THANK YOU... DONALD!

🎵 LETTERS... We get lots and lots of letters!🎵

Dear President Trump,

As a Canadian, I would personally like to thank you for the tariffs and disrespect you have directed at Canada. I haven’t seen Canadians so cohesive in my lifetime. As a Canadian, I hate to say it, but it is all because of an American = you!

For too long, Canadians have allowed the US to take the lead in our economy and our politics. our trade, our culture and our foreign policy. For too long, Canada has been content to suckle at the hind teat of America for our defence, at the expense of our own military industrial capability and NATO commitments. We have been laggards.

For too long, easy commerce between our nations has made us complacent about developing new trade partners. Your tariffs have awakened our listless nation to a world of possibilities -including the People's Republic of China. Personally, I think moves in that direction are a bad idea (even Russia quit importing Chinese cars), but only your zeal has pushed us in that direction, as it surely will with Europe.

For too long, we have ‘ripped and shipped’ our raw resources to the U.S., only to purchase them back as manufactured products which could have been made in Canada.

For too long, Canada has allowed American and other global investment concerns to purchase our industries rather than encouraging Canadian investment in Canadian innovation, enterprise and entrepreneurship.

For too long, we have allowed American culture in film, TV and news to dominate us with American stories while we studiously ignore our own war, scientific and sports heroes’ stories, condemning us to the clumsy efforts of the CBC.

There is just so much more to write about than I could possibly include in this brief letter. Thanks to your foresight, I now see a glimmer of hope for Canada, which has not existed since the Second World War. 

NO Canadian leader has ever had the gumption to call Canada to greatness... to finally grow up and do things on our own! 

Yet, as ever with Canada, an American leads the way!

If a Canadian could vote in the US, you’d get my vote.

A grateful Canadian... Allan's next-door neighbour... George!

U.S. States That Almost Became Part of Canada!

 The map of North America could have looked very different today. 

Many U.S. states nearly flew the Canadian flag instead of the stars and stripes due to border fights, land deals, and political battles that happened long ago.

The shared border between the United States and Canada wasn’t always clear, and both countries fought over land for years. 

These States were caught in the middle of these fights and almost ended up on the Canadian side of history, changing what both countries would look like forever.

Maine:

Big toss-up on whether Maine should go with the "Americans" or the British... decision still up in the air!

Vermont:

Vermont existed as an independent republic from 1777 to 1791 and considered joining British North America. Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys held discussions with British representatives about Vermont potentially becoming a Canadian province. Vermont officials negotiated with both nations to determine the most beneficial arrangement. The territory ultimately became the 14th U.S. state in 1791, though historical records indicate this decision was not unanimous.

Minnesota:

The northern Minnesota territory was disputed, with Britain seeking the mineral-rich Mesabi Range for Canada. Initial boundary proposals placed the northern shore of Lake Superior under British control. This resource-rich area became an important consideration during negotiations following the War of 1812. The boundary established by the 1842 treaty placed Minnesota’s northern border at the 49th parallel, securing these natural resources for the United States.

Montana:

Northern Montana was claimed by Britain during multiple border disagreements throughout the 19th century. The Hudson’s Bay Company established trading posts and developed relationships with Native American tribes across the region. British diplomats attempted to secure territories south of the 49th parallel, particularly focusing on areas with strategic water routes. The Oregon Treaty of 1846 established Montana’s northern boundary at the 49th parallel, though the physical border survey wasn’t completed until the 1870s.

Michigan's Upper Peninsula:

British forces occupied Mackinac Island and influenced the Upper Peninsula region following the War of 1812. Military authorities requested that the entire Upper Peninsula remain under British control as part of Canada. Their territorial claim was based on military presence and established commercial networks throughout the region. The Treaty of Ghent in 1814 returned the peninsula to American control, though the final Great Lakes boundary wasn’t fully determined until the Webster-Ashburton Treaty of 1842.

North Dakota:

The border placement along the 49th parallel created territorial uncertainty in North Dakota for several decades. Hudson’s Bay Company established trading operations while Métis communities developed settlements near the unmarked boundary. Survey errors regarding Fort Pembina’s location contributed to geographical misunderstandings about the exact border. The boundary was officially designated in 1818 but remained unmarked until surveys were conducted in the 1870s, creating an area of jurisdictional uncertainty.

Alaska:

Russia approached both Britain and the United States when seeking to sell its Alaskan territory. Canadian representatives showed interest in acquiring the territory to extend their western territories to the Pacific Ocean. Secretary of State William Seward completed the purchase for the United States in 1867 for $7.2 million. This acquisition prevented Alaska’s substantial natural resources from becoming Canadian assets.

Wisconsin:

The fur trade made northern Wisconsin strategically important during early boundary negotiations between the United States and British North America. The Great Lakes watershed boundary was contested, with Britain claiming areas farther south than the current border. British commercial enterprises had established trading networks that they sought to maintain through territorial control. The Treaty of Paris in 1783 created a preliminary boundary, though disputes continued until the Webster-Ashburton Treaty established the final border in 1842.

New York:

Northern New York remained under British military presence for years following the American Revolution. The regions surrounding the St. Lawrence River and Lake Champlain were considered strategically significant by both nations. British military forces maintained control of forts despite treaty obligations to withdraw from American territory. The Jay Treaty of 1794 finally secured British military withdrawal, though border questions continued into the early 19th century.

Here's one Canadian solution that will help things along!!!

I was curious to see if anybody would take my suggestion to only buy the first batch of F-35s from the States... ["That we already paid for!"]  ...then we could look around for something that was better [And cheaper] for Canada!

So, I asked the Perspective Research Department's A.I. SAL-9000: (HAL-9000's Twin... Along with CAL-9000!)

Sal: Which is better for Canada... Gripen E-series jets, the Dassault Rafale, or the Eurofighter Typhoon?

SAL said:

Certainly, Allan. Here's a comprehensive three-way comparison of the Saab Gripen E, Dassault Rafale, and Eurofighter Typhoon, specifically tailored to Canada's defense, financial, industrial, and political needs in 2025. I’ve broken this down by major factors that Canada must consider when selecting a fighter platform.

---

🇨🇦 Canada's Needs Summary

Before diving in, let’s remind ourselves of Canada's unique defense profile:

• NORAD obligations require long-range patrol and interoperability with the U.S.

• NATO commitments require multirole flexibility and combat-readiness.

• Sovereignty enforcement over vast Arctic and maritime zones.

• Budget sensitivity and industrial offsets (jobs, tech transfer).

• Desire to reduce U.S. dependency under current trade/political strains.

---

✈️ Overview of the Jets

Jet	Origin		Cost	Multirole?	NATO-Interoperable?
Saab Gripen E	Sweden		$85–95M CAD	Yes	Fully NATO-capable
Dassault Rafale F4	France		$100–120M CAD	Yes	Yes
Eurofighter Typhoon Tranche 4/5	Germany/UK/Italy/Spain		$130–150M CAD	Yes	Yes

---

🔧 1. Operational Capabilities

Category	Gripen E	Rafale F4	Eurofighter Typhoon T4/5
Range (combat)	~1,500 km	~1,800 km	~1,390 km
Max Speed	Mach 2	Mach 1.8	Mach 2
Payload	7.2 tons	9.5 tons	9.0 tons
Radar	AESA (Raven ES-05) + IRST	AESA (RBE2-AA) + IRST	AESA (Captor-E) + IRST
Stealth / RCS	Low RCS, small frame	Moderate stealth	Larger RCS, no stealth shaping
Suitability for Arctic Ops	Excellent	Good	Moderate (cold weather upgrades exist but limited field use)

➡️ Verdict: Gripen E is ideal for cold-weather, dispersed operations. Rafale leads in payload and versatility. Typhoon is the fastest but was originally designed for air dominance, not strike flexibility (improved since Tranche 3/4).

---

🛠️ 2. Industrial Benefits to Canada

Category	Gripen E	Rafale	Eurofighter
Tech Transfer	High – Sweden offers full IP transfer	Medium – France offers partial transfer	Low – Euro consortium unlikely to share deep tech
Domestic Assembly	Possible (Brazil & Czech deals had local assembly)	Limited – Dassault resists foreign assembly	Unlikely – complex supply chain across Europe
Canadian Jobs Potential	High – Saab committed to local production	Medium – Dassault offers offsets	Low – Mostly European jobs
Export Collaboration	Yes (Saab promotes joint export deals)	Possible, but France retains control	No – tight European export control

➡️ Verdict: Gripen E is the best option if Canada wants domestic production and long-term tech independence. The Rafale is decent but more centralized. Eurofighter is European-centric and less flexible industrially.

---

💰 3. Cost and Logistics

Category	Gripen E	Rafale	Typhoon
Acquisition Cost (fleet of 88)	~$8–9B CAD	~$10–11B CAD	~$12–13B CAD
Operating Cost/hr	~$7,500 CAD	~$17,000 CAD	~$20,000+ CAD
Maintenance Footprint	Low (single engine, modular design)	Medium (twin-engine, complex avionics)	High (expensive parts, complex logistics)
Lifecycle Cost (30 years)	Lowest	Mid	Highest

➡️ Verdict: Gripen E wins on affordability and ease of maintenance. Rafale is acceptable but costly. Typhoon is expensive both upfront and over time.

---

🌐 4. Geopolitical and Strategic Fit

Factor	Gripen E	Rafale	Typhoon
U.S. Independence	High	High	Medium (UK is a U.S. ally)
Five Eyes Compatibility	Medium – improving	Medium – independent systems	High – UK is Five Eyes
NATO Interoperability	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent
Export Freedom	High – Sweden rarely restricts buyers	High – France acts independently	Medium – EU consortium restrictions
Diplomatic Leverage	Moderate	High (France is assertive)	Complicated (multi-country consortium)

➡️ Verdict: Rafale and Gripen give Canada independent leverage. Typhoon is too politically entangled for a truly sovereign Canadian procurement.

---

🧩 5. Integration and Future-Proofing

Factor	Gripen E	Rafale F4	Typhoon T4/T5
Open Architecture	Yes – easy to integrate 3rd party systems	Somewhat open	Closed – heavily Euro-standardized
AI/Autonomy Features	Yes (future-proofed for drone teaming)	Yes (F5 roadmap)	Improving with Project Centurion, but slower
Sensor Fusion	Very good	Excellent	Good
NATO Data Link / Interop	Full	Full	Full
Upgrades Timeline	Rapid (Saab has agile dev cycles)	On track for F5	Slow – needs consortium approval

➡️ Verdict: Gripen offers flexibility and agility. Rafale is well-integrated but slower to adapt. Typhoon suffers from bureaucratic inertia.

---

🏁 Final Summary and Recommendation for Canada

Criteria	Best Choice
Cost	Gripen E
Industrial Benefits	Gripen E
Multirole Combat Performance	Rafale
Range and Payload	Rafale
Sovereignty / Arctic Ops	Gripen E
Future Growth / Modularity	Gripen E
Political Independence	Tie: Gripen / Rafale
Ease of Integration into NORAD/NATO	Rafale / Typhoon

---

🏆 RECOMMENDED RANKING:

1. 🇸🇪 Saab Gripen E – Best for sovereignty, cost-efficiency, cold-weather readiness, and local industrial impact. A pragmatic choice for an independent and cost-sensitive Canada.

2. 🇫🇷 Dassault Rafale F4 – Excellent multirole capabilities and combat range, but costlier with fewer industrial concessions. Strong option if performance trumps price.

3. 🇪🇺 Eurofighter Typhoon – Advanced but expensive and politically complicated. Less suitable for Canada's independent defense and industrial goals.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

April 15, 2025

Government Defence Review Recommends Saab Gripen E as Canada’s Next-Generation Fighter Jet

Ottawa, ON — Following a comprehensive defence capability review, Canada is poised to recommend the Saab Gripen E multirole fighter aircraft as the most strategic and cost-effective solution to replace the country’s aging fleet of CF-18 Hornets.

The review, conducted by independent defence analysts and experts in Arctic security, NORAD interoperability, and industrial policy, evaluated two leading contenders: the Saab Gripen E (Sweden) and the Dassault Rafale (France). 

The Gripen E emerged as the top recommendation for Canada’s evolving defence priorities!

“This aircraft is a perfect match for Canada’s operational environment, fiscal framework, and industrial ambitions,” the report states. “The Gripen E will strengthen our Arctic sovereignty, enhance NORAD integration, and bring high-value aerospace jobs back to Canadian soil.”

Key Highlights of the Recommendation:

Arctic-Ready: Designed for extreme weather, the Gripen E offers unmatched performance in northern environments—critical for Canadian sovereignty operations.

Interoperability: Fully compatible with NATO and NORAD systems, ensuring seamless collaboration with allies, especially the United States.

Economic Benefits: Saab has offered extensive technology transfer and the potential for domestic assembly, fueling Canada’s defense manufacturing sector.

Cost Efficiency: With one of the lowest operating costs among Western fighters (~$7,000/hour), the Gripen E allows Canada to sustain a full fighter fleet without burdening future defense budgets.

Strategic Shift Toward Sovereignty and Sustainability.

This recommendation marks a strategic shift away from reliance on expensive, high-maintenance platforms and toward agile, affordable, and sovereign defence capabilities. 

In a time of increasing global instability and Arctic competition, the Gripen E offers Canada independence, security, and control over its skies. “Canada must be prepared for tomorrow’s threats, not yesterday’s battles,” said one defense analyst close to the review. “The Gripen is the smart fighter for a smarter defence policy.”

Next Steps:

The final decision on procurement remains with the federal cabinet, which is expected to deliberate in the coming weeks. 

If approved, Canada could move quickly toward formal negotiations with Saab, potentially establishing Canadian assembly lines and long-term support infrastructure.

For media inquiries, interviews, or a full copy of the recommendation report, contact:

Media Relations – Department of National Defence

📞 1-800-DEFENCE

✉️ media@forces.gc.ca

🌐 www.canada.ca/defence

Re-Drawing North America!

 O.K. kids... I think I have this all figured out!!!!

For the benefit of both the U.S. and Canada... we here at the "Perspective Research Department" have arranged to have a "REFERENDUM" ballot in the summer... where Greenland is invited to join Canada as a Fourth "Territory" ..and Alaska and Maine become the Eleventh and Twelfth Provinces of Canada!!!! 

Date to follow:

P.S. And remember folks... FREE HEALTH CARE!!!!!

Marci to the Rescue!

 I got an e-mail question today that should be Addressed! 

Q: Will Trump’s tariff wars end up doing massive damage to the US economy?

But...! Instead of answering it myself...

I will hand it over to  Marci Moroz: 

A: Allow me to bypass the experts on the economy and politics to answer this question from a perspective where I have some expertise. (She's a psychologist! By the way... did you notice that she used my favourite word... "Perspective!" - ed.)

Trump’s tariff war has done massive damage to the relationship between Canada and America. The damage is so severe that I am comfortable predicting that it will not be reparable. When things happen that are out of Canada’s control, something fascinating follows.

Canada is forced to examine what happened from a personal perspective. What did Canada ignore about the relationship with the United States? What made Canada so complacent about living next door to a country that creates wars that aren’t their own wars? You know, wars that kill people, destroy infrastructure, create hatred towards the United States. Why did Canada blindly trust that the USA would never turn on us? How did we get to this place of complacency and vulnerability that so many Prime Ministers had warned us about? Liken this to a marriage you trusted. A spouse that you believed had your back, would never harm or betray you. Someone you trusted was a “soft place to land”. Then suddenly and unexpectedly left you, divorced you, and tried to take all the joint assets of your life together.

Divorce trauma is a real thing, with symptoms consistent with post traumatic stress. Canada now has “Tariff Trauma”, identified by several stages- Denial (Canada has been sleeping next to an elephant and ignored the obvious risks),Bargaining (Canada added measures of border security despite illegal alien and fentanyl statistics that proved Canada was not the main source of illegal immigration or fentanyl), Anger (NO, Canada is not for sale!), and where we recently arrived, Depression (WTF happened?). The final stage will be Acceptance as Canada moves on with tough lessons learned.

To quote Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who said yesterday, “Canadians are perplexed”, I would agree, and add that perplexed does not adequately capture the multitude of other “tariff trauma”emotions Canadians are experiencing. Even if the tariffs were removed before they gained traction, it would do nothing to repair the damage already done to our relationship.

However, there is a silver lining! Canada is now awake (I said awake, Canada has always been “woke” and in Canada woke is not a dirty word). Canada knows beyond the shadow of a doubt, that it is time to break the pseudo trusted alliance with America, away from the whims of a deranged president, toward economic freedom. Canada will quickly find new markets (some have identified themselves already) and will become more financially independent, even if that means allowing foreign investment that was previously denied because America doesn’t like Canadian relationships with other countries. You know, like a jealous spouse.

Canada has its own identity that eschews the USA (even more obvious when Trump floated the idea of a “51st State”). Now it is time to make new friends, open new bank accounts, apply for new credit cards, and start dating again. From that new position, Canada will watch “the ex, USA” stumble in the dark (a serious possibility that Canada will contribute to this), with no guilt or remorse. The US will get what it has coming, and Canada will witness karmic retribution from a safe place, never again having to make excuses for America’s reprehensible behaviour!

(And that's the name of that tune... )

Bob can be your uncle... but not Sam!

 ALLAN:

What is preventing the U.S. and Canada from merging?

It seems to me that the American people who post on here are either totally unaware of how alien their culture is to the rest of the world... or this type of post is trolling.

For the purpose of this reply, I assume that Americans are ignorant of how they are perceived by other nations.

We often see America as a failed or failing state because:

It is run by corporations, foreign countries and religions who own the political class.

The American education system is somewhat behind the rest of the world and rather than having an enforced national curriculum, it seems each country can change what is taught at a whim. 

Furthermore having school children pledge allegiance to the flag each day and teaching them “facts” about American history and achievements is much the same brainwashing technique used in North Korea. So please forgive us if we don't trust your indoctrinated “free citizens.

Americans seem to be taught that freedom is about having a gun/guns and killing people. When Trump was president he said something like everyone should carry a gun so that in the case of a shooting they can shoot the “bad guy.” (interestingly I didn't see Trump pull out a gun in the recent assassination attempt, I am sure that he will have an excuse) 

My point is that the rest of the world doesn't see having armed citizens as a good thing, in fact, most of the public in the non-American world don't want the proliferation of guns among the citizens. As a result, the only people in very many countries that have access to guns are those that can prove a need for them, school shootings are not accepted as a valid reason.

In the rest of the world, we care about the lives and well-being of others both from an ethical and economic standpoint, sick people can't work and that affects the economy. Also as I mentioned we are ethically concerned about the health of others.

The American healthcare system seems based entirely on schadenfreude and profiteering.

I started by saying this is the perception of non-Americans about America. Maybe it's wrong but it is the face you chose to show the world. It's anathema to what everyone else considers civilized so you can't expect any other nation to merge with the USA if for no other reason than you seem to be a country of politically corrupt, morally bankrupt, crazy people.

Ian Ellis