this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2025
645 points (96.1% liked)

Canada

8795 readers
2591 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 28 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (3 children)

The scale of these things is always fascinating. They're always much larger than I think they are.

For reference, I think that's a Suffren class, making it just shy of 100m, or a tad longer than a football field for my fellow Americans.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

The previously-mentioned French article says it's a Barracuda, but I don't know if that's a model or a class.

And unsurprisingly, he also decided to offer the Royal Canadian Navy its "premium" model, the Barracuda, rather than the Scorpène.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

perchance, banana for scale?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

It's a football field, Micheal. How big could it be, a banana?

[–] corsicanguppy 7 points 21 hours ago

It's there, but hard to see.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 20 hours ago

Whollottabanana!

[–] Albbi 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Canadian football fields are 100m, so just the right size for us!

[–] troyunrau 3 points 19 hours ago

CFL fields are 110 yards, which is about 100m. Close enough I guess :)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Finally. Letting the French keep a little bit of Canada pays off.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 hours ago

Pointing "am I a joke to you?"

[–] [email protected] 17 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

β€œBring it” - France probably

[–] [email protected] 5 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I believe it's "Le Bring it"

[–] [email protected] 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 18 hours ago

Take a nap zen fire ze missiles!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Don’t tease me!

NOBODY backs an American Revolution like the French!

πŸ‡«πŸ‡·πŸ¦…πŸŽ†

[–] 60d -4 points 19 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 12 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Important note: The "Nuclear" in "Nuclear attack submarine" means that it is powered by a nuclear reactor. It does not refer to its armament. An "attack" submarine means it is designed to attack ships and other submarines and these are typically not capable of carrying and launching ICBMs. Nuclear-armed deterrent submarines are called Ballistic Missile Submarines.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 22 hours ago
[–] sik0fewl 8 points 20 hours ago (3 children)
[–] Evkob 15 points 19 hours ago

Here's a French article about it. It's not a show of force, it's a naval defense company showing off their submarine in the hopes of being granted a 60 billion dollar contract for 12 submarines that the Canadian government announced last summer.

[–] KingOfSleep 11 points 20 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 20 hours ago

I'm going to guess a shipyard

[–] herrcaptain 7 points 21 hours ago

During a period with seemingly very little good news in the world, I really needed this. Assuming it was done for the optics it conveys, it's some much needed reassurance that our allies actually have our back. Granted, we're still absolutely fucked in the short term if the worst happens, it's still nice to see.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 20 hours ago
[–] 60d 4 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Despite the clear evidence pointing to the image being old, the photograph is still circulating on social media platforms and has been featured in Google searches related to the supposed annexation threat. This highlights how misinformation can easily spread online, especially when fueled by sensational claims and misleading images.

https://holrmagazine.com/french-submarine-halifax-photo-real-or-fake-explained/

[–] Evkob 17 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

An article using random reddit comments as a source should be outright ignored, IMO.

Especially when said reddit comment has since been edited and no longer reflects what's written in the article. If you bother to follow the reddit link in the article, you'll find someone has replied with an actual source (from France) that shows that the photos are legit, however the title of this post (and the original posts on reddit) are misleading.

This isn't in reaction to American threats, it's a French naval defense company showing off their submarine in the hopes of obtaining a 60 billion dollar contract for twelve submarines that the Canadian government announced last summer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

What the fuck would Canada, a non nuclear weapons country, want a nuclear sub for? Diesel battery subs are inherently stealthier because you can't turn a nuclear reactor off to go quiet and they don't need to stay submerged forever to hide where ballistic missiles are and they're not going to be power projecting to keep Iceland from sending another landing party with Erikson. It's not like Canada doesn't have an abundance of ports for refueling or a military vulnerability to oil embargos. It's not even compatible with their primary method of nuclear fuel since it requires nearly weapons grade refined uranium and the whole point of CANDU heavy water reactors is to not refine.

load more comments
view more: β€Ή prev next β€Ί