jmt18325 said:
I find echo chambers to be a pretty dangerous place. This website has that problem on a few fronts if people like you stay quiet.
I'm going to be blunt. The problem isnt that this is an echo chamber.... that would be such a trivial thing if it was. Rather the problem is that the viewpoints expressed by several members here, are not more widely known in the public. the problem is that we have an electorate that frankly do not have the slightest understanding of this issue, and a political class that understands almost as little.
And this is the incisive part. You claim there is another side. I know for a fact that the arguments you put forward here are for the most part wrong. The vast vast vast majority of the reason why we're here today is not because the F-35 is deficient in capability, cost, or industrial benefits. Actually, for not a single one of those categories can any of the other options claim they are better than the F-35. That was known clearly as far back as 2010, and despite every effort to prove otherwise, it remains true today. And that's widely known within the bureaucracy, and now within the government.
Rather the reason why we're here is because on a constant basis we have had two political parties, who despite in possession of the facts of the program, fail to possess political will, or understanding of this issue to actually get things done. You know why the government changed its mind on this interim purchase? Because it had made a decision based on a whole bunch of BS offloaded on them ill informed "defence experts" and Boeing representatives, official and unofficial. Then when the National Post released the story, they were forced to hear actual expert opinion... then they realized just how wrong they were. So they do what every government does when confronted with an unpalatable political decision: kick the can down the road.
As a side note. the Government can't dilute the requirements to make it NORAD only: F-35 wins in that competition hands down. The can't eliminate the F-35 with the twin engine requirement: that would open them up to a CITT Lawsuit the likes of which has never been seen because LM can claim such a requirement is spurious and discriminatory to their capability. Actually, there is almost no way they can run a legitimate competition without the F-35 winning, and that alone means running one opens Canada to a lawsuit.
So what you represent is not some other claim to truth. Rather, you represent to me the pervasive public opinion that the F-35 isn't ready, costs too much, and is a poor aircraft, which if you actually are familiar with the program (and not done a few google searches), are just rubbish. The best I can describe it, its like being for brexit and thinking Britain going to be fine and dandy, despite the overwhelming opinion that told you otherwise.
That's my blunt assessment. Perhaps too blunt. However that's the dynamic that's going on here. All of these facts you're claiming here are just BS. However this government, like the last one lacks the political courage to actually do the right thing.
