- cross-posted to:
- canada@lemmy.ca
- cross-posted to:
- canada@lemmy.ca
You must log in or register to comment.
It really feels like if the CBC is going to write an article about a procurement narrowing to two bidders, and is going to list the specs of one of the bids, it should also list the specs of the other bid.
Looking at the boats on offer, only one currently fills the specification Canada is insisting on. The KSS-3 from ROK has 10 VLS in its block 2 configuration, the German Type 212 has 0 VLS. If Canada requires the capability to deploy ballistic missiles that leaves it with the Korean boat , that’s also a very smart requirement since it allows for the nuclear deterrent that is obviously needed to be added down the line. The KSS-3 is currently deploying the Hyunmoo 4-4 ballistic missile, range of 800km, payload (I think) 1-2000kg. That could sling a thermonuclear warhead.
Writing tip: the first time you use an acronym, you’re supposed to write out the whole term and put the acronym in brackets, then you can use the acronym freely after that.
And I fail to see why it would be obvious that Canada would suddenly start a nuclear weapons program when we never have before.
Because the invasion of Ukraine proved that security guarantees by the US mean jack shit. They gave up their nukes on the promise of security by the States, look where that landed them.
I mean, I get it, but there’s also a not insignificant difference for American interests between letting Russia attack a former Soviet country on the other side of the world, and letting Russia attack a country that sits between America and a different part of America.
It would also be a deterrent against other countries besides Russia. Like for example a country that’s lead by a guy with dementia that has already used military force in inappropriate ways and has expressed in interest in making Canada part of his country.
deleted by creator
The CBC has done other articles recently on the South Korean bids. It seems more that they are just spreading out the stories as they get ‘exclusives.
Here are two ones from May that CBC linking in the newer article featuring the details on the Norwegian-German subs.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/south-korea-canada-submarines-artillery-defence-1.7523180
If they’re doing it intentionally, then they’re just intentionally writing badly and making me read them less.
But they do it constantly across a wide variety of topics. They write an article and provide some fact or stat but almost always fail to provide the context, or the full statistics that would make that a meaningful stat to compare. Or they provide a stat that doesn’t actually tell you anything about the question at hand.
I honestly just think that they have either crappy writers, crappy editors, or some combination of them just fundamentally lacking scientific / logical thinking skills.
Our government throws a hissy fit over BC buying civilian ferries from a Chinese shipyard. But they put control of our military assets into the hands of foreign powers all the time.
What the hell.
Some countries are our allies and others are not.
Like the USA under the current administration / trends? Do allies attempt to annex allies via economic warfare and separatist influence campaigns? And if the states can ‘flip’ from ally to adversary, why not others?
The current global situation means that self-reliance for critical sectors is of paramount importance – trade and globalism is fine for non-critical things, and for general collaboration on broader initiatives such as global warming/climate change (for countries that agree on it). Ferries, as civilian infrastructure, are not individually critical - if they fail for some reason, it’s “bad”, but it isn’t military failure levels of bad. Today we may think of Germany as an ally, for example, but the AFD and far right have significant support there, and it’s entirely plausible that within the span of the sub contract Germany will trend more like the USA is today. It’s also plausible, although still relatively unlikely, that China could expand its borders and push for SK to be absorbed by NK as part of a regional conflict wherein the USA doesn’t bother to support its traditional allies / values.
Additionally, I have far more confidence in Canada’s ability to take on civilian ferries, and their maintenance in the face of global uncertainties, than I do in Canada’s ability to maintain foreign made military vessels with far more complex systems. Ergo such specialties should be built up and maintained in country, by purchasing assets from internal companies.
