- Harper Takes Cold War out of Cold Storage

Posted: 8/1/2010 11:35:32 AM the Globe and Mail
Russian jet confrontation a 'close one,'
Defence official says, Daniel Leblanc, 30 Jul.'10, The Globe and Mail
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/russian-jet-confrontation-a-close-one-defence-official-says/article1657338/ tab 94

[Tory talking points: "More proof that Michael Ignatieff isn't in it for Canadians. He's just in it for himself. "]

Anyone see the irony in this.

In fact, this is

"More proof that Stephen Harper isn't in it for Canadians. He's just in it for himself, the Con's and their small core of die-hard supporters with epi-centre in Alberta."

Spending 16 billion - as one person pointed out, before interest charges (and what about the HST? Oh, sorry, I mean import duties) - is for the benefit of this small core of die-hard right wing extremists.

As Laurie Hawk, sorry Hawn (I'm a little bleary-eyed on Sunday morning), pointed out: "Alberta and Cold Lake will certainly figure prominently in the life of the F-35,"

I guess in a way there is some kind of logic (of the political, partizan kind) behind it, after all, the money is from all the revenues flowing from Alberta to the Canadian Federal purse due to their oil and gas; and, Alberta is the reason Harper is in power.

Also, MacKay is stretching, severely, when he tries to use this as an excuse for spending 16 billion of our hard earned tax dollars, oh sorry, Alberta's hard earned oil revenues, on the 65 F-35's. He is trying to appeal to us on an emotional basis, as opposed to any type of rationality.

There is no indication that the Russian violated Canadian airspace, or Canadian sovereignty, to any extent. This was with the current jets, CF-18's, which by the way were just modernized to be good to go until 2017 (if it is all the latest 'eye watering' gadgets MacKay wants to provide our troops with, make DS's standard issue - although the cost of the games may rack up a billion or two as anyone with kids will know, this should reduce the 'eye-watering' bill for these toys).

So, doesn't this incident demonstrates very visibly that what we have now is sufficient.

Perhaps, Peter MacKay could do a rational analysis of this incident and why spending 16 billion, triple net, on 65 F-35 fighter jets would change this type of behaviour by the Russians, Canada's reaction to it, or the end result, one iota.

Unless, perhaps, MacKay is suggesting that we could have shot them out of the air.

In fact, if the Russian are doing it to see what our capabilities are, one might suspect that they would increase their activities if we have the F-35's.

And, it is not likely that we would try to shoot them out of the air, no matter what vintage jets we have.

The Russians were outside Canadian airspace, apparently had no intention of violating our airspace and apparently according to them they had a right to be there and had informed the Canadians before hand.

Also, these are propeller driven planes and why would our current jets not be able to 'intercept' them, or force/shoot them down if so desired. I don't care how fast a prop plane is it simply can't compare to a jet fighter, of any post war vintage.

This Con talking point is just another example of Con-MEP's.

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html