About Paul Maillet that Colonel opposed to the F-35 purchase

- April 26th, 2012

Paul Maillet is put forward as a retired air force engineer and Colonel who has great knowledge military aircraft. I’m sure he does but is that the basis on which he opposes the F-35 purchase?

I’d hazard a guess that the answer is no.

Maillet is not only a past Green Party candidate but also a man who has questionable connections. In 2010 Maillet was part of a group that wanted to bring in Iranian scholars closely tied to the Ahmadinejad regime. That conference got the RCMP’s cultural diversity group in hot water for promoting it.

In 2011 Maillet traveled to Iran to take part in a peace conference that bashed the US and Israel. Video is below.

Mr. Maillet is free to share his views but let’s be clear, this is not simply a retired air force officer.

 

Categories: Politics

Subscribe to the post

8 comments

  1. Stephen Smith says:

    Ok so he’s a not all he seems to be. Now deal with the facts of the aircraft and why we don’t need it and can’t afford it when there are better plans out there.

    Single engine fighter, no good over Canada
    Short range, again no good over Canada
    Technology still doesn’t work, delay in production yet again and cost escalation per plane.

    Other planes are available that do a better job for the service required.

    You love to play on the fringe of an issue but never the issue itself as the argument. Just adnit it is was a shiny thing the Conservatives wanted that isn’t going to pan out.

  2. Mark says:

    The F 35 is questionable, but only if you view it through the prism of the past. The F16 is another single engine fighter that is out there that the Norwegians use in yes, Arctic like conditions and don’t have a problem, so I am failing to see how the F 35 is inferior to the F18/CF18 for that. Two, Smith, not sure how much you know about range, but the CF18 isn’t blessed with great range. For any real serious missions in Canada, in flight refueling is a must no matter what fighter we buy. The F35 was picked by Australia, the Italians, the Dutch, and a few other nations besides the US and Canada. All of them want that stealthy technology is a full blown ACM capable fighter. This ex Air Force officer is correct that eventually drone fighters will be a part of the landscape, but we aint there yet, and the current CF18 fleet is wore out. Something needs to be done, and the F35 is a choice the Liberals and CPC both have supported. All we are now doing is arguing about the cost…but if you want leading edge stuff, you will pay. We are a rich country and one with responsibility to defend our sovereigty and play a role in world affairs….and it is about time we started acting the part.

  3. Ken Petkau says:

    Brian, I almost turned to FoxNews during your interview with the retired Air Force Colonel.

    Are you sure his name was not Neville Chamberlain?

  4. Peter says:

    Speaking of playing on the fringe of an issue – those who oppose the F-35, by and large, also oppose Canada as a robust middle military power, capable of taking on any military challenge, be it defensive or offensive, and instead, have this quaint Trudeauesque image of us as a gentle peace-keeping nation, with a glorified police force in blue helmets and white flags, begging nasty people to please just get along. They profess to know precisely what our future military challenges will be, and are certain that a 60′s-based fighter in the F-18 Super Hornet with non-stealth technology is all we will ever need for the next 25 years in the limited roles they wish us to play. They also, all, pretty much hate Stephen Harper, and all that he represents. So, yes, once I cut through all of the chaff the F-35 opponents keep tossing out there, what they really want is to stall the purchase until the next election, when they believe they have their next shot at gutting the military, exactly the way the Liberals have done for decades. I don’t agree. I voted for Harper. I support a robust military. I want our pilots to have the very best, including stealth technology, with the capability of taking on the best in the world, which is exactly what they are likely to face at some point in the next 25 years.

  5. Jim Powell says:

    We all want our pilots to have the very best — but it still hasn’t been demonstrated that the f-35 is that best.

    Where do we feel the primary role for the plane is — defending Canada or engaging in other wars in the middle east or perhaps Africa if they find enough oil?

    If it`s defending Canadian air space is the F-35 the best alternative

    What will Canada`s primary role be if we go along with the Americans on some of their foreign adventures

    When the answers the government assumes to these questions are shared we`ll know if theyve made the right choice.

  6. Alain says:

    Mr. Maillet was less than honest in my opinion. He is not interested in the RCAF acquiring a better aircraft, he is clearly opposed to our RCAF having the necessary tools and equipment to do the job. He was also dishonest in trying to make the claim that Canada has traditionally only been involved in peace keeping. That was a short period in our history, and anyone who was ever involved in “peace keeping” will tell you that it is not all peace and that the military cannot do that job either without proper tools and equipment.

  7. Harry MacDonald says:

    To protect its sovereignty, Canada was correct to look seriously at acquiring the F 35s. As is the usual course in such purchases, the aircraft cost per unit keeps rising and may or may not rise substantially more as it goes through its final testing procedures. With the improvement in drone technology, should Canada be looking at using fleets of less expensive drones to stop intruders, to hit fixed and moving targets on the ground and to do surveillance.

  8. Kevin says:

    Hmmm….Sounds like 1959. Should we continue to build the Arrow, or go with interceptor missiles? We all know the folly of the decision made there. In the end we bought the obsolete bomarc missiles and a fleet of obsolete Voodoo fighters costing more per unit than the development and production cost of the Arrow combined.

    I believe we will still need manned fighters in the future, even with drones. We must consider all alternatives including slightly older technology like the F-22 Raptor or Eurofighter Typhoon. I understand the Liberal government of the day chose to work with several other countries and the F-35 is the result. If this option is the best one out there, then so be it.

Comments are closed.