- Hey Big Spender, why don't you spend a little time with us - Explaining the 16B for 65 F35's

Posted: 8/25/2010 10:38:15 AM The Globe and Mail
Critics set to launch new attacks on untendered deal to buy fighter jets, Daniel Leblanc, Globe and Mail, Aug. 25, 2010
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/critics-set-to-launch-new-attacks-on-f-35-deal/article1684112/

16 billion for 'future generation' fighter jets? . . .

Mr. Stephen Harper, how about 'future generation' Canadians.

Peter MacKay presented the procurement in Parliament as "eye-watering technology"
(and this is in Hansard) . . .

Hey Peter how about the 'eye-watering' costs.

"Asked at a news conference last month for 'specific examples of the uses of these aircraft,' MacKay mostly focused on what a great recruiting device they make.

'[I]t helps a great deal, I can assure you, in recruiting, to have new gear, new equipment, that is state of the art,' MacKay said."(Toronto Star)

If it is all the latest 'eye watering' gadgets MacKay wants to equip 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' bills for these toys.

"MacKay said the new fighter aircraft was needed to meet the 'increasingly complex demands' facing Canada’s air force."

Excuse me for asking, but, Mr. MacKay, just exactly what are these “increasingly complex demands” you are talking about. Just exactly what do you have in mind for Canada's armed forces that we would need such state of the art equipment.

"Lt.-Gen. André Deschamps, who heads the air force, 'This marks a huge step forward in the air force’s capability'"

And the reason we need to spend 16 billion to get this huge increase in the air force's capabilities, is . . .???

As Laurie Hawk, sorry Hawn (slip of the pen), pointed out: "Alberta and Cold Lake will certainly figure prominently in the life of the F-35," (The Ottawa Citizen)

I guess 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.

As long as the Harper policies do not consolidate the opposition then Harper can take the position 'Canadians be d[redacted]'.

We are the ones, each and every one of us to a man, woman and child, that will have to pay.

But, worse, it is also our children and our children's children that will be left to pay the crippling financial debt as well as the impacts of Harper's policies regarding just about everything.

We must prevent leaving for future generations a debt burden that is so crippling that the economy collapses into third world oblivion like almost happened with Mulroney.

Let not our legacy be a bitter resentment that we were ever given a turn at the helm.

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html