merits (or lack there of) of the F35.

[Rockie]

Wrong as usual mcrit. My only opposition to the plane itself is the skyrocketing cost and the fact it only has one engine. Neither of which the government are really responsible for.

However the goat show acquisition process the conservatives have bungled and lied about from the start belongs squarely in their lap. They are after all the people who sought out and won that responsibility as government aren't they?

[mcrit]

My only opposition to the plane itself is the skyrocketing cost and the fact it only has one engine. Neither of which the government are really responsible for.

Agreed all around dude. This brings us back to the main point of; Why do you insist on using this topic to air your (unrelated) beefs with the PM? It's almost like he stole your girlfriend or some such thing.

[Rockie]

Why do you insist on using this topic to air your (unrelated) beefs with the PM? It's almost like he stole your girlfriend or some such thing.

How this government has handled the F-35 file is a continuation of how they handle everything else. It's called establishing a behavioral pattern. And while Harper hasn't stolen my girlfriend, a couple of his senior cabinet ministers did misappropriate millions of dollars of our money and gave us all the finger when asked about it.

Why does that kind of stuff not bother you?

[mcrit]

a couple of his senior cabinet ministers did misappropriate millions of dollars of our money

Really? Do tell.

[Rockie]

Really? Do tell.

You see how quickly people forget?

$50 million dollars reported to parliament to be used for "border infrastructure" during the G20 summit was instead lavishly distributed around Tony Clement's riding for things that had nothing to do with border infrastructure or the G20. Tony Clement's riding is nowhere near the border.

When asked about it both Clement and his facilitator John Baird feigned insult and refused to discuss it. Eventually of course other things pushed the topic off the front burner and this issue became nothing more than a small campfire easily stomped out by an expert political operator like Baird. Misappropriate is such a benign word. Since it's public funds that Clement and the government used for their own gain under false pretenses I call it fraudulent theft.

This practice is of course not restricted to the Conservatives. The previous government was justifiably thrown out for the same sense of entitlement and hubris long after they should have been. It doesn't matter what political party is in power, when they misuse the taxpayer and forget that they work for us rather than the other way around they are done in my mind.

If everybody thought like that instead of making excuses for their political party of choice we might get more accountable government in this country. Until then...

[mcrit]

$50 million dollars reported to parliament ......... near the border

How is this related to the F35?

Shall we talk about the Liberal's Quebec Ad scam and how it relates to the Griffon procurement?

[Rockie]

How is this related to the F35?

See:

How this government has handled the F-35 file is a continuation of how they handle everything else. It's called establishing a behavioral pattern.

Shall we talk about the Liberal's Quebec Ad scam and how it relates to the Griffon procurement?

Sure if you want. I could tell you horror stories of Liberal political interference in military procurement and requirements that easily rival Harper, although perhaps not in terms of sheer governmental incompetence. Nice deflection from the Conservatives by the way but it won't work. Sounds to me like you're making excuses for your favourite political party.

[kamikaze]

Adscam concerned roughly 5 million$.

The tories have mishandled FAR FAR more than that in various ways ... All the G20 non-sense (50 mil for "border security", or the "indoor lake", and so on) alone eclipse the sponsoship scandal.

I agree with Rockie that some of the past behaviours of the tories does lend to great credibility in terms of sound spending of tax dollars ... which in turn has to make one suspicious about the F-35 program in general.

Although it has nothing to do with the aircraft itself, it's a factor in what is a major purchase with big political implications.

You can't spend 9 or 45 billion dollars of public money and think that the sustained g turn capabilities and similar factors will be the only things that matter ...

[mcrit]

See:
How this government has handled the F-35 file is a continuation of how they handle everything else. It's called establishing a behavioral pattern.

So, would constant off topic bashing of a PM you don't like be an established behavioral pattern?

I could tell you horror stories of Liberal political interference in military procurement and requirements that easily rival Harper.

...and yet you don't.....

I agree with Rockie that some of the past behaviours of the tories does lend to great credibility in terms of sound spending of tax dollars

I would agree too. The CPC has done a much better job of spending tax dollars than any government we've had in the last 20 or so years. When they get their next majority they should be able to carry on fixing this country by pushing it back to a more rational centralist position.

[mcrit]

Oh yes, need I point out that it was the liberals that got us into the F35 in the first place?

[trampbike]

$50 million dollars reported to parliament ......... near the border

How is this related to the F35?

I'm sorry, but I think he replied to this:

Really? Do tell.

Also, this:

Shall we talk about the Liberal's Quebec Ad scam and how it relates to the Griffon procurement?

...is not really consistent with:

....and this has exactly what to do with an F35?

...which seems to be the only kind of argument you present to Rockie.

[Rockie]

See:
How this government has handled the F-35 file is a continuation of how they handle everything else. It's called establishing a behavioral pattern.

So, would constant off topic bashing of a PM you don't like be an established behavioral pattern?

I could tell you horror stories of Liberal political interference in military procurement and requirements that easily rival Harper.

...and yet you don't.....

You really should make up your mind. One moment you critique me for what you perceive to be straying off topic, and the next you critique me because I don't. You're very confusing.

The CPC has done a much better job of spending tax dollars than any government we've had in the last 20 or so years. When they get their next majority they should be able to carry on fixing this country by pushing it back to a more rational centralist position.

I don't know what's funnier, your belief that the Conservatives do a better job of spending tax dollars or that you actually think they're centrist. Just how far right are you anyway?

[The Other Kind]

Just how far right are you anyway?

An equally good question is just how far left are you?

I've been following this thread, along with all of your other "I hate Harper" threads. Honestly, all I hear from you is "blah blah blah...Harper sucks...blah blah blah....Harper is anti-democratic....blah blah blah..."

And now the classic "I'm not partisan". God damn f%$king beautiful Rockie, you really should run for office.

[Rockie]

And now the classic "I'm not partisan". God damn f%$king beautiful Rockie, you really should run for office.

Harper does suck and he is anti-democratic. I truly wish that weren't so since I was once a huge supporter of his in the mistaken belief he would bring honesty and accountability back to government, but I can't change reality.

He's also in power at the moment and it makes no sense to place responsibility for what he does on the opposition since they don't make government policy and they have no ability to change it. Why would anybody with a brain hold the opposition responsible for decisions the government makes?

You also failed to notice that I have never endorsed any of the other parties, and I do not hesitate to heap blame on them for some of the things they did when they were in government. Bad government is bad government whatever colour their banner is.

I'm what is called a centrist. Of course that means I'm not right wing and to right wingers that means I'm a socialist commie. And that's because hard core right wingers are one dimensional, black/white animals who get headaches if they have to think too hard about anything. You know - the kind of people who say things like "you support us or you support the pedophiles".

Hard core left wingers are much the same but at least they have a heart.

[mcrit]

I could tell you horror stories of Liberal political interference in military procurement and requirements that easily rival Harper.

...and yet you don't.....

You really should make up your mind. One moment you critique me for what you perceive to be straying off topic, and the next you critique me because I don't. You're very confusing.

The point being that both the CPC and the Grits do the same thing (by your own admission); yet you call out the CPC and excuse the Grits. This indicates that your position is based in partisan politics vice merit. As a result most thinking people are skeptical of your position.

Just how far right are you anyway?

Just far enough. The major difference betwixt you and I is that I know I'm not in the centre.

your belief that the Conservatives do a better job of spending tax dollars or that you actually think they're centrist.

I know that they are right wing. The entrenched governmental apparatus, (CBC, Judiciary, etc.....) has been tilting to the left for decades and needs a good strong push from a right wing legislative branch to get it on track.

[Rockie]

The point being that both the CPC and the Grits do the same thing (by your own admission); yet you call out the CPC and excuse the Grits. This indicates that your position is based in partisan politics vice merit. As a result most thinking people are skeptical of your position.

No I don't excuse the Grits and never have as I've explained several times now. The CPC is in power and they aren't. When the CPC is turfed you will not find me blaming them for policies and decisions made by whoever succeeds them.

A simple enough concept that's been explained many times now on this very thread so I just don't get why you continue to claim otherwise.

[kamikaze]

"I agree with Rockie that some of the past behaviours of the tories does lend to great credibility in terms of sound spending of tax dollars


I would agree too. The CPC has done a much better job of spending tax dollars than any government we've had in the last 20 or so years. When they get their next majority they should be able to carry on fixing this country by pushing it back to a more rational centralist position."

Ha! I completely misspoke there ... I don't think the Cons have particularely great credibility myself ... Even when they have a somewhat decent idea I might agree with, the execution tends to fall flat.

I mean if you're against thje F-35 anyways, the poor execution from the government just adds to your dissatisfaction anyways.

But if you're actually in favour of the F-35 as an aircraft, then you should be extra pissed that they are completely mismanaging anf fumbling a good idea/project ... I'd think this hurts them with their base even more than with the people that wouldn't vote for them anyways.

[mcrit]

The CPC isn't handling the F35 badly. The problem is rooted in a media that is trying to manufacture a story.

[Rockie]

The CPC isn't handling the F35 badly. The problem is rooted in a media that is trying to manufacture a story.

Oh brother...

[kamikaze]

"The problem is rooted in a media that is trying to manufacture a story."

KPMG, the Auditor General, and Budget Officer all would disagree that they are either manufacturing anything, or qualify as "media".

[frosti]

Mods must be taking the week off, didn't know this was a political discussion now.

Anyway, back on track:

http://www.hilltimes.com/news/politics/ ... ters/33625

Lockheed Martin test pilot Billie Flynn, a former Canadian Forces CF-18 pilot who commanded a Canadian squadron on NORAD duty in northern Alberta, flew NATO combat missions over Kosovo in 1999, and is married to Canadian astronaut Julie Payette, told The Hill Times the F-35 will outperform Canada’s aging fleet of CF-18 fighters in “dramatic” fashion when it comes to Arctic sovereignty and security patrols—a key aspect in the debate over a new Canadian fighter as the polar ice cap recedes under climate warming.

“As the commanding officer, I was responsible for a NORAD fighter squadron, I was responsible for going to the Arctic with my guys, Arctic sovereignty is a huge part of the future, every Canadian gets that,” said the former Canadian Forces lieutenant-colonel, sitting at a boardroom table in Lockheed Martin Canada’s Ottawa office.

“What does that do?” he said, pointing to an F-35 model on the table.

“It does 50 per cent further in range than the CF-18s that I flew, that my squadron flew going to the Arctic. It allows you to go the Arctic by yourself, not refuel, it allows you to go patrol over the Arctic and stay over station longer. You go further, you stay on station longer than any airplane, by a dramatic amount, 50 per cent further than I ever could go in a CF-18, that’s dramatic, that’s measurable, everyone gets it, because the expanse of the Arctic is on a scale that only a Canadian can understand,” said Mr. Flynn.

“What do you see? In the CF-18 what you have is a little radar that looks ahead, and you have the equivalent of a fuzz buster, a radar warning receiver,” Mr. Flynn said, answering questions about criticism over F-35 capabilities.

“What you see with the sensors in this airplane, I see, in my F-35 in Texas, to the horizon, everything as far as the eye can see is what I see and sense, and by the way, no one can see me doing that,” he said in reference to F-35 stealth capability.

“I get to patrol the Arctic, I go further, I stay longer, I see dramatically further at all sorts of spectrums, more than other airplane could, and no one knows I’m there. To me this is entirely a story about Arctic sovereignty,” Mr. Flynn said.

Usual people won't believe him despite his track record of been there and done that. He doesn't seem too concerned about the single-engine of the F35 either. Oh I forgot, he is being paid by LM so his professional and experienced-backed opinion doesn't count according to the Harper hating mob.

[trampbike]

“What does that do?” he said, pointing to an F-35 model on the table.

That's one hell of a model airplane he got there!