News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.9K     0 

EBT said:
If Trump blocked military sales to Canada, he would be in essence declaring Canada an enemy nation. You only block military sales to your enemies. If that ever-happened Canada.....
Click to expand...
It did happen. The US refused to allow Britain or France to sell nuclear submarines to Canada.

"Under the 1958 US–UK Mutual Defence Agreement, the US had the right to block the sale of submarine nuclear reactors by the United Kingdom to any third party (i.e. Canada), and under a 1959 agreement between the US and Canada the US had the right to block the purchase of submarine nuclear reactors by Canada from any third party (i.e. the United Kingdom or France)."

Canada-class submarine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Admiral Beez said:
It did happen. The US refused to allow Britain or France to sell nuclear submarines to Canada.

"Under the 1958 US–UK Mutual Defence Agreement, the US had the right to block the sale of submarine nuclear reactors by the United Kingdom to any third party (i.e. Canada), and under a 1959 agreement between the US and Canada the US had the right to block the purchase of submarine nuclear reactors by Canada from any third party (i.e. the United Kingdom or France)."

Canada-class submarine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...

On that note, maybe we can pick up what the Australians gave up on - the Suffren class SSNs from the French.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Admiral Beez said:
It did happen. The US refused to allow Britain or France to sell nuclear submarines to Canada.

"Under the 1958 US–UK Mutual Defence Agreement, the US had the right to block the sale of submarine nuclear reactors by the United Kingdom to any third party (i.e. Canada), and under a 1959 agreement between the US and Canada the US had the right to block the purchase of submarine nuclear reactors by Canada from any third party (i.e. the United Kingdom or France)."

Canada-class submarine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
The United States blocked the sale in part based on an agreement signed between the United States and Canada:

" Under a 1959 agreement between the US and Canada the US had the right to block the purchase of submarine nuclear reactors by Canada from any third party (i.e. the United Kingdom or France)"

I don't know why any Canadian leader would sign such an agreement allowing the United States to veto the sale of any commodity to Canada but let's face it we have been led by mostly stupid people during most of our existence. If that were not the case Canadians would be the richest people on earth given the wealth of natural resources, we have. In 1959 John Diefenbaker, who cancelled the Avro Arrow was Prime Minister so not surprising he would sell out Canada by signing an agreement allowing the US to veto sales to Canada.

I would hope in 2025 if the United States were ever to try to block a sale of European military technology to Canada that whoever is Prime Minister makes it clear that we consider that by taking such action the United States is signaling that it considers Canada an enemy country and that we will be reconsidering our alliances accordingly. We can't continue as a vasal state of the U.S. any longer.
 
EBT said:
The United States blocked the sale in part based on an agreement signed between the United States and Canada:

" Under a 1959 agreement between the US and Canada the US had the right to block the purchase of submarine nuclear reactors by Canada from any third party (i.e. the United Kingdom or France)"

I don't know why any Canadian leader would sign such an agreement allowing the United States to veto the sale of any commodity to Canada but let's face it we have been led by mostly stupid people during most of our existence. If that were not the case Canadians would be the richest people on earth given the wealth of natural resources, we have. In 1959 John Diefenbaker, who cancelled the Avro Arrow was Prime Minister so not surprising he would sell out Canada by signing an agreement allowing the US to veto sales to Canada.

I would hope in 2025 if the United States were ever to try to block a sale of European military technology to Canada that whoever is Prime Minister makes it clear that we consider that by taking such action the United States is signaling that it considers Canada an enemy country and that we will be reconsidering our alliances accordingly. We can't continue as a vasal state of the U.S. any longer.
Click to expand...
So what. Null and void. Trump ripped up NAFTA.
 
afransen said:
So what. Null and void. Trump ripped up NAFTA.
Click to expand...

Those defence deals were signed to get American protection. It's those deals that underpin NORAD. And it's those deals why Canada has always approached defence spending so unseriously. Canada, the only G7 country where the Health portfolio is more sought after than Foreign Affairs or Defence.

Go back some years on this forum. How many people have basically insinuated I was a war monger for saying we should spend more on defence? Heck, I think a few folks did that even after the Feb 2022. This Canadian naivete is now being paid for.

It's actually really frustrating for everyone in the CAF right now. Go on the Reddit threads and you'll see how mad folks are about the "Cancel the F-35" campaign from the very people who likely brought us to the rust out we're at right now.

With stopping the Canada Class, the Americans also exercised a veto over the UK supplying us. This influence over the UK, by the way, is why the French are also arguing for substantial exclusion of the British, from European defence projects.

We have to buy some F-35s. That's just the cost of the Hornet fleet rusting out. But I would love to see a real grand bargain and strategic partnership with France. Take some used Rafales as a bridge fleet and join FCAS. And then start discussing buying nuclear subs from the French. Incidentally the only nuke fleet that uses Low Enriched Uranium, like our CANDUs. Make that strategic partnership cover nuclear power too. Etc

They are the only country that can genuinely help us somewhat balance the US.
 
kEiThZ said:
The Shorfin Barracuda (which would be my pick too) was not an SSN.
Click to expand...
We’re entering the height of battery technology. We need silent, lurking subs that can run under the ice. That’s not necessarily nukes.
kEiThZ said:
They are the only country that can genuinely help us somewhat balance the US.
Click to expand...
Of course we then open ourselves up to being cut off by France, as Israel discovered. In their case Israel knocked off the Dassault Mirage and made the Kfir.
 
Admiral Beez said:
We’re entering the height of battery technology. We need silent, lurking subs that can run under the ice. That’s not necessarily nukes.

Of course we then open ourselves up to being cut off by France, as Israel discovered. In their case Israel knocked off the Dassault Mirage and made the Kfir.
Click to expand...

Nukes offer unparalleled flexibility and would simplify the logistics - especially given the infrastructure and accessibility issues in the Arctic. And like @kEiThZ said, the French subs rely on.some level of nuclear expertise in their host country - which we have (and Australia don’t).

And the complaints about the French so far as the subs are concerned is moot anyways - the US loath to share their nuclear tech, and wanted to have the Arctic as their own playground. The French therefore is your only viable choice.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Admiral Beez said:
We’re entering the height of battery technology. We need silent, lurking subs that can run under the ice. That’s not necessarily nukes
Click to expand...

Still not the same endurance as a nuke though. Or the same speed.

Admiral Beez said:
Of course we then open ourselves up to being cut off by France, as Israel discovered. In their case Israel knocked off the Dassault Mirage and made the Kfir.
Click to expand...

Just as we risk with the Americans. Turns out the only way to mitigate such a risk is to buy mixed fleets.

Also, I can't envision a scenario where we are on the wrong side of the French. Not the same for the Israelis.
 
kEiThZ said:
Still not the same endurance as a nuke though. Or the same speed.
Click to expand...
No, but we could get the AIP boats now from Korea (see #7 in this paper) while we wait the two decades for the first SSN to arrive. We'd keep our skills and personnel in submarines after the non-AIP Victorias end their service lives.

Brazil is building their own nuclear submarines, with French reactors and other help. Canada has the 9th largest global GDP, higher than South Korea, Russia or Brazil. If we wanted indigenous arms development and supply, we'd have it.
 
Last edited:
Admiral Beez said:
No, but we could get the AIP boats now from Korea (see #7 in this paper) while we wait the two decades for the first SSN to arrive. We'd keep our skills and personnel in submarines after the non-AIP Victorias end their service lives.

Brazil is building their own nuclear submarines, with French reactors and other help. Canada has the 9th largest global GDP, higher than South Korea, Russia or Brazil. If we wanted indigenous arms development and supply, we'd have it.
Click to expand...
I think we need to be practical. We need capability, not just aspirations.
 
Is Trump determined to destroy Lockheed Martin?

1742620574414.png
 
guavadelic said:
Is Trump determined to destroy Lockheed Martin?

View attachment 638627
Click to expand...
I don't think that Trump is determined to destroy Lockheed-Martin. He is just too STUPID to realize what he is saying and after Trumps STUPID comments only a very STUPID country would ever want to buy a "toned down" "F-47" fighter jet.

Aside from being a narcissist and psychopath Trump is paranoid and doesn't trust anyone and that includes America's closest allies.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top