The Second Cold War
 

Canada has just, or is intending to purchase Swedish Jets over American. Why? Because they are cheaper and more aligned to a Cold War philosophy.
Being able to operate from roads is very similar to the Harrier in concept.
So I wanted to start a new `Cold War` thread as it would appear that is the way Europe is heading and ask the first question, "Are expensive stealth jets the way to go (with a 300 million price tag and no guarantee the US will allow their use) in what will be a relatively low tech Cold War?".
As a cold war is just that, a non firing war of politics and subversion is there any point in bankrupting ourselves to fight it. Equip with a cold war mentality and drain the enemies resources in trying to counter that threat?
No shots were fired in the last cold war, this one should be no exception.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.
There were just enough adults in the room on all sides previously to ensure that, and that's far from the case this time around.

Isn't there a theory that Reagan instigating Star Wars bankrupted the Soviet Union while trying to keep up?

The Brezhnev Stagnation began at some point in the early 1970s and was of purely domestic manufacture. Inadequacies of a sluggish central planning economy, stubborn old men at the helm, some peculiar decisions on top, the road to bancruptcy was a long one. If SDI played a role here, I´d think it was far from crucial.

The cold war doesn't start until fighting in Ukraine stops, or is resolved. That's when the battle lines are drawn the the cold war begins.

I think that is a fact and a deliberate action by Reagan.

"No shots were fired in the last cold war...."

Tell that to the crews of various US reconnaissance aircraft that were shot down, most with fatalities, during the Cold War. There were many more than just Gary Powers.

31 Americans died on 15 April 1969 when a EC-121M was shot down - just one example. A quick google search reveals more.

As I recall plenty of shots were fired in the last cold war, just in proxy wars rather than large scale conflict directly between major powers.

Perhaps "Phoney War", as a precursor to the massive global conflict comprising Act 2 of the Second World War, is a better analogy.

Fair point although I don't believe any shots were fired in direct conflict between troops (proxy wars accepted). Gary powers, for example, was shot down to prove the point that the US were spying, which of course was denied.
Perhaps we can agree that the cold war never became a hot war.