Why doesn't Canada design and build its own fighter jet?
this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2025
533 points (99.4% liked)
World News
50886 readers
2026 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
- Blogsites are treated in the same manner as social media sites. Medium, Blogger, Substack, etc. are not valid news links regardless of who is posting them. Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don't allow those links either.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't think I can understate just how ridiculously expensive it is to start up your own jet fighting industry from basically scratch.
In the entire world, there are only 5 countries that produce fighter jets. USA, Sweden, France, China, Russia.
It's what happens when you harm and betray a peaceful ally. Let's do this! 🍁
JK, fuck American tech
Gripen is a great jet for Canadian requirements.
F35 doesn't even work.
If I remember correctly, Saab has even offered to have the jets built.in Canada.
You do remember correctly. It's part of SAABs strategy, and if I remember correctly, there were also talks about Canada building their global eye AWAC
I hope they do it. Maybe the arms manufacturers will turn on Trump when they start losing trillion dollar clients.
If you want to make America piss itself, station J-35S.
What's to consider. Do we need to hire an american consultant? (Canada's "go to" action in the past). Also, let's get those decisions made on the Chinese EV's and get that Canola flowing. Win-win for all Canadians. We can't be politicking all the time, can we? Pull up those sleeves, put away the middle-school insults, join hands, and get the hell to work!
Militarily procurement has always been massively corrupt in Canada.
I assume it's a bargaining chip for a reduction in tariffs. The problem as I see it is that any deal with Trump is not worth the paper it's written on, so I'm not sure much is to be gained.
Try searching Google with "f-35 sales before:2024-11-01". Countries were lining up to buy them. Boeing had a years long manufacturing backlog.
No matter how you, personally, feel about the F-35 and the US military-industrial complex, Trump wants to both increase exports in general and tout US military strength. Most of NATO running with the F-35 would have been great for both of those. He could have succeeded at it by doing nothing. Complete failure of his own goals.
Lockheed Martin. Boeing makes the F18 (for example)
I hope we snub those unhinged fash. Fuck them.
There is unfortunately a lot of nuance here.
A Gripen does not do the same things that an F35 does.
Europe simply does not have an answer to 5th or 6th generation fighters and I feel like wanting to be supporting of peoples respective countries and acknowledging the US being pretty awful right now is making people unwilling to acknowledge this glaring and incredibly important fault in western arms manufacturing outside of the US.
Humans benefit greatly when people, groups etc, specialize as less resources need to be wasted reinventing the wheel, but when it comes to defence, the current situations shows how flat footed CANZUK+EU* has been left by allowing the US to basically become the single source for some of the most crucial defence items.
Projects like FCAS need to cut the bureaucratic bullshit and speed up development as its increasingly obvious that the US is not a stable partner. CANZUK+EU* despite years of warning about these facts remained unwilling to spend, viewing it as inefficient, and with every individual state that has the capabilities holding recalcitrant attitudes, fighting over who gets to build what.
Basically, what I am saying, is that I would love to have non US weaponry, but if that weaponry can't compete with US weaponry, there isn't much of a point.
I mean, quite frankly, for us, Canada, the most important thing we could possibly do this decade, is to internally create our own ultimate strategic deterrents. Anything short of that would leave us completely defenceless to our greatest military threat, and largest neighbour. There is literally no chance we win any conventional war, so in a way, not even this fighter deal matters.
I agree you on all points, but i want to add that weapon systems where manufactorer has a back door open and they can do things like remotelly lock the missile systems or other weapons, does not really sound appealing.
I think we'd do not badly in a conventional war when you factor in the fact that the Americans would be fighting on two fronts - within Canada against Canadians, and within America against the substantial chunk of Americans who would be trying to bring down the regime that was causing something as insane as an invasion of Canada to be undertaken. Plus there'd be international support at play. It would be a huge mess. Canada would just need to make the mess as big and as long as possible.
That said, preventing America from invading in the first place would be ideal, so the more preemptive preparation to strengthen Canada's position and weaken America's the better. Shifting our military supply lines to European sources is a step in that direction for many reasons. I do think a nuclear deterrent would be ideal, but that's a couple of steps of escalation further down the line I think.
within Canada against Canadians, and within America against the substantial chunk of Americans who would be trying to bring down the regime that was causing something as insane as an invasion of Canada to be undertaken.
Given the current trajectory, I have little faith that they would mount an effective internal resistance.
I think we’d do not badly in a conventional war when you factor in
No matter what, conventional war is horrific and wed be losing our families, homes, friends, and more. Effective strategic deterrents make it such that we would never reach that stage and as such, is far more economical and moral.
I do think a nuclear deterrent would be ideal, but that’s a couple of steps of escalation further down the line I think.
You cant make nukes loudly in such a situation, but as we've seen, you definitely cant make them under the gun. The only time is before the circumstances that you feel would necessitate them when we are still not viewed as enemies.
Disarming yourself as to avoiding presenting as a threat clearly does not work.
No matter what, conventional war is horrific and wed be losing our families, homes, friends, and more.
Which is why I said "preventing America from invading in the first place would be ideal"
You cant make nukes loudly in such a situation, but ass we've seen, you definitely cant make them under the gun.
Right, it would be done before the US invades, to prevent them from invading. Nuclear weapons are deterrence, you don't want to actually use them.
Right, it would be done before the US invades, to prevent them from invading. Nuclear weapons are deterrence, you don’t want to actually use them.
I fear my point is being missed.
My point was in response mainly to this last sentence:
I do think a nuclear deterrent would be ideal, but that’s a couple of steps of escalation further down the line I think.
My point is that it cant be further down, because if you are down that far, its too late. We've seen this was most countries that became under the gun when they would benefit dearly from having nuclear weapons of their own.
Notably, if Ukraine did so before they would have been fine, but during, they have no chance.
Iran similarly has a difficult time.
Its not about the nation, its about the fact that if you are at a point where you feel the heat is on, its too late to build nukes. Now is the time to build them.
What's sad, is that Ukraine did have nukes. Then this happened in '94: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum Guess who is now a bully.
It should be noted that they were never actually their nukes (not their codes or delivery systems), but that this would have been a good time for them to make their own nukes.
load more comments
(3 replies)
view more: next ›