Again, the problem with looking at those costs is that we only have the infrastructure and the ability to maintain pilots for a certain number of air craft. This isn’t a scenario where we can easily go the zerg rush route of having many more aircraft at a lower cost per unit. If we want to have an effective air force, that air force needs to focus on quality over quantity.

And the math leans even harder in favour of quality when you factor in how heavily stealth and sensors affect air warfare today. A fifth gen fighter like the F-35 can destroy many times its own number of older generation aircraft - even heavily upgraded ones - because stealth is basically an “I win” button. If your enemy cannot detect you before you detect them, everything else is irrelevant. A Canadian air force armed with F-35s would have stood up to many, many times our number of outdated Russian aircraft. Even their Su-57 isn’t a true fifth gen aircraft and its stealth capabilities are pathetic.

This is the problem with moving away from it. What other options do we have for a fifth gen stealth fighter? There aren’t any because everyone who would have put money into developing one decided to put money into the F-35 program instead. It was supposed to be the 5.56 of air combat, the standard solution for all of NATO. Solutions like the Grippen, Eurofighter or Rafale simply do not work against a peer adversary. Remember that we have to keep this thing in service for decades. We can’t just buy a new fighter in a few years.

Going into mid 21st century warfare without a stealth fighter would be like going into WW2 without machine guns and tanks.

The problem is that there really isn’t anything out there that does what the F35 does. Any replacement will be inferior.

The common accusation thrown at the F35 is that it’s too expensive and too much of a generalist. This is an accusation made by people who don’t understand a) how much of warfare is logistics and b) how expensive pilots are.

The key limitation on our air force is not the cost of aircraft, its the cost of training pilots and maintaining the logistics to support our aircraft. Two different types of plane means two different logistics chains, two different sets of parts, and two different sets of pilots. Flying more, cheaper planes means more very expensive pilots.

The F-35 was a superb solution. The only readily available fifth gen fighter in the world, and one that could serve in ground attack, interception and air superiority roles, and which fundamentally outclassed anything a potential adversary could likely field for the next few decades. Even with the programs notable cost overruns, there simply isn’t another option that can meet all those needs.

Now, unfortunately, all of that is imperilled by the fact that the US has become a potential adversary. As far as good options for our airforce goes, that leaves us completely up shit creek.

We have allies in the Commonwealth, in NATO and in the EU. But it’s really an open question if any of them would willingly defy the US to support us. I’d like to hope so.

Unfortunately, any support would be largely meaningless, mostly consisting of sanctions against the US. The reason being, any military support, even just equipment like we’re sending to Ukraine, has to cross an ocean to get to us. An ocean that would be controlled by the US navy and air force. There’s not a lot anyone can do to counter that.

The CAF is already working on those things as we speak. Trust me, every single lesson that can possibly be gleaned from Ukraine is being studied backwards and forwards across the entire military. From the highest levels to the most basic grunts, the CAF are studying every report, every video, every anecdote that comes out of Ukraine. And yes, absolutely both drone and anti-drone systems are being acquired as we speak, along with new anti-air and anti-tank capabilities, and a new frontline service rifle.

For now I suspect they’re all assuming it’s just bluster. The general tenor of what’s coming out of the white house seems to suggest that they’re basically treating the president like an angry toddler, letting him get it out of his system and hoping he calms down before they actually have to roll their sleeves up and take his toys away.

But there’s also the fact that his cult is a very dangerous weapon that he eagerly points at anyone who do much as disagrees with him. Basically the party hates everything about this, because it’s bad for business and Republicans hate anything that’s bad for business, but no one wants to take the heat for saying so. So why not just wait and hope it all blows over when he gives up or gets distracted, like he always does. Trump has little stamina for things that don’t immediately go his way so they’re probably all banking on him finding a way to bail on this before long.

The strategic situation favors the US immensely, with all our cities situated directly on the border. There’s basically no way to mount any kind of serious defence of Canada. Every city, almost every strategically valuable location, would be lost in days.

But our nation is superbly suited to guerilla warfare, with our vast forests providing excellent cover against aerial and satellite observation, and the CAF is superbly good at fighting against superior numbers and firepower because they train around the assumption that they will be fighting an enemy that outclasses them in equipment and numbers. Manuever warfare, hit and run strikes and defeat in detail are core to CAF tactics, and they know how to fight in ways that maximize their impact while minimizing losses.

They’re also very, very good at what they do. Canadians routinely demolish Americans in wargames and training operations. Our training standards are much higher and it bears results. This isn’t much help against the sheer scale of the American military; a holding action like the one Ukraine is putting up against Russia would be functionally impossible. But a guerilla war would make the Americans pay a heavy toll for every day they tried to remain here.

The US would control the cities, but all of those strategic resources that Trump wants are deeper in the interior and much more vulnerable to hit and run attacks by a determined Canadian military presence, while ordinary resistance fighters would be able to launch terror strikes against vulnerable targets all across the continental US. They would have to place security forces everywhere, while we can choose to strike anywhere. Just the financial and political weight of protecting every state capitol, every senators home, every factory, every distribution centre, every power plant… Hell, every mall and school if we want to go that far… Would be absolutely crushing. How long would the American people put up with going through checkpoints to get to work, being pulled over and searched my soldiers to get to the grocery store, all while watching bombs blow up in their neighbourhoods and their tax dollars get pissed away on the world’s largest and most expensive national security operation? America is swimming in debt and piling on more to give tax breaks to billionaires, and a right wing government has no way to embrace the kind of radical economic thinking that could try to solve those problems. How long could they even sustain an occupation for?

This is a good assessment. For some added context, the idea of annexing Canada is astonishingly unpopular in the US. Even among Republican voters, only 25% approve. No one in the White House understands where this insanity is coming from or why, no one in the Republican party is in favour of it. It’s basically just Trump and Navarro.

So while it is absolutely insane that the possibility of a US invasion exists, there’s no real likelihood to it. Russians see annexing Ukraine as a good and right thing to do. They don’t generally want Ukrainians to suffer - they see them as fellow Russians - but they see annexation as in their best interests. There’s no such appetite in the US. The American people have zero interest in a senseless war against an ally.

But Trump is largely unchecked, and he may try anyway, no matter how much the attempt would destabilize his own nation. That’s a risk we have to prepare for.

Either way, our days of treating the US as a reliable ally are over. Canadian soldiers bled and died for them in Korea and Afghanistan, and fought shoulder to shoulder with them in both world wars and multiple peacekeeping operations, and this is the thanks we get? Fuck that, and fuck every American that allowed this to happen.

Before you get disappointed, pay attention to the fact that he’s repeatedly said his plan is to replace the carbon tax, not just end it with no backup plan.

Carney’s play here is simple; he wants, and believes in, some form of carbon pricing, but The Carbon Tax has become politically radioactive. So, kill it, rebrand it, and reintroduce it. Without “Axe The Tax” and “Fuck Trudeau” PP loses his entire political identity.

Alternatively, he defends the carbon tax, potentially to the point of it being enough to put the CPC over the top in an election, and then they axe it with no plan to replace it.

I’ll join you in being disappointed - and disgusted - if he fails to follow through on delivering an effective replacement (which won’t happen until after an election), but for now let’s follow the play.

The magic words worked because they were backed by the power of institutions that people trust.

The mistake this guy made - the mistake that the US Republicans are absolutely not making - is that he did not sufficiently erode public faith in those institutions first.