Posted on 03/15/2008 3:52:13 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
So as I pointed out all the Japanese and European cars in their driveways, they became quite outraged and spent a long time explaining why that was different.
I guess they still live there.
“If that was a real concern, then why did the Air Force allow them to submit a proposal in the first place?”
It was a concern and Northrup didn’t meet the requirements until a last minute change by the Air Force.
“This is about domestic pork barrel politics, and the real agenda of a lot of so-called “conservatives” out there is showing.”
Your slip is showing. Dems are much better at pork barrel than conservatives. Look to Boxer out in CA who was funneling contracts to her husbands company.
He doesn't.
“So as I pointed out all the Japanese and European cars in their driveways, they became quite outraged and spent a long time explaining why that was different.”
Does Toyota make critical national defense related items?
Has anyone else here ever tried to buy parts for a French built Fiat-Allis caterpillar? or a French built Mack diesel engine? Horror Highway... and twice to three times the money too.
“They’re both quite good at it. That’s part of the reason why the Republicans lost congress.”
Yep, Pelosi promised to fix it too. That was right before she submitted a massive pork filled bill.
EADS also sells two-way radios (P25) to cops in the USA - no sale of that product?
What of Beretta? (M-9/92F)
Fabrique Nationale? (SAW M249 AKA Mini-mitrailleuse?)
And PLEASE spare me the 'French = white flag crap, the Légion étrangère more than pulled thier weight in the GWI and later in Chad. France has thier own foreign policy, and it may not agree with ours. That's life.
Very true, but the difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the Democrat leadership runs on delivering the bacon back home. Republicans pretend that they don’t.
EADS tried to circumvent US law in bid to help Chavez. Last year, the Center for Security Policy cited EADS for its sales to Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez and in January, 2006, the U.S. invoked international arms trade regulations to stop EADS from selling its Spanish-built EADS CASA C-295 and CN-235 transport and patrol planes to Chavez. Under the regulations, known as ITAR, other countries cannot sell military products containing American-made components to third countries without U.S. approval. Since the EADS CASA planes contain dozens of U.S. parts, including engines and unique turboprops, the White House notified EADS and Spain of its objections.Rather than stop its dealings with Chavez as a reliable U.S. defense partner would be expected to do, EADS immediately tried to circumvent ITAR by stripping out the American-made equipment and trying to find non-U.S. replacements. Only when it was clear that EADS could not come up with the substitute components did the deal officially fall through, in an October, 2006 announcement – nine months after President Bush invoked ITAR.
Working to arm China. Since the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre, the European Union nations have largely stopped their military cooperation and arms sales to Beijing. Over the past few years though, EADS owners in France and its workers in Germany and Spain have agitated to end the embargo. This desire to fully open the technological floodgates was most recently evinced in March by French Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie, who while in Japan, continued to declare that the ban was “illogical” and “paradoxical.” In fact, she later stated that China’s burgeoning military might was not a threat but that, “what is important is for China’s military power to be put to the service of peace.”[8] It should be noted that the French government is no mere shareholder in EADS; President Jacques Chirac has used his influence to hire and fire the company’s top executives and to intervene in management decisions.
Weapons and nuke parts to Iran. As if selling advanced military equipment to China was not bad enough, EADS is also marketing its wares to the Islamic Republic of Iran. In 2005, for example, Eurocopter representatives attended an air show in that country and were seen attempting to sell what they said were “civilian” helicopters.[9] However, astute observers noticed that EADS’ promotional videotape for the show was labeled “Navy” and that that it prominently featured a military helicopter. EADS official Michel Tripier when questioned why they were ignoring U.S. policy to isolate Iran said, “As a European company, we’re not supposed to take into account embargoes from the U.S.”
Perhaps even more worryingly, there are concerns that EADS may be inadvertently aiding the Iranian nuclear program. As late as 2005, the company was selling Nickel 63 and so-called “Tritium Targets” – both crucial to triggering a nuclear explosion – to the South Korean firm Kyung-Do Enterprises. Reportedly, unbeknownst to EADS, the South Koreans were then reselling the nuclear parts a company called Parto Namaje Tolua, a front for the state-owned Iranian firm Partoris.[10] Even if the sale was an accident, it is extremely worrying that EADS did not take the time to verify the end-user of the nuclear materials.
Is that enough for you?
BTW: Did you know Russia owns at least a 5% stake in EADS, and would like more?
Actually, it is not the politics of winning or losing Kansas, it’s the principle of the situation, if Boeing was trying to rip off the US Govt and by extension the US Taxpayer, then they should have lost the contract.
If the pentagon told Boeing they needed a plane that could do “x” then changed that to a plane that could do “y”, then the deal should be scrubbed.
Like Hillary or Obama are going to procure military aircraft at all? At least under McCain they might get a chance to bid on the next contract.
“And PLEASE spare me the ‘French = white flag crap, the Légion étrangère more than pulled thier weight in the GWI and later in Chad. France has thier own foreign policy, and it may not agree with ours. That’s life.”
Exactly. Thats why critical systems like the refueling system should not be foreign made.
“Yeah. Yeah. If China should deprive our fighting men and women of their berets, what will we do? Answer: produce them in the US! ...or Pakistan.”
It involves far more than berets. That was just a fairly amusing example. But production can’t be instantly moved to another location, particularly for more complex items used by the military.
I know I read of two examples of foreign suppliers refusing to resupply the Brits because of their opposition to the war in Iraq. Once was a Swiss company that supplied grenades, and there was another perhaps French company that refused to supply them with some other items.
Allowing any basic production for our military to go overseas is one of the dumber moves that has been made.
Nor do EADS’ woes end there. Northrop Grumman, EADS’ bidding partner for a U.S. Air Force contract potentially worth as much as $100 million, has thrown its toys out of the pram too. Northrop is threatening to pull out of the bid altogether unless the Air Force alters the terms of the bid, which it argues is biased toward Boeing, because the contract looks at cost simply in terms of initial outlay, not ongoing operation. Ironically, Boeing was originally awarded the contract, way back in 2001, but it was retracted after a procurement scandal.
Multi-national Boeing barely qualifies as an “American” company any more, so this whole story is the reddest of red herrings.
Can the foreign subs produce a Boeing AC without Boeing? Can EADS/Airbus still produce an AC without US assembly plants?
NO and Yes.
Boeing is American and EADS is European.
Strategic US Military Assets should be produced by American companies.
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.