Think of it this way. With two very critical differences, the Sunnis of Saudi Arabia and the Shi'a of Iran bear a resemblance to the Capitalists of the United States and the Communists of the (former) USSR. They are ideological enemies, as were we and the Soviets. Perhaps their enmity is even more extreme, based, as it is, on differing and mutually-exclusive interpretations of a religion.
The two very critical differences? First, while we and the Soviets were both capable of defending ourselves (through Mutually Assured Destruction), the Saudis, if forced to be self-reliant, would be no match for even a non-nuclear Iran. Their population is a fraction of Iran's, and their economytheir oil fieldsis only a stone's throw across the narrow Persian (or Arabian, if you prefer) Gulf. The Saudis depend on us to deter the descendents of Ayatollah Khomeini, as they did to shelter them from the wrath of Saddam in 1990-1991. Second, while there were very few Communists in America and very few (perhaps, no) Capitalists in the USSR, there are a lot of Shi'a in Saudi Arabia, and they happen to reside where the oil fields are located.
So if I were the King of Saudi Arabia, I'd be concerned about Iranian influence on my Shi'a subjects and extremely worried about Iran becoming a nuclear power. In the aftermath of 9/11, I'd wonder what the U.S. would be willing to do if I were threatened by a nuclear Iran determined to take my place as the leader of the Islamic world. Wouldn't it be ironic if the end result of bin Laden's Sunni fantasy were to elevate the Shi'a to the top of Islam's totem pole?
Faced with these risks, I'd be guilty of dereliction of duty if I didn't at least have an option to become a nuclear power.
There's plenty of evidencemuch of it dating from long before 9/11that the Saudis have been exploring this option. Whether they've exercised it, I can't say. Judge for yourself after reading this post. head to the link and read it.
#1
This is one of the relatively undiscussed issues that convinces me that Bush will act. It wouldn't end at Saudi, either. Easy to see Egypt wanting to be in that club. Another is the snuggly relationship between the MM and Yugo. The problem is tryinig to stuff the nuclear genie back in the bottle post-Kahn.
Long termm technology will get faster, better and cheaper. It will become easier for any wacko turd world country to become a nuclear "power" each year. We have to demonstrate that it is not worth the effort, regardless of how small that effort becomes.
So, Iran must be made an example. We need to Shermanize the place. Especially the electrical system.
And for all this we have the Indians, Paks and Chinese to thank.
Past state decisions to share weapons information (shown graphically in Figure 1) have served to influence the current international system. By and large, the rationale for these acts had been the strengthening of an ally. But alliances change: Moscow, for example, grew to regret its early nuclear weapons assistance to Beijing.
Figure 1: Venn diagram displaying the historical sharing of nuclear weapons knowledge
among declared nuclear weapon states (solid circles), undeclared nuclear weapon states
(dashed circles), and South Africa, a former undeclared nuclear weapon state. The num-
ber of explosive nuclear tests performed is given in parentheses. Area of overlap is not
strictly proportional to the degree of knowledge sharing, as this is difficult to quantify. The
Russia-U.S. overlap reflects the recent purchase by the U.S. Defense Special Weapons
Agency (via a detailed neotiated contract) of a large amount of data concerning the
former Soviet test program. Transfer of information from nuclear weapon states to non-
nuclear weapon states that would assist the latter "in any way' to acquire nuclear explo-
sive devices is prohibited under Articles I and II of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Posted by: john ||
04/13/2006 13:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
We are committed to democratic norms, procedures and structures freedom of opinion
Notice we are now entitled to free opinion, but not free speech.
I didn't read the rest. Blah, blah blah. We've got a new plan, better than the old plan. It's untried, its untrue, but send us some money and we'll sell it to you.
Several of the books stressed that those most severely affected by these problems tended to be Muslims themselvesthe abused wives who fled to womens shelters, the toddlers subjected to the torture of clitoridectomy, the children sent abroad to prison-like Koran schools, the teenage girls compelled to wed illiterate bullies who think wife-beating is a God-given right.
Please note how the list of victims really aren't "Muslims" so much as plain women and children. The least willing participants in Islam's aggression.
its not American imperialism or exploitation that provokes Islamists but rather the seductive appeal of American culture, their own attraction to which appalls them.
So, just like how women must be kept sequestered and veiled because of the potent and persistent threat they represent to an easily tempted Muslim male, so must America be obliterated solely due to its enticing freedoms. Yeah, sure ... [spit]
Warraq concludes with a sentence that resonates now even more than it must have in 1995: The final battle will not necessarily be between Islam and the West, but between those who value freedom and those who do not.
Right there is the bottom line. Just like WWII.
He favorably quotes a postwar observation by Bertolt Brecht: The womb is fertile still, from which [Hitler] crawled.
And just like WWII, Europe is still at risk of becoming the same old charnel house it becomes whenever its utopic ideals fall crashing to the ground.
#3
I didnt find the article to be overly academic, but it is rather long. Its also completely worth reading. I especially enjoyed the authors skewering of pompous academics like Garton Ash. What fool in his right mind could compose a sentence like this?
even if it were possible for the United Nations to be composed entirely of crypto-Americas [i.e., democracies], this would be deeply undesirable, on grounds of, so to speak, the biodiversity of world politicsnot to mention sheer boredom.
Wow! Leave Oxfords campus once and a while, Mr. Ash.
This is in regards to the Amnesty program for illegals..
The United States government now employs an untold number of people who are either responsible for enforcing immigration policy or supporting those who do, ranging from Consular Officers in far flung places to immigration inspectors in airports and border patrol agents combing the arid deserts. Tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people obey the law year in and year out while they wait in their home country for their chance to immigrate to America. All of these people, it seems, are fools.
Imagine that you are a Filipino, and that it has always been your dream to emigrate to America (or as the Dept. of State web site frames it "visiting permanently"), and that over twenty years ago your sister became an American citizen and filed an application for you to get a visa (visas for Filipinos are now available for "Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens" who had applications filed on their behalf in 1983). You have been waiting all these years, perhaps not so patiently, but obeying U.S. immigration law nevertheless. Today you turn on the news to find that the government of the United States is considering a bill to allow those in the U.S. illegally to remain there, if they pay a small fine and back taxes. They might even have a shot at U.S. citizenship, but don't worry, it is not an amnesty. (By the way, no matter how much spin the White House puts on it, to the rest of the world this is an amnesty program.) What might your possible reaction be? Would it perhaps be enough to push you into the local anti-American camp? visit and see his other points...
#1
THIS ARTICLE IS A CROCK - here in Guam, the only Filipinos I know of whom had to wait so long for their visas and citizenship are those with serious problems on their applications, e.g. criminal records, indicias of fraudulent applications or answers, or problems with personal or professional references. Most Filipino, Asian, or other foreign emigres whom come to Guam, and as I've also found in the US, want to obey US-local laws and inevitably become legal citizens, NOT to be illegal or permanently illegal.
#3
Joe - not a crock at all. Very well documented that siblings of Filipinos who have become USCs have to wait in excess of 20 years for their number to get called. Same with Mexico, India, and few others. It is so bad that when people find out that the applicant died, they pay big money to assume the ID of the dead relative in hopes of getting the immigrant visa.
Posted by: Bangkok Billy ||
04/13/2006 7:40 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Remember, this entire process is the result of over 200 years of debate and laws passed by Congress. The very same jerkoffs who are now on Spring vacation.
Gee, that's strange. I wonder why I don't get a Spring vacation.
#5
we should fix and expand the already existing "guest worker" program.
Could someone please explain why that if there are over 11 million illegal aliens currently in the US there is a need to increase the number of approved applicants? If passed, the senate bill would add an additional 4.7 million (includes 20% expansion quotient) unskilled workers by the end of 2007. (That doesnt even include offspring and family repatriation) It should be telling why the usual self-proclaimed defenders of the disenfranchised workers are not supporting the Dorgan (D-ND) amendment.
#7
The answer is simple: (1) build a wall (2) Enforce the laws so that those in the states illegally do not get work and thus leave on their own (3) Streamline the paperwork so that more legal immigrants can come in (4) push for assimilation as that is the key to success in America rather than a permenant underclass.
The combination helps those that follow the law and punishs those that don't. It also would be easy to market to the average American who sees fairplay as important.
#8
1. build a wall;
2. set up a fair system to citizenship for hard working, good, people who came here under the pre-exisiting system;
3. send home the losers (La Raza types, whiners, felons and congress-critters)
#9
The answer is simple: (2) Enforce the laws so that those in the states illegally do not get work and thus leave on their own (
What in the hell makes you think for one moment any of these illegal aliens will leave on their own?!!!
That is foolish and blind-eyed beyond words and is exactly the sort of attitude and belief that our so-called Representatives in Washington continue to fantasize in.
Grow up and join the real world already! The people already here are here to stay until & unless we do something concrete about all of them.
#10
FOTSGreg, if someone cannot work they cannot buy food, they starve and die. Most folks came here because they could earn cash, without that the incentive is gone and they will return to Mexico. The problem is really coming down on employers and everytime that has happened politicans are contacted by the companies and the politicians come down on the border patrol and nothing gets done. That must change.
The following are excerpts from Al-Baghdadi's article: [1]
The Muslims are the Ones Who Failed to Present a Positive Image of Islam
"Osama bin Laden is a terrorist, criminal, murderer and villain, and every other inhuman description applies to him as well. However, he is definitely not responsible for the rising [level] of hatred towards Muslims in the West. This hatred is reflected in numerous new measures that have recently been adopted by Western governments in an effort to stop the stream of Muslims entering America and Europe. The governments also implement laws that limit freedoms and violate human rights as another precaution, to protect the safety of their citizens...
"Even though Muslims boast that Islam is the [fastest]-growing religion in America and in the West... it is [actually] the religion that is most incomprehensible to the Europeans and the Americans.
"What is truly saddening is that Islam is being associated with terrorism due to the terrorists' frequent use of Koranic verses and hadiths to justify their terrorist actions...
"Statements made by preachers in the mosques, in articles and on various media channels accusing non-Muslims of heresy, the [preachers'] curses, and their characterization of Jews as the descendents of apes and pigs - [all these] cause Westerners to perceive Islam as an intolerant religion that rejects religious pluralism.
"The Muslims, therefore, are responsible for the distorted image of Islam prevalent in the modern West, and they are the ones who failed to present a positive image of Islam. Thus, they are responsible for the problems experienced by the Muslims today...
"Among those who incite to jihad, have you seen a single one who set out [to wage jihad] himself, or sent one of his sons to wage jihad for the sake of Allah? On the contrary - while encouraging innocent people to wage jihad in Iraq and in Chechnya, they themselves take additional wives..."
"What Do You Expect the West to Do When it Sees its Citizens Being Murdered in the Name of Religion?"
"Osama bin Laden didn't force anyone to go to Iraq, murder its people and destroy its institutions. He didn't force anyone to murder innocent people in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, America and Europe. Bin-Laden did not tell the Muslims in the West: 'Hate the country that gave you shelter when you fled [from your homelands], made you rich when you were poor, fed you when you were hungry, gave you freedom after the bondage you suffered in your Muslim countries, and educated you when you were ignorant.'
"You caused all these catastrophes out of your own choice and your own free will... and failed to repay the kindness [shown to you]. So what do you expect the West [to do] when it sees its citizens being murdered in the name of religion, when it [experiences] hatred in the name of religion and suffers the damages of terrorism [perpetrated] in the name of religion? It is only natural that the West should hate you and tighten the rope around your necks, so you do not 'invade it from within' as you declare in your announcements and sermons...
"The truth that we must deal with today is that people in the West no longer trust Muslims in general. The Muslims in the West must therefore sever their ties with the Muslims in the east, and repair their relations with the Western societies by announcing that they accept the humane values on the basis of which they were received in the West. They must also sever their ties with the religious clerics and their fatwas...
"If they fail to do this, they must bear the consequences and the difficulties that will ensue. They must not blame bin Laden and Al-Zarqawi, but [only] themselves for being driven, in ignorance, by the views of the clerics..."
#1
It has become apparent that while the actual extremist element in Islam is only about 10 % of the whole deal, that a plurality or possibly a majority of the rest are either giving the bad actors aid and comfort or are quietly hopeful that they achieve their goal of taking out the West. Of the remaining 30-40%, most don't give any of this a moment's thought one way or another. Only a small and mostly powerless percentage truly want coexistence.
The lack of loud, pure condemnation from most Muslims and from organizations like CAIR speaks volumes.
Wan criticism of the acts of extremism which turns out to be nothing but a platform upon which a huge "BUT" can be placed (followed by a list of whiny grievances) is neither useful nor sincere nor deserving of trust.
When groups like CAIR make strong unqualified critiques of the acts of murderous terrorists without adding on their own lists of real or imagined grievances for a period of five years or so, I'll start believing in the concept of a large Muslim majority which is moderate and has no designs on destroying the West, and not one moment before. Until then, I'm forced to believe that the number of Muslims who are committed to coexistence and peace is a tiny minority of the entire lot of them.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
04/13/2006 6:03 Comments ||
Top||
#2
no mo uro, You state that Only a small and mostly powerless percentage truly want coexistence.
I would say that those people actually want out of Islam and to pursue a normal lifestyle, however, they will be murdered if they leave their beloved Islam, so they keep quiet about it.
#3
Poor fellow realizes that things have gone past the tipping point for trust in this generation. He also, perhaps, may have studied enough of the history of Western civilization to realize what lies beyond the next tipping point, the one where Muslims are perceived as the enemy instead of just an annoyance. Beyond that point lies only a lonely wind blowing over the salted fields of their former homes.
#4
"recently been adopted by Western governments in an effort to stop the stream of Muslims entering America"
There is no effort...I'm told by a highly respectable source that approximately 2000 Somalies enter the USA at Newark International Airport as permanent residents each month and I don't think they are catholics.
#5
Somalies, yet. You would have thought that someone would realize that the white/black thing isn't working very well.
Why do learned men (and women) continue to fool themselves about integration and bigotry ? Worldwide prejudice is winning over tolerance by about 99 to 1. Open your eyes, every day, shia and sunni Arabs kill each other by the dozens.
Outrage and disbelief as world soccer body condemns Israel, not Hamas.
By Tom Gross
Israel is used to being singled out for unjust criticism and subjected to startling double standards by the United Nations, the European Union, much of the Western media and numerous academic bodies. But now FIFA the supposedly nonpolitical organization that governs the world's most popular sport, soccer is getting in on the act as well.
FIFA has condemned Israel for an air strike on an empty soccer field in the Gaza Strip that was used for training exercises by Islamic Jihad and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. This strike did not cause any injuries. But at the same time FIFA has refused to condemn a Palestinian rocket attack on an Israeli soccer field last week which did cause injuries.
With the soccer World Cup, which takes place only once every four years, just weeks away, it is a time of mounting emotion for the hundreds of millions of people across the globe who passionately follow the game.
As FIFA meets in the next few days to decide what action to take against Israel, the double standards involved could not be more obvious. Up to now FIFA, which sees itself as a purely sporting body, has gone out of its way to avoid politics, and has refrained from criticizing even the most appalling human-rights abuses connected to soccer players and stadiums.
NOT A WORD ABOUT SADDAM AND THE TALIBAN
When Saddam Hussein's son Uday had Iraqi soccer players tortured in 1997 after they failed to qualify for the 1998 FIFA World Cup Finals in France, FIFA remained silent. Uday, who was chairman of the Iraqi soccer association, had star players tortured again in 1998. And in 2000, following a quarterfinal defeat in the Asia Cup, three Iraqi players were whipped and beaten for three days by Uday's bodyguards. The torture took place at the Iraqi Olympic Committee headquarters, but FIFA said nothing.
Again, FIFA simply looked the other way while the Taliban used U.N.-funded soccer fields to slaughter and flog hundreds of innocent people who had supposedly violated sharia law in front of crowds of thousands chanting "God is great." (Afghan soccer coach Habib Ullahniazi said that as many as 30 people were executed in the middle of the field during the intermissions of a single soccer match at Kabul's Ghazi Stadium.)
FIFA equally failed to speak out when soccer stadiums in Argentina were turned into jails.
AND CHILE AND CHECHNYA
FIFA's silence was no less deafening when, according to the International Red Cross, about 7,000 prisoners were detained (and some tortured) in Chile's national soccer stadium after Augusto Pinochet seized power in 1973.
Nor did the organization threaten Russia with sanctions after Chechen president Akhmad Kadyrov was murdered by a bomb explosion at Grozny's Dynamo stadium.
As for the Middle East, FIFA refused to criticize the decision to name a Palestinian soccer tournament after a suicide terrorist who murdered 31 people at a Passover celebration at the Park Hotel in Netanya in 2002. (At the tournament, organized under Yasser Arafat's auspices in 2003, the brother of the suicide bomber was given the honorary role of distributing the trophies to the winning team.)
FIFA also failed to condemn the suicide bomb at the Maxim restaurant in Haifa in October 2003 which injured three officials from the leading Israeli soccer team Maccabi Haifa.
ISRAEL IS DIFFERENT...
But then last week, FIFA finally found a target worthy of its outrage, and leapt into action. That target was Israel.
The international governing body for soccer condemned the Jewish state, and announced that it was considering possible action over the Israeli air strike last week on the Gaza soccer field that had been used for terrorist training exercises. The field, which had also reportedly served as a missile launching pad, was empty at the time; the strike itself came in response to the continuing barrage of Qassam rocket attacks directed at Israeli towns and villages.
Only a couple of days earlier, one of those Qassam rockets landed on a soccer field at the Karmiya kibbutz in southern Israel, causing light injuries to one person. Several other Israeli children and adults needed to be treated for shock. The attack was claimed by the Al-Quds brigades, an armed wing of Islamic Jihad. The soccer pitch is regularly used by children and it was only a matter of luck that there were not greater injuries. (Since Israel's withdrawal from Gaza last year, several members of the kibbutz, including a ten-month-old baby, have been wounded after their homes took direct hits from Qassams. Israelis elsewhere have died after being hit by these weapons.)
... BUT NOT QASSAM ROCKETS
In an interview with the Jerusalem Post, Jerome Champagne, FIFA's deputy general secretary, who had personally condemned the attack on the Palestinian soccer pitch, refused to extend a similar condemnation to the attack on the Israeli pitch.
Champagne said he had discussed the matter with FIFA president Sepp Blatter and that a decision on what action to take against Israel would be announced soon. Champagne, a French national, also sent an official letter to the Israeli ambassador to Switzerland. (FIFA is based in Zurich.)
A FIFA condemnation of Israel is no small matter. The incredible passions that soccer arouses in most countries around the globe seem to have few boundaries. For example, it was said that the only time the guns fell silent during the Lebanese civil war was during the 1982 World Cup matches.
Individual Israelis, outraged by FIFA's blatantly one-sided decision, have been sending e-mails to FIFA asking why "they care more about the grass on an empty soccer pitch than the human lives saved by strikes on the Qassam launching pads."
ANTI-SEMITIC BANNERS AND CHANTS
They have also asked where FIFA is when anti-Semitic banners go up in European soccer stadiums, and there are chants from spectators about sending Jews to the gas? And where, they wonder, are the FIFA sanctions against the Arab or Asian countries that refuse to allow Israel to compete in Asia?
Other questions have been raised, too why, for instance, FIFA has moved games from Israel because guest teams were afraid to come to Israel, but has never banned any other national teams from playing home games on account of local Islamic violence. Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Turkey were allowed to continue playing matches at home.
In response to some of this criticism Champagne perhaps unaware of the phenomena of some radical Jews being at the forefront of whipping up hate against the Jewish state wrote to the Jerusalem Post saying he couldn't possibly be biased against Israel because his wife was Jewish.
AP FAILS TO MENTION QASSAM ATTACK
In its widely circulated report on the FIFA condemnation of Israel, the Associated Press also failed to mention the Qassam rocket attack on the Israeli soccer pitch. As a result, and not for the first time, AP gave its readers around the globe an unbalanced impression of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The popularity of soccer ensured AP's story was used by dozens of news outlets among others, Al-Jazeera, CBC News of Canada, and the Los Angeles Times. Only the Israeli press mentioned the Qassam attack on the kibbutz Karmiya soccer pitch, an attack which the Islamic Jihad website admits to carrying out.
"WE ARE NOT IN POLITICS"
The outrage felt in soccer-mad Israel at these astonishing double standards is all the greater since FIFA president Sepp Blatter has made it clear that FIFA should not become involved in politics. Following calls last December from German politicians that Iran should be banned from participating in the forthcoming World Cup (which starts in Germany on June 9, 2006) because of repeated Holocaust denial by the Iranian president, Blatter said "We're not going to enter into any political declarations. We in football, if we entered into such discussions, then it would be against our statutes. We are not in politics."
Indeed so emboldened does Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad now feel by FIFA's support that he announced last week that he will likely attend Iran's opening match against Mexico in Nuremberg on June 11. Holocaust denial is a serious crime punishable by a prison term of up to five years in Germany, but Ahmadinejad no doubt feels that powerful international bodies like FIFA will protect him.
A BLIND EYE TO DUBAI
Meanwhile FIFA (and other sporting bodies) continually turn a blind eye to boycotts of Israeli sportsmen.
In February, Tal Ben Haim the Israeli national soccer team captain, who plays his club soccer for the English Premiership team Bolton Wanderers was banned from joining his Bolton teammates for their training matches in Dubai. FIFA pointedly ignored this. So did Bolton despite the fact that the team claims to be among the leaders of the campaign to "Kick racism out of football" in the U.K.
Only last week, another English club, West Ham, left their two Israeli players, Yossi Benayoun and Yaniv Katan, at home when they went to Dubai. FIFA naturally had nothing to say.
Whilst Israel is often slandered as an "apartheid state," (despite having several Arabs playing in its national team), Dubai has received no criticism for what appears to be a clear "apartheid" policy.
Indeed, were Israel allowed to compete against other Asian teams for a World Cup berth, rather than against the likes of England and France, the relatively strong Israeli team would most probably have been able to qualify for this year's World Cup.
RONALDINHO AIDS TERROR VICTIMS
Not all is rotten in world soccer. Some individuals still seem to know right from wrong. Last week, Ronaldinho, the Brazilian superstar widely regarded as the best current player in the world, donated signed footballs and shirts to Israeli child suicide bomb survivors, saying he hoped his gifts would "warm the hearts of the children who have suffered so much."
But FIFA, meanwhile, apparently thinks it is acceptable for Palestinian terror groups to continue targeting such Israeli children, firing missiles from the Gaza Strip, even though Israel has left the area.
Tom Gross is the former Jerusalem correspondent for the London Sunday Telegraph and New York Daily News. Among his previous pieces for NRO is "Jeningrad".
GENEVA - Soccer's governing body insists it has no power to stop forced prostitution in Germany, which is expected to increase during the World Cup.
We...just...can't...do...it! FIFA president Sepp Blatter said Thursday his organization is obliged to comply with international and national laws, but its main task is to ensure its competitions adhere to regulations.
"FIFA places great importance on respecting human life and the physical integrity of human beings," Blatter said in response to accusations that his group was not taking stronger action on this issue.
Oh, come on. I'll bet Sepp and the boys are paying top dollar for their whores. "Prostitution and trafficking of women, however, does not fall within the sphere of responsibility of an international sports federation but in that of the authorities and the lawmakers of any given country," he added.
See! Not our job! So let the good times roll!
In my recent Conventional Global Strike I promised to address soon other ways in which U.S. Navy submarine armament systems are dramatically broadening in reach and lethality. But observing the errors of fact and occasional tone nearing hysteria in some media lately, I feel compelled to first address an enemy weapon and put it in its proper place. This weapon has been called in print hellacious. It's been described as a quantum leap in the nature of naval warfare from this day forth -- a disruptive technology for which America is woefully unprepared. It's even been said that there's no physically possible friendly defense against it, and the target won't even realize the weapon is coming until it impacts and the target's crew are dead. Paints a scary picture, doesn't it? Yet none of these statements are true.
Note, article is not correct in number of jobs affected, it is many more. Many more still, if you also include some of our vendor base who will be affected via cuts or even closure in some cases because of the closure and moves.
An Era of a major player in the Aerospace industry and especially the defense industry is coming to an end.
Stanley Aviation, which has been in business since 1948 (and well before via Robert (Bob) Stanley during WWII and before, is being shutdown after nearly almost 60 years in the industry.
Eaton a large global manufacturer aquired Stanley Aviation from Cobham Plc (UK) in November of 2005 has reached the decision to transfer manufacturing to low cost manufacturing country or countries.
You've probably not heard much about Stanley, which has a rich history in the industry and American Defense as it was a quiet but important player in the industry. This is not like some little plating company or machine house shutting down.
For example some of our projects past and present:
Ejection Seats, Bell X craft, Nulcear Range Finding and Computation (before computers), parts on the moon, major components of many aircraft, fuel air and ECS systems for commercial and military, various systems for sea launch ICBMs, F22, F35 (JSF), C17, UAVs, other military planes, Space Station, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Eaton is not to blame for this, there are other issues, however, it is indeed a very sad day for Aviation and especially American Aviation that Stanley is ceasing manufacturing activities.
This is the reality now that the American Aerospace Industry and even general manufacturing in America face ... simple math. We cannot compete with $2.50 - $10.00 per / hour shop rates that the Low Cost Countries can deliver. The myth that China, India, Mexico, et al are not quality or mature manufacturers is just that, complete myth.
They've recently started to crush ITAR / Export concerns and issues, a major roadblock for any Military transfer to an LCC and quality is no longer a concern.
As I've mentioned before, there will be a major shift when an industry / country make nano-manufacturing a reality. If the US is not first, we will face major problems. This is true given the problems our manufacturing base already faces.
#4
felt worse when Ryan left San Diego - you may have remembered Ryan: Spirit of St Louis?
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/13/2006 18:05 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Yeah, there are a lot of us that are falling.
Most will not know of Stanley, nor really 'get' what they've done for Aerospace, that is the shame. Same for many other companies.
It is very sad to go to the Areospace Campuses in LA area ... many skunkworks facilities and many of the old school Areospace Campus facilities are now sound stages or other uses.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
