…I think you may be underestimating how bad China is in this regard.
I question why we’re buying even 16 of these shitty, single-engine trouble-prone and hugely overpriced F-35 jets in view of the Orange Felon currently running the USA who’s taken the position that from now on the US will be buying nothing at all from Canada. We’re forging new alliances with Europe, and we should at least explore how practical it would be to buy new fighter jets from them.
And I think you misunderstand how bad the direction America is heading in is. China’s never exterminated or deported half its own population, for one. Or exterminated the entire population of Africa and South America.
Or destroyed modern civilization, but of course after that there won’t be much in the way of historians to make any comparisons.
I had forgotten that suitcase nukes were a thing. Apparently they require maintenance, but I’d like greater detail about that.
The first nation to install one of these devices should make it look like an attempt by China to frame Russia for planting one of these devices in order to blame the Hungarians.
Even without politics and even if Washington and Ottawa were on the best of terms, the F-35 wasn’t an ideal jet for Canada anyway. As you point out, Canada’s distance is vast and a single-engine jet means you can’t limp to a runway in an engine failure. And Canada had little to no practical use for stealth.
Super Hornet or F-15EX Super Eagle would have been best, especially since CF-18 was already similar to Super Hornet.
I suspect much of the money for them has already been handed over to the USA. Since they got your money you should at least take possession of their goods to deny them having both the money and the jets. Jets they can resell to somebody else or seize to use themselves.
Good article on The War Zone:
One customer that one would think really has to be second-guessing now would be Finland, which placed an $8 billion order for 64 Lightning II jets years ago. With the Finns being that close to Russia, and so close to Sweden, it might be in best Finnish interests for them to ditch the F-35 and go with Saab’s Gripen instead.
Interesting update: Boeing has just been awarded the contract for the F-47 NGAD fighter jet. However, unlike the F-22 Raptor, which was prohibited from foreign sale by Congress, this F-47 may be available for sale. If it is, then it might be hard for some American allies to pass up a chance to buy this jet even if they hate Trump.
Only if they are foolish enough to supply their defense using a nation that is totally unreliable at best, and likely their future enemy.
And which may have kill switches buried away in the software for each plane.
Danish conservative MP makes the case for not buying American.
"Buying American weapons is a security risk that we can not run. "
“After weeks of speculation, the Pentagon formally denies having the ability to remotely disable @LockheedMartin’s F-35 fighter jets.”
Given Trump’s threats to Denmark and Greenland, the Danes would be foolish to trust the Pentagon’s word.
Trust once destroyed is gone.
Also given that the fighters regularly require replacement parts and software updates there’s nothing stopping them from adding a kill switch later. Or more subtle stuff like spyware.
Or just not providing the replacement parts or software upgrades, a couple of weeks before they invade Greenland.
Europe has potential alternatives in the works - the Tempest and the New Generation Fighter from the GCAP (UK, Japan and Italy) and FCAS (France, Germany and Spain). If tensions escalate and/or the U.S. departs NATO, I imagine more resources could be poured into those projects. The expertise exists in situ, the U.S. just has the advantage of unified logistics and a larger manufacturing base.
It wasn’t that long ago we had this little international spat:
Methinks that there might be a couple of defense force mandarins in Canberra who are wondering whether this bit of toothpaste can be put back in the tube.