Just curious, but what makes you say that the CF-18 replacement is useless? Are the CF-18s that Canada now has not wearing out and in need of replacement? Are there still not Canadian commitments to continental air defense? The Russians are still playing their old games with the Bear into North American ADIZ.
Nobody knows what the next war will look like or who it will be against. And if it happens to be against folks who are not so computer dependent as this current one is (remember, al Queda and Isis have not surrendered or been destroyed), you will probably need something to provide more air support for your guys on the ground.
The next tank replacement.
I think he may be talking about what a debacle it’s been, Canada is trying to replace its F-18 fleet with F-35’s.
Yet last year they bought 7 F-18 off Australia, and it’s estimated the upgrade will take 5-7 years, at which point they might be obsolete.
The attempts at procuring the F-35 have also been a disaster on all fronts by the government.
And the Taliban is making a comeback!
Ken
1 Like
Sorry, wrong choice of words. The CF-18 is not useless, and neither is the physical military hardware that we have. And neither is the CF-18 Replacement (whether that’s the F/A-18, F-35, or Gripen) but it’s the actual competition the Canadian government is hosting which is a supreme waste of money. The problem is that, while obviously choosing our next combat aircraft is very important, it’s taken what? Like 8 years? If one guy at http://bestfighter4canada.blogspot.com/ can comprehensively break down the ups and downs of each aircraft in what would take a couple months of man-hours, there’s no way it would take an entire committee 8 years. Through the process (which has been restarted multiple times, mind you), we’ve blasted through millions with nothing to show for it. What if the Canadian government had just gone to the experts instead of convening a committee to choose a fighter which it had little understanding of, freeing up millions which could have gone to our cyber infrastructure. I’m not saying that cyberwarfare should be funded at the expense of conventional military equipment, but rather alongside it where the funding becomes available.
And to your point about the CF-18, @Stikpusher , well…
Methinks the Hornet is a bit long in the tooth!
1 Like
Canadians have no chance of beating the Australian military crap. Australia decided to update its submarines. Looked at many options. Then choose a French sub which was nuclear and asked for it to be diesel. Huh? Yup redesign a nuclear sub to run on fossil fuels. You know, the stuff everyone is trying to ban. Anyway after 5 years they have spent a few billion on nothing. Nothing even includes no contract yet with the French. First sub not designed yet so they cant even give a delivery date for something that they don’t have a plan for yet. Sure Canada may have acquired some old Australian planes. But at least you have serviceable planes. We don’t even have a contract to build what we need.
As for China? Well currently off the Australian coast there is a large naval exercise. Australia, USA, Japan etc etc etc. Plum in the middle of the war games sits a Chinese spy ship. True. They wont even shoo it away.
The big difference between China and the west when it comes to any military future is that while we scratch our collective butts about should we or shouldn’t we, China will simply tell their military what to do. And they will do it. Remember Russia in WW2? The Russians simply out produced what the Germans could destroy. Same with China. Anything the west can build will be out built by China.
bruce
1 Like
Well, sitting spy ships in the middle of war games is just a cultural thing for the Chinese, so we can’t judge them on their culture as that is bigoted. The Modern Military requires us to check our respective privileges–Australian, Japanese, and U.S.–and allow a developing nation to continue developing.
I think the biggest leverage the west has is that the eastern foes tend to play catch up. First the US needs to make some cool tech, then China needs to spend 5 years reverse engineering it, but by then it might be obsolete. And if not, we designed it (the USA mostly) so we should have an idea of how to defeat it.
They have never seemed to be very good at being innovative when it comes to military tech, which is a saving grace
1 Like
brekinapez I hope you are jesting! China is only a ‘developing nation’ because weak minded bureaucrats were bullied into giving China that status. By any measure no one can classify China as a ‘developing nation’. China is a bully and needs to be called out as such. Ask those in Taiwan. Vietnam. Philippians. Japan. India. Hong Hong. Australia is a good example of how China reacts when someone wants to question their actions.
Call me bigoted. Call me whatever suits. But who among us wants to be another Neville Chamberlain?
bruce
1 Like
Yes, it was a joke. Sarcasm doesn’t transmit very well in text but it might help to interpret my posts twice; once serious and once sarcastic and go with the one that seems most applicable to the topic. Or funnier.
1 Like
brekinapez no worries. I have been misinterpreted more than once myself. Here in Australia the word China is a dirty word.
1 Like
I know. I watch some of your news channels. To paraphrase one of your YouTuber’s, ‘We’re strugglin’ 'ere. Can someone help a bogan out?"
@DennisatAutoloader Dennis excellent and very interesting post. However, I don’t think the Chinese need to do much if any innovation because the West is morally bankrupt and will do it for them.
Money here, more money there and all those new Western secrets and ideas…Go East. Add in traitors like Snowden and it doesn’t appear the US could keep a secret even if its existence depended on them.
Armor_Buff I’m not so sure now days. I think the tide is turning against China. China’s military build up and their bullying in the South China sea has a lot of folks scratching their collective heads. When the likes of the UK, France etc etc etc, as well as Asian countries like India join in together with military exercises I think China can’t but see a clear message.
Everyone feared Russia’s armed forces during the cold war. Yet on close examination much of it was put together with string and sticky tape. Maybe China’s military is the same. Maybe!!
bruce
Good point @Armor_Buff . I definitely don’t want to use my experiences in research as if they’re even a fraction as relevant as those of other people’s in this thread, but I can say with certainty that it’s not clear-cut where the line for the west is drawn when it comes to sharing expertise with the Chinese. Case in point, I attend quantum computing courses offered by MIT as part of a global initiative to boost understanding of the field. People my age attend in the thousands from all over the world - except for China. Of course, I’m sure MIT would be more than happy to take as many Chinese students as possible and educate them on critical cybersecurity hardware, save for the fact the Chinese are so tight-gripped when it comes to allowing students to potentially do a mutual info transfer. But another case in point, here in Canada it’s been revealed that the RCMP has been going after two of our head virology scientists in Winnipeg for sharing bioweapons secrets with the Chinese. It seems like they are the ones who determine if we get to give them all our precious secrets.
1 Like
@DennisatAutoloader Dennis, sounds like all sorts of very cool stuff!
What’s your thoughts on the following?
Given the rancor of Chinese government propaganda, I doubt the Communist government really cares if the international tide is against China; as long as they can keep selling products and growing the economy.
However, at some point that Taiwan 
issue is going to really flare up. The mainland wants unification or way or another. The West better have a united front and make sure Beijing understands what will happen if they force the issue.
Honestly, doubt West will do anything other than whine if Beijing forces reunification with Taiwan by military action. The Chinese know that too or think they do. Short of an overt move directly against the West, China can do whatever it pleases as a regional power with minor to no repercussions.
However, China is on a “clock” is to become a rich nation before becoming an aging and old nation. So getting Taiwan back in the fold is probably on the horizon. In other words, China is getting near its zenith of power and influence and will peak in the next ten to fifteen years before descending.
China’s population is aging faster than almost all other countries in modern history. In 2050, the proportion of Chinese over retirement age will become 39 percent of the total population . China is rapidly aging at an earlier stage of its development than other countries.
I think in general old “aged” countries tend to be less aggressive so if the next ~25 to 30 years are peaceful and China gets close to the average age of ~48 that Japan has the world will become more secure in regards to issues from China.
In short China has to decide if getting Taiwan back is worth the risk of becoming an impoverished aged defeated POOR nation.
The West better clearly have a plan, communicate it, have force to back it up and most of all the WILLPOWER to use force.
Although China has a massive military on paper… the real war they wage is economic.
I agree regarding the threat to Taiwan especially after the disappearance of the Free Hong Kong movement.
China agreed to all sorts of stuff in 1997 that seems forgotten now 
I think the Chinese government & military leaders are smart. They’ve studied the lessons of the 20th century.
There’s probably a great argument that in the 1940’s Japan could have done whatever it pleased in the Pacific Rim as long as it didn’t actually attack the West. I doubt FDR would ever have been able to get the inert USA to get off the sidelines if Japan hadn’t directly attacked. In hindsight, that seems obvious.
If your system can gain advantage without fighting that’s definitely the correct path. Small advantage adds up to big advantage and leverage. The Warsaw Pact vs Nato and Cold War being an example.
Also in one sense, who can honestly blame China for wanting to have a powerful military? Previous history with the West from a Chinese perspective probably looks like weak nations get badly exploited. Today’s China probably deep down, much like Germany of the very late 19th and very early 20th century, desires to be taken seriously and treated with the respect accorded to a great nation.
My guess is there’s probably similarly between today’s China and Imperial Germany of last century’s desire for recognition and status.
1 Like
Today’s news reports that China has warned Japan that if they so much as send one soldier to help defend Taiwan they will respond with a nuclear attack. They are quoted as saying it will end in Japan again surrendering in response to a nuclear strike. Make what you will of that.
On another level. Australia has/had a huge overseas university market. One of our biggest export money makers. On top of that China has ‘bought’ into many universities with grant money. That money comes with the condition that all research must be shared with China. So maybe not ‘invented’ in China but it’s owns anyway!!
bruce
Welcome to the club.