

The cost of failing to deter aggression is incredibly high, look at Ukraine. We are in a similar situation, but we are even worse off. There is much less conventional parity between us and the hostile dictatorship next door. As an example, Ukraine started the war with a layered air defense network and thousands of interceptors to keep it in the fight, that led to Russian caution with their air assets and allowed a front to form. Canada has precisely 0 air defense batteries.
Ultimately there is no reasonable amount we can spend to gain conventional deterrent against the new United States. The money needs to yield a fast track to nuclear deterrence.
Unfortunately for us Canadians, we are staring at the choice between spending and sacrificing financially to hedge against the risk of invasion. If we don’t, and the worst happens, we’ll spend much, much more, and a lot of the cost will be blood.
Looking at the boats on offer, only one currently fills the specification Canada is insisting on. The KSS-3 from ROK has 10 VLS in its block 2 configuration, the German Type 212 has 0 VLS. If Canada requires the capability to deploy ballistic missiles that leaves it with the Korean boat , that’s also a very smart requirement since it allows for the nuclear deterrent that is obviously needed to be added down the line. The KSS-3 is currently deploying the Hyunmoo 4-4 ballistic missile, range of 800km, payload (I think) 1-2000kg. That could sling a thermonuclear warhead.