Posted on 06/09/2008 3:26:04 PM PDT by pissant
Protests very very rarely work, but then theres always hope.
I was wondering if the tanker contract deal had anything to do with the firings and suspected it did but this is the first piece I’ve read on it. I believe Gaffney lays out a good case for it.
True. There are politicos fighting on both sides as well.
I don’t think Frank is saying this is why they were fired, rather that it was another reason they should have been.
I think the politicos should be investigated for undue influence on the original award. Otherwise there was no reason Boeing shouldn’t have won.
I agree and didn’t mean to imply it was the only reason, just one of them. It’s been quite a while since the nuke fiasco but with the reported foot dragging on the UAV’s it all caught up with them.
If it’s not Boeing, then it’s not flowing.
The tanker deal was a political payoff to france. Pure and simple.
What did we get in return?
It's always possible to lay out a good case if you clinton the facts
That decision was one of the biggest stinkers of all time. Kudos to Gates and finally somewhere down the line to Bush for hiring him.
Bush’s decisions have gotten much better since that jackass Rummy left.
They don’t care about the facts.
An inferior tanker. I would add someone got a pocket full of cash.
Frank Gaffney is just a nobody when it comes to defense issues, I reckon.
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/Home.aspx?SID=75
Anyone working acquisition knows the SAFE route was for the USAF to pick Boeing. That they didn’t is a strong indication the process was clean - they had to CLEARLY believe EADS built the better tanker, or they wouldn’t have invited all this trouble for themselves.
I don’t believe for a moment the acquisition folks said, “Let’s throw ourselves on a buzzsaw for fun!”
Yes, maybe we should just give Boeing $200 billion a year directly from the Treasury and cut out the middle man. Amazing propaganda work, how completely “What’s good for Boeing is good for America” has become unquestionable conservative popular wisdom.
There was no good reason to pick EADS. They were undoubtedly pressured to do so.
Who would put more pressure on them than they KNEW Congress would?
Sorry, but they had nothing to gain from picking EADS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.