Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
#5 Calm folks, remember criticizing the EU members is against the law and that is what this is really about IMHO. Not saying this war has been conducted swimmingly but since Europe didn't step up with more than an obligitory handful of brave soldiers (apologies to Nations who did step up, your brave service lays in the shadow of shirker neighbors playing political office with your safety) and Turkey disallowing the use of airspace and the invasion timetable not being changed I believe this is about as good as it could have been.
So sorry Duke of York. It hasn't kept one Royal from joining; perhaps your frustration is could have been spent on preparing your armed forces instead of letting the Royal Navy get gutted, developing joint weapon ssystems with the EU instead of integrating with battle tested US equipment, so on so forth.
Posted by swksvolFF 2008-02-05 11:44||
#6 Randy Andy should stick to subjects he's more familiar with, loose women.
Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2008-02-05 13:00||
#7 Mr Hoon, who is now Chief Whip, said their advice not to dismantle the Iraqi Army or purge all members of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party from senior positions had been overruled by Washington.
That's the Prince's criticism. Weak, not thought out, unhelpful. Yeah, leave the Baathists in charge of the gov. I wonder what the Brits would have thought if the Americans suggested leaving the Nazis in charge in 1945? Same for the Army. How soon would Iraq had a coup if the Tikriti mafia were left in charge? I blame the Prince's inhaling too many helicopter fumes.
I have no developed opinion on the merits of a second design/source for this component. Britain is one of the co-developers of the fighter and they do want to keep their defense industry alive. And they've been lobbying friends on Congress who have in turn been pressuring Bush to include this in the budget.
Maybe the Duke thinks a Dem win is on the horizon and is using this announcement to generate sympathy among the anti-Bush crowd. ??? FWIW
Posted by lotp 2008-02-05 14:31||
#12 Bad deal for the US to keep Rolls Royce competitive. The American taxpayer will fork over for the F-136 more than Britain's entire F-35 R&D contribution. If the Brits want the engine, let them fund it. Same for handing over $40 billion worth of R&D for Britain's 5% contribution.
As a further aside, I believe there is no US need for the F-35B. Helos and new build Harriers are fine. The Marines do not need stealth for CAS and deep strike is for the Navy and Air Force. Just as the Marines don't need their own escort carriers. They learned the wrong lesson from Guadalcanal. If the Navy fleet carriers have to leave, the LHDs won't be staying behind to get slaughtered.
Instead an outsize portion of the F-35 R&D budget is spent on the B model, and of course, spent in Britain. The main beneficiaries are nations without our large deck carriers. Not the US.
#15 ed: not to stray from the main topic, but Boeing is lobbying the Navy hard to rethink the F-35C ( the carrier version) in favor of more Super Hornets. Using the cost angle, proven platform, etc., etc. If this gains traction, expect the toatl JSF buy to go down, but unit cost to go up, which then drives reduced procurement totals, increased unit costs, etc. Mixed emotions on this; I have no lost love for the Lawn Dart, and i am also drawing a paycheck, based in part on F-35 related work. But then there is the taxpayer side of me.
Posted by USN,Ret. 2008-02-05 15:48||
#16 I hope the Navy keeps the full F-35C. We need to stop bleeding our equipment buys with a 1000 cuts. The R&D is already spent. If we don't buy enough F-35Cs, then in a few years we will have the spend the R&D all over again to develop something to defeat a threat that the F-18 can't handle or don't have the numbers in the first place. Witness the $40B spent on the B2 and only $7B spent on procuring 21 bombers. Now the Air Force wants more money to develop another bomber. That's criminal.
I think the US spends too much on too many R&D programs. We need to focus on fewer programs and then buy equipment in quantity so that it can have a decisive effect. The Russians were forced to concede this. We should have figured it out on our own.
#17 Agree: as far as the next-gen AF bomber, what is wrong with a 'Lot II' buy of B-2s, or to save some money, some B-2 Lites (less stealth, still killing). And ask the AF why the EFA-18 Growler isn't a good enough Jammer platform for them, since they have had to rely on the Prowler since the Aardvarks were retired? Jammer envy, perhaps?? I also think the USN has their entire aviation future pinned to the Lawn Dart and will force it to fill all the roles that until recently specialized aircraft were developed and excelled at. I will call it quits when they figure out how to replace the Grumman E-2D with a Hornet. THe recent shredding of the Tomcats was as much about ensuring Iran couldn't get the spare parts as it was to ensure they would not be brought out of mothballs and put back in service (IMHO), and all the potential spots for man made reefs were taken ( and already done w/ Intruders).
Posted by USN,Ret. 2008-02-05 17:57||
#18 The Duke is entitled to his opinion and I, praise be to Thomas Jefferson and associates, am entitled to not give a rat's...
Posted by Darrell 2008-02-05 19:44||
#20 #19 OK - Darrell wins the thread. :-D
Posted by Barbara Skolaut
IMHO - in honor of tonight: wayyyy too early to call. Some of our rural precints haven't been heard from, and the western comments haven't been closed yet, but with <1% reporting so far, we've gotta wait til 3% reports before bestowing that honor
#21 Lessee, the Brits were behind Musa Qala in Afghanistan, which turned into a disaster, and in charge in Basra, where the Iraqi Army is just now getting a handhold (though tenuous) on the graft and corruption created by Britain's "go soft" policy. Andy, I think it's wise for you to remember the words of my father: it's better to sit quietly in a corner and THOUGHT a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.