Im Golden Dome treffen Kanadas F-35-Debatte und Trumps Grönland-Drohung aufeinander
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/f35-greenland-canada-missile-defence-9.7069059
Im Golden Dome treffen Kanadas F-35-Debatte und Trumps Grönland-Drohung aufeinander
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/f35-greenland-canada-missile-defence-9.7069059
14 Kommentare
We already have some F-35’s. Use those for domestic ops and use the new GRIPEN ones for overseas deployments.
Can someone explain WTF this golden dome actually is? Like are we trying to entertain the idea of placing missiles all over the arctic in case China or Russia invades?
The „Golden Dome“ is a Trump vanity project that he needed to fill one of his daily reality TV shows. It’s not real.
It’s the same thing Elon does with his cars. Promise the world, a great product. Never comes other than teasers, Repeat
“Golden Dome” is such a stupid name. Gold is one of the most fragile and malleable metals it is an extremely soft metal that’s why it always needs to be mixed with copper or zinc to make jewellery.
You wouldn’t want your dome to be made of gold if the purpose was for it to protect you. A vanity project sounds more like it.
Why not focus on being good global citizens instead of dumping $1 Trillion into that pipe dream?
Ditch the F35. They have already said for any reason the pentagon can turn them off with a flick of a switch. Doesn’t matter how superior the F35 is, if any country can disable it with a button or hold your country ransom, you shouldn’t be using it.
I believe it’s a Trump version of Israel’s iron dome.. some sort of Aerial defense network. The difference is it doesn’t exist.
If only Trump’s dad had used a dome
As a Canadian….The F-35 welds us to the U.S military…they have the software and they won’t share. There may have been a time I would ignore that. But no longer.
no to F35s, no to golden dome and time to get out of NORAD as well.
This article obfuscates what should be the key questions in defense spending for Canada – what are the key threats Canada faces, and how best to defend against them?
A missle defense scheme defends against really only one threat, a limited exchange of ICBMs. And it’s questionable how well it will even do that. What plausible scenario would we, or even the US, likely experience that specific kind of threat, without a whole lot of other, more important threats coming out at the same time?
Likewise, the whole discussion around F-35 vs Gripens rarely seems to frame itself around strategic aims. Sure the F-35 has more capability, but against which threats do those extra capabilities actually matter?
I’d argue these areas of threat are extremely niche, hypothetical only, and don’t reflect the current geostrategic realities Canada faces. Most importantly, they signal an old paradigm where the military issues Canada face are expected to be eminently winnable, and the primary goal is to avoid any casualties. That’s a luxury we may not have, not with plausible threats against us and allies from China, Russia, and most importantly, the United States.
Golden dome is as real as the Star Wars program in the 80s
We already have a cooperation agreement in place. Everyone agrees more missile defense is a good thing. But what Trump wants is full control, which is not realistic as it requires Canadian and Greenland territory.