this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2025
219 points (96.6% liked)

Canada

9641 readers
1034 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Linked National Post on purpose. Given their bias I believe they'd present the worst case scenario.

E: Apparently the article is from 2016 so the cost is likely higher today.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 86 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Why even pay the cancelation fee?

It's not like anything going on now is legitimate.

[–] lettruthout@lemmy.world 58 points 2 months ago

Or promise to pay but never do, like Trump did for his campaign rally expenses.

[–] CircaV@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Exactly. Canada should just choose to ignore it. Just like the US is ignoring international deals they’ve signed with other countries. Thing is: Canada has honour and our actual signature means something when we sign agreements. I don’t think Canada will sink as low as the US.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 45 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Why bother paying anything? Let it go to court. Threatening annexation should fall under some kind of hostilities clause, national security clause, or force majeure clause. Anyway who's going to collect?

The US government can pay ~~MD~~ Lockheed, they're the ones who threatened annexation.

Edit... Fixed above, not sure why I had MacDonell Douglas on my mind...strange substitution for a company that no longer exists under that name.

[–] sik0fewl@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Not saying you're wrong, but certainly that would be added to the made-up list of reasons to annex Canada.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

If it is mentioned, say "We have changed our course and will pay in full." Then don't pay. Wait a week and say "We changed course and won't pay." repeatedly flip flop like a Trump.

[–] CircaV@lemmy.ca 44 points 2 months ago (2 children)

We need to pull out of this deal, the last thing Canada needs is to buy weapons from the country that has designs to annex us. And that sells weapons with kill switches.

[–] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 11 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Weapons they need permission to use.

[–] CircaV@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 months ago

Exactly. Absolutely it has to be cancelled based on the fact that the imminent danger to Canada is from the US. No way we should be buying their weapons, listening to their media etc.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That feels like an internet rumour. How would that even work? Like if someone took out LM's servers all F-35s in the world would no longer function? If an enemy jammed the signal they wouldn't work?

There's no need to invent problems anyway. The US could potentially cut off Canada from parts needed to maintain the planes and that's reason enough to cancel it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 42 points 2 months ago

Doug Ford spent much more on canceling various contracts on a whim. I say bail.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 37 points 2 months ago (5 children)

America is currently at war with us, declared abruptly and out of nowhere. They just decided one day "we want to annex Canada!"

Even if Donald's presidency is short-lived and a new slightly saner and less stupid administration takes control, I don't think it's a good idea to be trusting the Americans any more.

We need to disentangle ourselves from any military dependence on such ridiculously unreliable "allies." I'm all for this.

[–] PenguinMage@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

As an American I sadly agree. This is an overreach that shouldn't be ignored. And if it is OK now it's obviously not off the table sometime down the road... this isnt something g you just shove under the carpet.

[–] pretzelz@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

You would imagine there would be a clause in the contract for exactly this scenario. If there's not, it's going to be a common one in contacts going forward...

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 months ago

I think everyone is thinking the same way. I think the probability of the US invading is low, but there is a probability.

Even if the US never uses their military against us, there's a very real chance they withhold parts for military equipment as leverage in a negotiation. They are already withholding military aid from Ukraine as leverage after all. That alone makes it imperative we end Canada's dependency on the US defense industry.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Aconite@lemmy.ca 31 points 2 months ago

Fuck it. They're an intelligence hazard and that's cheap in government terms.

[–] witty_username@feddit.nl 31 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Don't cancel. "Pause" it until further notice

[–] chuck@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

No say will cancel it and then pause it then cancel the landing gear then pause that then cancel it pause it till it comes back looking like the avro arrow

[–] Grimpen@lemmy.ca 27 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I've been advocating joining GCAP, an effort by Japan, UK and Italy to make a 6th gen fighter. It isn't scheduled to deliver the final design until 2035 though, so we would still need a stopgap.

Still, it would send a pretty strong signal and also allow as a path to reinvigorate our domestic aerospace defence industry.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

and also allow as a path to reinvigorate our domestic aerospace defence industry.

Avro Arrow centenary edition in 2059.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca 22 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes. In this case I linked it on purpose because of their handlers.

[–] AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
  1. But it continues the notion that we should rely on them for information, when they have most certainly poisoned Canadian culture and politics.
  2. Also, by sending users to an American site, it increases their revenues, when this money could have gone to a Canadian media site.
  3. And if you aren't already aware, Canadian owned media is deliberately neglected because it's contrary to a particular elite group in this country... And yeah, we should support and grow Canadian owned media regardless of political party.

But if you still insist on supporting American media...

[–] Global_Liberty@lemmy.ml 21 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Of course Canada needs to leave. Do Canadian politicians think the US will supply it with parts as it invades?

Buy some Gripen and/or Eurofighters and join GCAP.

[–] lambipapp@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Would love to see some buy in on Saabs next gen project

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 21 points 2 months ago

That's less than the total incurred costs of Ford's decision to break the contract with The Beer Store a year earlier than scheduled.

[–] sirspate@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's an article from 2016.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fletch@mapstodon.space 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah Europe should also cancel, the Saabs are excellent while the F35 always has had… issues, and we also got the inferior version too.

[–] fletch@mapstodon.space 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@nightwatch_admin you must make it at home, at scale, without reliance on enemies or potential enemies. It’s a reasonably simple matrix to optimise. Eurofighter and Saab, new Euro. Make Australia and Canada and New Zealand and UK demonstrate their commitment to a rules base world.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] adamsteer@mapstodon.space 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

@fletch @avidamoeba
IKR
it's a geostrategic steal compared to staying entrenched! I hope #auspol is listening.

[–] fletch@mapstodon.space 5 points 2 months ago

@adamsteer @avidamoeba USA are gone from NATO, stand up, dig in. Is it the easy road? NO! Do you want a future where you steal a toilet for your home town? That’s where you’re headed, Russia

[–] fletch@mapstodon.space 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

@adamsteer @avidamoeba time to put a proper moat around “EURO interoperability” interoperability with USA is a trap

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 months ago

Notwithstanding clause. Don't pay a fucking dime.

Besides war declared by US, that makes US permissions on every flight a deal breaker, the plane is a POS, and we should be refunded for returning every existing plane we may already have. Cancelling deal for cause, with zero penalty, despite any contract is the right move.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 months ago

Ford blew twice that to put beer in gas stations. Clearly we have the money to blow 🤡

[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I'd be hoping that Trump's time in power would be far outlived by the F-35 program and would be only a footnote in the history of friendship between Canada and the US. But nobody who knows what the future has in reserve.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 6 points 2 months ago

Significantly. The F-35 programme is a 50-year one. Trump won’t even be alive in half that.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago

Trump won't outlive the F35, but the distrust of the US will.

The US cut off military supplies to a country (Ukraine) during an active conflict. Trump did this as leverage in a negotiation. That's a line that can't be crossed, and he crossed it. There were no articles of impeachment, and most Americans didn't pay it any mind. So this is how Americans do business now.

So we should expect the US to use military supplies as leverage in negotiations going forward. Using US equipment means CAF's readiness is in constant peril for the foreseeable future. Currently it's at the whims of a deranged old man. But it will always be a bargaining chip for future US Presidents.

The only way to ensure CAF readiness is to end the use of all US equipment. It's not solely about Trump, it's about what the US has become.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LeFantome@programming.dev 10 points 2 months ago

Yes please. So clearly the right move.

[–] crabigno@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] crabigno@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 months ago

And investment. 1/5 of my lifetime economies are now in European aerospace and military companies shares. Something I would have never thought I would do, as a fundamentally anti militaristic person. I don't even care if I don't get any economic benefits out of it.

[–] Nils@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago

These are numbers from 2016. Is there any place where we can read these contracts? Maybe with the current situation, conditions are changing. Hopefully, people put a clause in case of animosity between countries.

load more comments
view more: next ›