- Reaction score
- 8,102
- Points
- 1,260
I was thinking Croatia as well since the Croatian PM was just here in Canada.
Replacing the Subs
- Thread starter Spencer100
- Start date
HavokFour
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,718
- Points
- 1,040
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Belgium, Norway, Portugal, Greece.
Denmark and Croatia are also possible guesses, that could be swapped with any of the above.
Noah’s reporting lots of chatter today about an announcement to come Monday, notably the day before NATO. At least one other defense reporter whom I’ll not link here is saying the same; Noah’s tweet quotes him so I’ll not share it either. But anyway, a bit of a chorus of “we’ve heard this too” is starting.
HavokFour
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,718
- Points
- 1,040
Hey I ain’t laying a guess down, I’m just saying what the dude’s saying. He’s got a better batting average than most.Someone saw that no one here at Army.ca guessed the 6th.
Rainbow1910
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 2,413
- Points
- 810
Fighter jet announcement at the NATO Summit would definitely be a choice, given it's basically the highest profile platform to announce a procurement. I would have guessed that if they were going for Gripen, they would have kept it more low key at home in a bid not to enflame the US given ongoing tensions on the issue. Unless we're angling for maximum spite over substance.
Also a bit awkward to announce a Gripen buy to NATO when almost no NATO nations operate the platform lol, especially when so many use the F-35 instead.....
Regardless of what the substance of the fighter announcement is, I do agree that it has moved up the schedule now that we've passed the July 1 USMCA deadline to renew. With annual reviews going forward whatever leverage there was in the decision must be reduced.
Whatever announcement might come at the Summit though I still don't think it will be the subs. As a comms guy I just see that as a wasted opportunity for maximum domestic PR, regardless of the winner(s) (hedging my bet on an all SK decision
).
Fighters might make the most sense if it is a procurement winner announcement since which ever way we go is, in my opinion, still going to involve a substantial number of F-35s, and all f-35 or mixed fleet there will be much more controversy and parsing of the various moving parts than there will be with the subs.
That being said, at an international summit I'd be looking for something much more high level in terms of defence policy, budgets, future structure/plans etc. Maybe related to the bank or new commitments to the front lines in the Baltic?
Whatever announcement might come at the Summit though I still don't think it will be the subs. As a comms guy I just see that as a wasted opportunity for maximum domestic PR, regardless of the winner(s) (hedging my bet on an all SK decision
).Fighters might make the most sense if it is a procurement winner announcement since which ever way we go is, in my opinion, still going to involve a substantial number of F-35s, and all f-35 or mixed fleet there will be much more controversy and parsing of the various moving parts than there will be with the subs.
That being said, at an international summit I'd be looking for something much more high level in terms of defence policy, budgets, future structure/plans etc. Maybe related to the bank or new commitments to the front lines in the Baltic?
Rainbow1910
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 2,413
- Points
- 810
I think the flipside of this is any announcements of this sort of magnitude at such a well attended and covered multi-national event will see huge media coverage both at home and abroad. If we want to show we are serious and especially regarding the size and substance of the submarine procurement, I can very much see the NATO Summit being a far more suitable platform for this kind of announcement. Do we want yet another Halifax/Esquimalt defence announcement like we've seen quite a few times in recent years, or do we want a bold statement on the world stage?Whatever announcement might come at the Summit though I still don't think it will be the subs. As a comms guy I just see that as a wasted opportunity for maximum domestic PR, regardless of the winner(s) (hedging my bet on an all SK decision
I tend to believe the rumors of a Monday announcement likely at home though, there's too many well informed folks saying it at this point for it to realistically be false.
It isn't really a procurement winner announcement, as what they are talking about is a sole source contract to Saab with no actual contest at this point. I'd bet we'll see more nations jumping onboard DSRB at the NATO Summit, which is very relevant for Canada.
- Reaction score
- 27,727
- Points
- 1,360
I’ve heard “formalizing GlobalEye” and “another very large SAFE contract.”
Not saying that as a comms guy I've never been overruled...
- Reaction score
- 8,102
- Points
- 1,260
Is Trump going to be at the summit? If yes, will that factor into any of our decisions as to what to announce or not before, during or at the end of the summit?
Yes he is, and for sure that factors in. And to me it mitigates against anything in the way of an announcement from us about subs and for sure fighters, unless in the latter case we're confirming the original F-35 plan, which would be welcome to both the US and I would think most of NATO (other than the Swedes).
Beyond that, I still think anything from us is more likely to be high level big picture stuff. Yes the it's the world stage with the world media but Trump and whatever pronouncements good or bad the Americans have about the future of NATO will be sucking up all the oxygen. Add to that whatever storylines emerge about Ukraine, Turkey's apparent rapprochement with NATO/the West and whatever the hell is going on in the UK and I would fear that the impact of any Canadian announcements will get lost, at least as far as international media go.
