It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Suspends Israel from JSF Project.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by longbow

I thought the attack on Nethetherlands was just fake attack to lure French and UK to the north. Than the Germans punched through the Maginot line near Ardennes. (although the M line was weaker in Ardenes).



The Germans DID invade through the Ardennes forest, but the Maginot line didnt extend that far in the same strength as the rest of the line. The Maginot line was initially only along the Franco-German and the Franco-Italy borders, it stopped at hte Belgium border because of a 1920s alliance between the two countries. In 1936, Belgium pulled out of this alliance which caused France to extend the Line across the Belgium-France border but it was never completed, and basically consisted of a couple of pillboxes and a few forts which were spaced far apart along the new section of the Line, the gaps left were meant to be filled in with more forts as time allowed.

When the germans invaded, they had two main forces. One force sat opposite the main Maginot Line and acted as a decoy, they knew they couldnt get through the Line. The second force invaded Belgium, went through the lowlands and the Ardennes and slipped through the gaps that the French hadnt yet filled and was deep into France by the fifth day.

The Maginot Line on the Franco-Italy border did successfuly stop an Italian invasion which came at the same time as the German one - not many people realise that Italy invaded France too! If the maginot line had been extended properly, if france had had the time to do it, then chances are Germanys invasion would have been a lot more bloody.




And why do you think Rafale is so good? I don't think it is better than Grippen only it costs much more. Especially it's radar sucks.


Mainly its a personal opinion, but when did the Gripen come into this? The Rafale is a Mach2 multirole aircraft, and it has the option of operating off an aircraft carrier, which the Gripen doesnt. The Rafale maximum takeoff weight is also nearly twice that of the Gripen, and it has a higher ceiling, along with a similiar range. Who says its Radar sucks? The Rafale is equipped with an RBE2 radar, developed by Thales, which has look-down and shoot-down capability. The radar can track up to eight targets simultaneously and provides threat identification and prioritisation. Thales is one of the best electronics manufacturers in the world, and produces electronics systems for the majority of the european aircraft and ship manufacturers including the Eurofighter project.




posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by RichardPrice
Mainly its a personal opinion, but when did the Gripen come into this? The Rafale is a Mach2 multirole aircraft, and it has the option of operating off an aircraft carrier, which the Gripen doesnt. The Rafale maximum takeoff weight is also nearly twice that of the Gripen, and it has a higher ceiling, along with a similiar range. Who says its Radar sucks? The Rafale is equipped with an RBE2 radar, developed by Thales, which has look-down and shoot-down capability. The radar can track up to eight targets simultaneously and provides threat identification and prioritisation. Thales is one of the best electronics manufacturers in the world, and produces electronics systems for the majority of the european aircraft and ship manufacturers including the Eurofighter project.

Of course Grippen cannot operate from the carriers,. but it has some similar features including small RCS and advanced radar/avionics. My point is price and although I don't know the exact numbers, I think you can have 2 Gripens for 1 Rafale.
The Rafale radar may be advanced but I have read it's only ESA (if this has already changed, than sorry) so it has short detection range when compared to AESA or even Eurofighter machanically steered radar. The French don't see this as big problem , because they are planing to use them in combination with AWACs and Hawkeye. For other customer whou cannot rely on Aawcs it coud become a problem very quickly.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3

Originally posted by American Mad Man

We don't need them as a watchdog in the ME anymore - we have our own bases in Afghanistan and Iraq. Right now they serve no purpose unless we use them to attack Iran.



You plan to stay there for good??!!




Do you really think there is any chance of the US leaving in the next decade or two?

I don't. I think we will gradually phase out, but for the short and midterm we are there.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 04:18 PM
link   
We give Israel basically top notch tech and systems for free, and this to me is idiocy they stab us in the back we should let them rot they are basically nothing without the U.S.


[edit on 22-4-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man

Do you really think there is any chance of the US leaving in the next decade or two?

I don't. I think we will gradually phase out, but for the short and midterm we are there.


And what if either country asks the US to leave? With the recent Iraq elections not exactly going with the US favourite, theres more than a chance that the Iraq government will request such a thing in the near future.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 04:46 PM
link   
I think the neo-con's PNAC strategy makes it pretty clear a permanent presence in the ME is envisaged.

Iraq became number one choice as it became clear that there was no way Saudi Arabia would tolerate an unlimited and permanent US presence post gulf war mk1, especially in view of the damaging and significant destabilising this was causing the 'House of Saud' due to the religious significance of having foreign (infidel) forces seen as occupying such 'Holy land' (and not going home after the war like they said they would).

So, yes, I think they imagine they can and will do the whole 'going home with much fan-fare' routine in a year or two as their friendly 'client gov' fully takes Iraq over......

..... and they'll keep very quiet about the permanent bases they'll keep on in Iraq.

(Isn't it something like 20 huge bases that have been built there to date?)



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 12:32 AM
link   
The US has bases in over 80 counters, I don't see what what's with having bases abroad if the county your in dose mind.
A permanent bas in Afghanistan and Iraq will be very helpful to the U.S. as we may need to conduct operation in that part of the world.



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 12:54 AM
link   
Why would Israel bite the hand that feeds them? God, I can think of so many ways this relates to Adam and Eve. While doing so I can think of so many ways why that is blasphemous on my part! I am not trying to say the U.S. is God, just that Adam and Eve bet the hand that fed them and thus we don't get to live in Paradise. STUPID ADAM AND EVE!



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 01:23 AM
link   
No no.. if you're talking stupid then its Argentina..
Stupid Argentina Stupid stupid!!



posted on May, 8 2005 @ 02:15 PM
link   
So lets see the USA goes invades the ME and gets them as well as others more angry with the USA and thus Israel than they have been for a long while. Then denies Israel of weapons that it has payed for (didn't all major members of the project help fund it?) and needs to possibly defend against the turmoil in the region that the US has created. What kind of policy is that? China isn't even a threat, at least not until some dumb ass US president picks a fight with them. When and if that happens it will be interesting to see just how many allies the US has left, at this rate i doubt it will be many. Ah well I'm sure we will all do just fine without the US, Israel had to rely on France for advanced figher jets in their last greatest time of need when no one else would sell them jets so there is no reason they won't be able to do this again. With them selling tech to China probably wouldn't be an issue because they aren't as paranoid as the US and will probably be selling tech to China themselves soon.



posted on May, 8 2005 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trent
So lets see the USA goes invades the ME and gets them as well as others more angry with the USA and thus Israel than they have been for a long while. Then denies Israel of weapons that it has payed for (didn't all major members of the project help fund it?) and needs to possibly defend against the turmoil in the region that the US has created. What kind of policy is that? China isn't even a threat, at least not until some dumb ass US president picks a fight with them. When and if that happens it will be interesting to see just how many allies the US has left, at this rate i doubt it will be many. Ah well I'm sure we will all do just fine without the US, Israel had to rely on France for advanced figher jets in their last greatest time of need when no one else would sell them jets so there is no reason they won't be able to do this again. With them selling tech to China probably wouldn't be an issue because they aren't as paranoid as the US and will probably be selling tech to China themselves soon.


Israel did not contribute financially to the development of the JSF. They were considered non-participating members of the programme, observing to determine if they would eventually make a purchase. They did have to pay a non-refundable fee though to take part in the evaluations.

Also, Israel would never have paid for the fighters anyway! The U.S. gives them most of the weapons they import as part of the post camp david military aid plan.

Good point about France, though, they were Israel's main benefactor before it became the U.S.

-koji K.

[edit on 8-5-2005 by koji_K]



posted on May, 8 2005 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Chirac being in power may make it less friendly than before but the French usually try to play all sides and can be good to use as long as your ever watchful for the knife in the back. I'm not trying to be anti-French here but that's the way i see it and i don't think they really try to hide it, which i find refreshing.



posted on May, 9 2005 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by American Mad Man

Do you really think there is any chance of the US leaving in the next decade or two?

I don't. I think we will gradually phase out, but for the short and midterm we are there.


And what if either country asks the US to leave? With the recent Iraq elections not exactly going with the US favourite, theres more than a chance that the Iraq government will request such a thing in the near future.


Sorry, but we aren't going to leave just because some (it's never all) of that country wants us to. We have invested billions of dollars in this, and we are going to see it through, the way we believe it should be.

That may sound harsh or whatever, but we are not going to let either country sink back to what we have just saved it from. Bottom line:

If we don't want to leave, we ain't going to leave.



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 08:05 AM
link   
Because of the airintakes, many people believe that China has got some material about F-35 from Israel
external image

[edit on 15-5-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Is it just me or does the Rafale look very similar to the Eurofighter? I wasn't aware before as i never paid much attention to French Planes and it might just be a superficial similarity...

RAFALE


EUROFIGHTER TYPHOON


[edit on 15/5/05 by stumason]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 09:01 AM
link   
The French was working on the Eurofighter project but halfway they decided to build a light fighter on their own, which became the Rafale. Those damn french!



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Halfway? Well, not really. France was involved in initial discussions with Germany and Britain but quit before any real design work began because the other two were not prepared to give France 50% of the project plus all assembly, flight testing and export sales (unsurprisingly).

And yes, the similarity is merely superficial as the Rafale is based on the Dassault ACX while the Typhoon evolved from the BAe P.110 via the BAe P.120.



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 09:36 AM
link   
The Eurofighter fared a 4.5 against the Su-35 in that same old simulator, while the Rafale fared a 1.0 against the Su-35. Either the french engineering was not as good as Europe combined or the Americans must be thinking "Damn those damned french!"



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 10:15 AM
link   
While Israel is suspended, it might not be impossible for India to get some F-35's.

Here's a pic of an F-35 with Indian markings displayed by the US Department of Defence :


external image

Read these links : www.indianexpress.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Edit: resized photo

[edit on 15-5-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by emile
Because of the airintakes, many people believe that China has got some material about F-35 from Israel


Any sources in that ?? I am pretty sure that is untrue.

The FC-1/Super-7 is actually the development of the Russian Mig-33 concept which China bought from Russia soon after the Soviet collapse.


Mig-33 concept :

external image

Chinese FC-1(super-7):



Read more details on matej's superb thread : www.abovetopsecret.com...


The USA are really annoyed over Israel letting China copy its Lavi (which had several hi-tech stuff from the F-16) :




The LAVI :





The Chinese J-10 (copied) :

external image




Also read :

Israel-China UAV Deal Provokes Pentagon



The Pentagon’s undersecretary of defence for policy Doug Feith accused top Israeli defence ministry official on an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) deal between Israel and the People’s Republic of China (PRC), and claimed that this has caused a confidence crisis between the Pentagon and the Israeli MoD.

Israel’s Channel Two television reported on 15 December that Feith had demanded the resignation of retired Maj. Gen. Amos Yaron, the widely respected and longtime director-general of Israel’s MoD. According to the reports, Feith was ‘outraged’ that he was not informed the UAV sale to China few years ago, and demanded the resignation of retired Maj. Gen. Amos Yaron, the widely respected and long-time director-general of Israel’s MoD.

This is also the first time that the existence of such a deal between China and Israel is confirmed. China reportedly acquired some unknown number of the Israeli Aerospace Industry (IAI)’s Harpy Attack UAV in 1994. In summer 2004 some of these UAVs were sent back to Israel to be upgraded for better performance. The Pentagon has already demanded that Israel not to deliver these UAVs to China, even though they are properties of the PRC.

source


Harpy pic :


Edit: more StealthSpy photo and images resized!

[edit on 15-5-2005 by Seekerof]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join