top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 201 points 6 months ago (3 children)

So if they don't buy any we're just gonna give them out free? That's dumb.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 123 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    This is just robbery, we weren't able to make our schedule and modified the price. "$27.7 billion in cost – up from its initial $19 billion."

    Yet expect them to just give us $7 billion dollars because we failed to meet the contract?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Duh. That's how extortion works.

    You think the mob ever delivered anything on time and under budget?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Now I want a short story where the Mob accidentally hires the most effective project manager ever

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    There's actually an anime where a corporate worker gets summoned into another world because they need him to use his efficiency to get their shit together.

    It's called "Headhunted to Another World: From Salaryman to Big Four!", and it's pretty good.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 92 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    "Buy or weapons or else..." Maybe we should look for a more reliable supplier and close our airspace to their jet fighters.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 84 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    “Give us money or we will attack you” is generally not something you say to an ally you want to keep. Trump is literally insane, trying to start WW3.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 79 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    Everybody calm down. USA and Canada have an agreement allowing them to enter each other's air space. They said that if Canada doesn't buy enough F-35s USA will have to send more jests into Canada's airspace to fill in the gaps. That's it. It's not "buy our jets or we will invade you". It's "if Canada doesn't buy F-35 we will have to do more work in our agreement".

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 62 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    That’s technically a declaration of war, right?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Not even close.

    They’re suggesting that Canada won’t be able to defend its own airspace so US will have to be able to operate more freely in Canadian than they already do. They are saying that the NORAD agreement would need to be updated to accommodate this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 54 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Pretty sure that is the exact explanation that Russia uses when it violates Finnish and Swedish airspace.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago* (4 children)

    And neither Finland nor Sweden are at war with Russia. Bullshit scare tactic used by fucking putin yes, but it's not itself an act of war. At least, it isn't generally treated as such.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    You seem to be applying a pretty strict definition to what is actually an arbitrary term. An act of war can be anything that any nation wants to call an act of war.

    So I guess we should probably just use some of the countries involved in the real life case we are talking about.

    Does anyone consider violation of airspace by a nations warplanes to be in-and-of-itself an act of war or at least a proactive action worthy of escalation and retaliation? Oh yeah, the United States does. And so does Russia.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago

    NORAD already has shared skies provisions. US jets can fly into our airspace as needed to intercept foreign attackers. We can do the same with them.

    None of this constitutes a threat, despite Hoekstra's weird, fumbling attempt to deliver it like one.

    He basically said "If you don't give us your business, we'll have no choice but to protect your airspace even harder!" Oh, wow, scary. No, please, don't do that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 57 points 6 months ago (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 48 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    It's kinda loud in here, did the headline say 'piece of shit fuckface Trump gives Canada reason #563 to stop trading with the US and increase trade with Europe, China, etc'?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 45 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    What

    Buy our fighters jets or we invade with fighter jets ?

    What absolute fuck is wrong with this country

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 41 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Canada could do something really funny and start buying chinese anti-aircraft missiles.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 38 points 6 months ago
    [–] 34 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    I was walking past the 7-11 the other day and the manager came out and forced me to buy a slurpee by gunpoint. USA! USA! /s

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 33 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Buy our fighter jets or we'll send you fighter jets

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 28 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Basically: you are getting those F-35's whether you want them or not.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 6 months ago

    You know, like you do to allies when the commander in chief isn't a Russian asset.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 6 months ago
    [–] 17 points 6 months ago

    Whatever it takes to distract from the Epstein files sir!

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 6 months ago

    I mean it's always been like this basically.
    But less publicly

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 14 points 6 months ago* (8 children)

    Canada would be dumb to go forward, everyone knows the US has kill switches in their gear and now might hostilely engage canada, perhaps to steal territory, and otherwise has talked of invading other nato countries like in Greenland.

    In which case the US could brick all of the gear they sold them. It's already bad enough, Canada has to buy from EADS or whomever builds their air forces, I would not trust the UK either at this point, they are properfucked by their own neoliberal type politicians in labour, that have done more damage than the tories the past couple of years..

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
    [–] 13 points 6 months ago

    To do what? Fly around, wasting tax payer money?

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    wut.

    If you don’t buy from me, I’ll bomb you.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago (3 children)
    load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    What are they going to do in Canadian airspace? like.. fly around? Can they do some tricks? Arent those jets mega expsnive to maintain and fly, and they are going to burn dollars by flying them around?

    Pretty weird behavior for an ally's airspace, but OK, whatever.

    Canada might think about halting lumber and oil shipments if they are too distracted by fighter jet noise to make work productivity goals. Those jets are loud and annoying. What then? Seems like trump will chicken out and walk back his childishness like he always does.

    Only winner here is Putin, same as always. What a coincidence.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago* (8 children)

    This will be a devastating air campaign for the US, many F35s will be lost to mechanical and software failures and it isn't our fault it is totally Canada's fault if that happens because if they had bought our jets we wouldn't of had to break them by trying to use them as airplanes.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
    [–] 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)
    load more comments (2 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›