Just... Why?

This as all about arctic control, which is a major long term strategy for the conservatives (the remainder of this post assumes this goal is positive, obviously if you reject this notion, this purchase makes no sense). Despite the political propaganda and out-of-context RAND simulations, this is quite an effective aircraft for this purpose, with the only major concern being its shorter-then-optimal ranged nature. Keep in mind though, this 'short-range' is a >1100 km radius from its fuelling source. For purposes of tactical geographical defense or control, this fighter's range is more than sufficient.

The major 'problem' with this aircraft is that it tries to do too much-- this is exactly what Canada's severely limited military budget would need.

If you are worried about the range, look at a map of canada, and using a compass (or effective computational analogue) draw a ~1000 km radius circle around each canadian airbase (this distance is reached in <30 minutes at top speed). If you do this, it looks like a new airbase will need to be placed to cover the far north, but that the rest of the country is well covered.

In America we are laughing at your "modern military" with "One of the best jets in the world", The F-35 is form Lockheed Martin's reject pile. That's why our military rarely uses it, except on rare occassions in auxiliary missions.

Aha, so the Conservatives see Canada getting into a potential war with Russia, Norway, Denmark and the U.S. over control of the arctic. Some funny Ideas that tool Stephen Harper has, Also I wonder who would lose that war, Two of the world's (former) superpowers? or a country of 30 million people that pollutes some of the world's most valuable freshwater resources trying to squeeze out a few drops of oil from some rubble in Alberta.

Nice job, Canada. Your new F-35's make you look so cool, eh?