Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Would Michael Ignatieff Drive This Car If PM?

So it appears an election is a done deal. And Michael Ignatieff is going to harp on about buying new fighter jets for our armed forces. But I'm wondering, if Ignatieff thinks it's ok for our armed forces to use 30 year old planes in missions such as what is going on in Libya, is he prepared to apply the same fiscal measures and austerity to himself were he e PM? That car in the picture shares something in common with our CF-18 fighter jets. Both were delivered new in the same year.

So Mr. Ignatieff, will you ride around in this car? After all, Canadians need national daycare. Hey, if you cancel those corporate tax cuts you might be able to get the windows tinted and a personalized plate that reads COLISHN


Frances said...

Can just see the new Conservative ad: "Jean Chretien cancelled the new helicopters, and ...... men have since died in Seaking crashes. Michael Ignatieff wants to cancel the new jets - how many deaths will he be responsible for because of this gesture?"

Fay said...

Give out brave men and women in the Canadian military the equipment the deserve.

ridenrain said...

Isn’t that Liberal Transport critic, John McCallum’s car?
I heard he was having trouble remembering where it was, what it was and who made it.

Fay said...

That should be give OUR brave men and women.

VeryVeryConcerned said...

I dont think the issue is around the need for jets. Its how much these prices have gone up for these aircraft. Its now $29 billion dollars cdn and climbing.

Even the CNN article below shows the US Pentagons price concern.

AToryNoMore said...

Frances said.March 23, 2011 5:04:00PM PDT
Frances you and other readers would be interested to know that Canada recently purchased 6 used Chinook Helicopters sight unseen from the US for our Afghan mission.

The sad thing is that Canada had Chinooks, until the Mulroney Progressive Conservatives sold them to the Dutch in 1991. Canada was broke, no money.

Read the article below that describes this.

alecz_dad said...

Spurious argument.

What if we were talking instead about a 1982 FERRARI, 308 GT like Tom Selleck roared around Oahu on Magnum P.I.?

Wouldn't most people want those kind of wheels in their driveway? You betcha.

Whether or not the first CF-18s went into service in 1982 is irrelevant. There are several other less expensive and proven models that could easily serve Canada's needs in the future, that DND and the government steadfastly refused to even consider.

The Harper Government has consistently lowballed the cost of this program, when even now the Pentagon admits they'll cost more, while at the same time uselessly knocking a couple of points off the GST, while pleading poor when it comes to programs that would actually help large numbers of Canadians, instead of just a relatively few workers and investors in the defence industry.

AToryNoMore said...

The US are using the F-15 which was first put into service in 1972.

The US F-15 planes will be in service to 2025. Open the link below.

Canada is flying the F-18.

God bless our military men and women from all wars and conflicts and their magnificent contribution to our country and freedom. God bless them all.

AToryNoMore said...

Sorry, I should have said the F-15 are being used by the US in Lybia.

AToryNoMore said...


How are the Russians building 70 of their new fifth generation fighters for $2 billion dollars?

Why is the Canada paying $29 billion dollars and climbing for 65fifth generation fighters?

Thats why there should be contract bids on this job!

Read the Russian article below.

ridenrain said...

Just a news flash for AToryNoMore.

Those F15’s delivered in 1972 are no longer flying. They’re in the boneyard in Arizona or in the Evergreen Aviation museum in Oregon.
You are very uninformed.

AToryNoMore said...

ridenrain said...
March 24, 2011 5:16:00 AM PDT

No so my friend. You know not what about you speak.

Here is a clip of an F15 that the US have in Lybia that crashed. The F15 is still used by the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia. The F-15 are in the desert alright but not the ones in Arizona.

AToryNoMore said...

The US air force has said only that B-2, F-15 and F-16 fighters are participating in operations over Libya. The US's involvement in Libya is being run by Africa Command, which is based in Stuttgart, Germany.

Ruth said...

I don't care how much the planes cost, our men and women deserve the best. Better to spend the money on the planes than on any National childcare or eldercare program that would end up costing a lot more.

AToryNoMore said...

Ruth don't sell our seniors and kids out;

Our seniors defended us. They created our secured and peaceful way of life.

We owe them respect and a decent future as they gave us in their prime.

The children you speak of will hopefully be there for us in our time, as they would have bebefitted for the strong values of their parents and grandparents have instilled in them.

Ruth said...

thanks, but I happen to be one of the seniors you talk about. There are scads of Provincial homecare programs now to help seniors when they need it.

AToryNoMore said...

That is an odd statement Ruth, very very odd.

I wonder how you could justify a wildly high expenditure for these aircraft at the expense of seniors trying to stay in their homes, active in the community, struggling to pay taxes, property and otherwise and properly fed.

The $600 million for seniors works out to about a paltry $1.64 a day per individual or for a couple $800.00 which is $2.19 a couple per day?

The conservtives recoginize the problem but display an unwilling ness to address the real economic concerns of our proud seniors.

Which is first, the respect and dignity of life for the twilight years of our seniors or single source contract jets procurements with no bidding?

AToryNoMore said...

The truth of the matter is that Canada is using newer fighter jets in Libya than the Americans are.

The Canadians are using F-18's and the Americans, God bless them too are using F-15 and F-16 fighters that have been around for forty years.

Thats the thing about aircraft. You can change engines in them, switch up the tecnology on them, trick them out with newer gadgets and keep them going for years.

The American B-52 Stratofortress long range bomber is still flying missions evey day. They are 60 years old.

The old Russian Bear propellor bomber that has been flying in and around our airspace since back in the late fifties and sixties is 50 years old. The Russians still use it.

Anonymous said...

The Americans are also buying about 100 times as many F-35's as we are, so your argument about them having older planes in use now, as some sort of brilliant proof that they're not needed is pretty lame. I hate to be the one to take of your Liberal media blinders bud.

AToryNoMore said...

Anonymous said...
March 25, 2011 6:22:00 AM PDT

Hey, I dont make this up. Unlike you, I back up what I say with the evidence. Take note of the link below where the US Penatgon is very concerned about the price of the F-35. That article is also from last year.

Pentagon: F-35 fighter jet cost doubles

AToryNoMore said...

I wish the 'blue true believers' would actually say things that they can back up. Thats part of whats needed in an intelleigent adult conversation of voters. People tend to make wild statements they cant back up with fact.

Our world is changing and our country is changing with it. We are told one thing but in many cases its something else.

For example, our Canadian air force is flying out of Germany. However Germany is not part of the UN forces on this mission. Odd isnt it.

Here is a part of the article shown below.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel's decision to opt out of any military action in Libya has drawn criticism at home, putting the government on the defensive over a policy that opinion polls suggest should be popular with voters.

Cut and paste the link below and see for yourself.

China reaches out to Germany on Libya

AToryNoMore said...

March 25, 2011 6:45:00 AM PDT

Corection, Canada is flying out of Sicily and the Americans are flying out of Germany.

AToryNomore said...

The non-confidence vote has been passed.

Harper will soon realize that he is about to be consumed by the monster he has created.

paulsstuff said...

OK, so I have to ask. If the Conservatives are in contempt of Parliament because the oposition says they won't produce documents to show the actual cost of programs such as the F-35's, how can PBO Page give an accurate figure?

As for your complaints about the cost of said figheter jets, the first expenditure isn't for 3 more years, roughly around the time the budget will be balanced. Matter of fact, the Liberal National daycare plan is more expensive than the cost of the fighter jets, which by the way will cost less than what we spend on the CBC over the same time period.

As for the election, watching Iggy squirm today about a possible coalition sure put a smile on my face. If Iggy says yes to a coalition, Conservatives get a majority. If Iggy refuses to give a straight answer for the next 36 days, Conservatives get a majority.

AToryNoMore said...

paulsstuff said...
March 25, 2011 4:04:00 PM PDT

Harper didn't hang around to answer any questions of the press on his historic non-confidence defeat.

No wonder he doesnt want to go to the Royal Wedding. How would you like to sit there with other world leaders with everyone pointing at our guy, defeated and probably to be defeated again in May.

The new conservatives wont balance the budget. They just keep spending money we dont have. Gifts for everyone but we are stuck with the credit card bills for years.

So until Harper and Flaherty, the big talking spenders and mega defecit creators go away, no right of centre voter like me, a homeless fiscal conservative, will ever vote for these guys until the party dumps them and we are welomed back to a fiscal conservative home.

How is this unfiscal conservative stuff workin' for ya' now?

AToryNoMore said...

Cost of Fighter F-35 Jets?

Quote below is in the article.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released on 15 March 2011, show average unit acquisition costs to be in the same order of magnitude as the PBO estimates.

Read more:

Anonymous said...

As someone suggested: scrap the CBC and buy the jets. Simple. Problem solved.

The Trusty Tory said...

Hahah! Yeah, I don't think so. ;) Boy, is that ever snazzy.

The Trusty Tory said...

Oh, and we need new jets. Get over it. That's part of being a COUNTRY, having the ability to defend ourselves somewhat. Unless, of course, we should just surrender our military sovereignty to the Americans. You'd love that, wouldn't you?

AToryNoMore said...

To The Trusty Tory
March 26, 2011 8:54:00 PM PDT

No one including the Librals is arguing against the planes. Its just that the conservatives have no idea about the dollar amount they will spend for them. No one including the Harper Government, or as of today what was the Harper Government, knows squat.

Ahhhh, and whats the North American security perimeter all about if we are not giving away some of our military and security soverignty to the United States?

paulsstuff said...

That link you provided validates my point. Page himself admits he doesn't know what DND used in it's formula for estimating it's cost. DND pegs the cost at $16 billion over 20 years, Page $30 billion over 30 years. It's safe to assume the older the aircraft gets the higher the maintenance costs. so PBO and DND are not that far apart.

It's also been pointed out Page added in costs of research and development, which WE don't pay for. Deduct that amount and the figures are even closer.

So are you in favor of spending over $100 billion on national daycare and elderly care? National daycare would be something only a small percentage of Canadians would be able to use. It excludes shift workers, those in rural areas, families with no children. It allows Quebec to keep the billins they get to spend on whatever they want.