Social commentary around the F-35 issue is in general acceptance that they are needed, based almost exclusively on the age of the F-18s. There is an interesting comment in the paper today about the CF-18s in Libya (The Globe and Mail, “NATO split threatens Libyan effort”). Seems that the CF-18s and Tornados are particularly unsuitable for close air support to ground troops, i.e. they’re only good for bombing and departing. So again, if our future commitments are to Libyan-type conflicts where the need is for close air support, we’re buying the wrong plane.
You may also like
A number of commentators in this forum have proposed to take the crews from the MCDVs and move them into the A/OPVs […]
* Moderator’s Note: This post appeared originally in the Letters to the Editor section of The Washington Times on 30 March 2007. […]
31 May 2018. Dr. Dan Middlemiss. Why do successive federal governments treat Canadians as pliant ignoramuses on matters of defence? Take for […]
I read Mr. Perry’s Broadside commentary “A Sub Too Far” with attention and interest. In terms of your reflections on public perception […]