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.

 

A basis to fears that Europe to sell stealth technology to China?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Any basis to fears that Europe to sell stealth technology to China?

Some in Washington fear that EADS (the main European aerospace company, a merger of many famous companies such as Airbus, Eurocopter and MBB, and the second biggest aerospace company in the world) may sell high grade military technologies to China. The rumors are helped by EADS’ recent sale of 150 Airbus to China, and the simultaneous announcement that Eurocopter (part of EADS) is to collaborate with AVIC II to develop a new helicopter.

EADS are also involved in advanced projects as Eurofighter, IRIS-T missile and Global Hawk (“Euro Hawk”).

What is more, EADS is working with Dassault to develop UAV technologies, including a UCAV. Dassault, makers of the famous Mirage series of fighters, have stealth technology, as was demonstrated by their AVE-C “Littke Duke” stealth UAV demonstrator:


Dassault has already worked with Chinese companies to develop target drone UAVs.




posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 06:37 PM
link   
This is about as sound a series of rumours and "basis" to suspect Europe is about to transfer secret tech to China as Boeing's arrangements to produce several major components of the 787 in China is.

Come on guy, if you're going to try and get a little heat going on this kind of purely speculative issue at least check out that the USA isn't doing exactly the same thing, hmmmmm?



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 06:47 PM
link   
i dont think even europe trusts china enough to sell them stealth technology, for their own sake....



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by planeman
Any basis to fears that Europe to sell stealth technology to China?

Some in Washington fear that EADS (the main European aerospace company, a merger of many famous companies such as Airbus, Eurocopter and MBB, and the second biggest aerospace company in the world) may sell high grade military technologies to China. ...


Some in Washington also feared WMDs in Iraq or soviet base on the backside of the Moon - so much for the credibility of such claims


And I dont know if you just expressed it wrongly, but EADS is not the merger of the companies you name, instead they themselves are subsidiaries of EADS.

[edit on 16/12/2005 by Lonestar24]



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Actually, EADS (European Aeronautics Defense and Space) was formed by the merger of a few european aerospace companies in 2000. They have an 80% stake in Airbus SAS, and owns Eurocopter.

I quote, from www.eads.com


n July 2000 EADS was created by merging Aerospatiale Matra of France, DASA of Germany (DaimlerChrysler Aerospace AG excluding MTU Triebwerke) and CASA of Spain(Construcciones Aeronauticas SA).


Incidentally, Dassault is supposedly working on an advanced UCAV, similar to the X-47B and such, called the Neuron, expected for deliverey in 2009. It will be supposedly controllable from the back seat of a rafale or similar fighters. It will have stealth features...

Here's a picture


And more info: Dassault Neuron [Wikipedia]



posted on Dec, 16 2005 @ 11:17 PM
link   
Does China even need stealth aircraft?

What would China use them for?

What are they useful for full stop?



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Come on guy, if you're going to try and get a little heat going on this kind of purely speculative issue at least check out that the USA isn't doing exactly the same thing, hmmmmm?


Oh wait....it cannot be that Europe would do a such a dastardly deed, but because Boeing has an arrangement to let China build certain civilian components of the 787, which has no stealth characteristics at all, lets point the finger towards the US, eh, sminkeypinkey?

Sound logic there.


Sminkeypinkey, I do believe that there is more than enough validity in planeman's purely speculative issue. Maybe, just maybe, you missed these valid circumstantial evidences and coincidences:

1) EU has been looking to end the arms embargo with China.
2) France has been looking to sell Rafale fighters and Agosta stealth submarines and advanced avionics. Notice the mention of stealth here, sminkeypinkey?
3) And who builds the Rafale? Dassault. Hmmm....

Did I miss anything else?
Opps, yeah I did.

The days of Clinton giving US national secrets and technology to China are over.
Boeing nor the US is selling or seeking to sell China military equipment and technology, let alone anything connected to stealth, but hey, seems France is willing to sell the farm, so to speak, including military equipment and stealth related hardware. France is located where? Europe. The topic of this thread is what again? A basis to fears that Europe to sell stealth technology to China? Answer to the question asked? Dern straight there is valid fear that some European nation will sell enough stealth know-how to the Chinese.

So in all reality here, your commentary to this topic was off-mark and considerably so.
Perhaps another try?





seekerof

[edit on 17-12-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by namehere
i dont think even europe trusts china enough to sell them stealth technology, for their own sake....


I agree, hasn't Europe been the main allie of USA for centuries, they will cover eachothers backs... Trust me...



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by SilentFrog
Actually, EADS (European Aeronautics Defense and Space) was formed by the merger of a few european aerospace companies in 2000. They have an 80% stake in Airbus SAS, and owns Eurocopter.

I quote, from www.eads.com


n July 2000 EADS was created by merging Aerospatiale Matra of France, DASA of Germany (DaimlerChrysler Aerospace AG excluding MTU Triebwerke) and CASA of Spain(Construcciones Aeronauticas SA).


Yes, this is correct and I do not dispute that. However the companies you named in your FIRST post are daughters of EADS (or joint ventures with a large share for EADS) - and on those I commented




Originally posted by Seekerof

....

Sminkeypinkey, I do believe that there is more than enough validity in planeman's purely speculative issue. Maybe, just maybe, you missed these valid circumstantial evidences and coincidences:

1) EU has been looking to end the arms embargo with China.
2) France has been looking to sell Rafale fighters and Agosta stealth submarines and advanced avionics. Notice the mention of stealth here, sminkeypinkey?
3) And who builds the Rafale? Dassault. Hmmm....

...


While I am not Sminkeypinkey I´d like to comment on that. The Lift of the EU arms embargo is not necessarily connected to any increased high-tech exchange. Just because the technology that could then be exported doesnt have to be dual-purpose anymore doesnt mean that everyone would start and share their highest secrets. Apart from that a lift would reflect the realities of economic reliances the western world is in ATM - to treat China as an A-grade civilian partner and not show enough confidence to trust a certain level of military cooperation is phoney and an easy way out, to put it simple. I would not approve of unrestricted arms deals with China, but the 1989 arms ban is not up-to-speed anymore and that is the reason why the discussion to lift it takes place.

The Rafale you mention is not "stealth" in the usual sense of the word. It has contemporary Avionics and ECM features, but even the French usually somewhat downgrade their export systems.
Same goes to the Agosta Submarine: In the pure sense of the word EVERY submarine is "stealth", its one of their most basic features. But it isnt in the sense of Radar "stealth" as the topic implies.

China is a reliable trade partner (whose dependancy on exports gives some control authority by the west), its a permament and important member of the UN security council (and hasnt had a remarkable "partisan" attitude over the last years, as well as an increasingly "mediating" attitude in the pacific region), at least they show SOME progression on the human rights issue and is an exceptionally stable country in comparison to other 2nd world countries particularly in the east asian region.

Just for the perspective, and I do not want to make a holier-than-thou comparison, I feel much more comfortable with arms sales to China than to any other "disputed" country - I cannot understand why this issue raises so many eyebrows in Washington while at the same time the USA reluctanly deals with Pakistan (a terrorist country if there ever was one, and a known stability threat), Saudi Arabia (the synonymous human rights violators, with full government approval) or Indonesia and the like.

And on the Stealth issue: China isnt even able to produce an aircraft with (arguably) significantly better performance than an F-16, and Europe has yet to show a decisive employment of stealth techniques - so what dangerous "stealth" technology does Washington expect Europe to export? And a stealthy UCAV lies within the capability of any decent aerospace consortium, the principles are known, the computer programs are known, what would China need european technology for? Above that I would not expect ANY european country to export high-profile stuff like stealth tech anywhere - I´d rather watch that little democratic country in the Middle East on that issue.



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lonestar24
Just because the technology that could then be exported doesnt have to be dual-purpose anymore doesnt mean that everyone would start and share their highest secrets.

The World needs something more than goodfaith from the Chinese.
The fact is that their are so many Eastern European nations from the former soviet union, that would be more than willing sell any technology that they possess for money. China on the other hand is more than willing to purchase any amount of technology to expand their already immense arsenal.
By removing the export restriction on china it doesnt STOP any nation from doing this. This could potentially destabilise the entire Asian region with the Taiwanese, Japanese, Koreans and even the Indians getting ready for an arms race. Europe doesnt apparently share any concern for the Asian region as they posses no significant interests there any longer but that is not the case for the USA. The stability of the region is vital to US interests in the region and more for the people of that region as well.


Apart from that a lift would reflect the realities of economic reliances the western world is in ATM - to treat China as an A-grade civilian partner and not show enough confidence to trust a certain level of military cooperation is phoney and an easy way out, to put it simple.

Realities ?? What do you mean by that?
The Chinese today are still not completely a developed nation and most of their population still lives in penury compared to the populations of Europe and the rest of the developed world. Just because they produce large quantites of expendible goods doesnt signify greater maturity on their part. Why only recently we've had chinese generals saying that they envision nuclear warfare with the US. How can such a feckless attitude warrant anything but caution ? Yet the EU is unconcerned about it.
Another point is their regular attempts at threats against Taiwan and their known aggression to the Japanese. All these are not signs of maturity surely ? Yet the EU doesnt care enough about these issues to withhold the ban !

A nation that is adept at producing Consumer durables cannot be entrusted to act maturly with military technology. Such trust is only witnessed through action and the chinese have shown no such affirmative action against any except the Flung Gong- a nonviolent group, while the North Koreans who are armed with chinese tech nuclear weapons still threaten the region without regard for international law. Why has China, a member of the Security Council not taken any affirmitive action against them and have to the contrary given them the technology to pose as a greater danger ? With the largest amount of N.Korean dependence of China it should be easy for china to muscle its way to the North Koreans.



Same goes to the Agosta Submarine: In the pure sense of the word EVERY submarine is "stealth", its one of their most basic features. But it isnt in the sense of Radar "stealth" as the topic implies.

Well, not every submarine is stealth say like a diesel surfacing but what is important is that the Agosta's are nuclear capable submairines that use a methanol-and-liquid-oxygen engine bedded on a suspension system that quiets its purr to a whisper. Even though this may not be true "stealth" it is a problem for the US hydrophones to pick them up.


I cannot understand why this issue raises so many eyebrows in Washington while at the same time the USA reluctanly deals with Pakistan (a terrorist country if there ever was one, and a known stability threat), Saudi Arabia (the synonymous human rights violators, with full government approval) or Indonesia and the like.

Well, it is infact the other way around, it is the EU that has armed the Pakistanis with Agosta sub's even though they are fully aware that Pakistan is a nuclear capable nation and a heavily islamist one at that. Potentially giving Bin Laden a chance to stike every major city in the world with pakistani technology and nukes. As for Saudi Arabia, the Al-Saud family has always been extreemly co-operative with the US entertaining all US requests even though they have compramized their own survival at times in the country. Plus the Al-Saud family is the most moderate force in Saudi Arabia without which Wahhabi elements would reck havock. The Saudi govt has shown their maturity by actively taking part in the regions stability as in the Iraq war and also in the fight against terrorism.Pakistans Agosta
The Indonesian govt are again very co-operative with the US and have played active roles in supporting the global community against islamic fanatics. These nations; Saudi Arabia and Indonesia have played significant roles internationally even though they are not permanent members of the Secuiryt Council like China is, yet China with its massive military chooses to foster rouge nations and spread nuclear technology to countries like N.Korea and Pakistan recklessly promoting instability in the region. How can the EU see such a nation fit for greater tech transfers in military. ?



And on the Stealth issue: China isnt even able to produce an aircraft with (arguably) significantly better performance than an F-16, and Europe has yet to show a decisive employment of stealth techniques

I beg to differ again, the chinese with their massive industrial potential and their hunger for weapons have already taken the services of Russian firms (which is also a part of the EU) to develop stealth detection and stealth aircrafts. Already with Russian help and espionage they have managed to source technology from all that are willing to sell to employ in their arsenals.
The J-10 is proof of this technology advancement by the Chinese. It customary for the chinese to source tech form other parts and incorporate their own production plans into them so that they can fully utilize their massive industrial complexes to gain advantage of production.
European nations in NATO have access to large parts of US technologies, this is a concern too. The US programmes like the JSF etc have major European interaction in development. This along with exsisting European expertise would only hasten the process of China aquiring Stealth Technology especially with the Russians already onboard.



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Oh wait....it cannot be that Europe would do a such a dastardly deed, but because Boeing has an arrangement to let China build certain civilian components of the 787, which has no stealth characteristics at all, lets point the finger towards the US, eh, sminkeypinkey?


- Er no actually Seekerof, I suggest you read planeman's original post again.

His entire 'case' was based upon the reported Airbus sales to China and the fact that EADS is involved in some other military projects.

Things that apply exactly to Boeing and the USA too (in respect of the 787 and Boeing's military projects).


Sminkeypinkey, I do believe that there is more than enough validity in planeman's purely speculative issue.


- I'd suggest this isn't the thread to debate the comparison between EU military sales to China.

But in any event you must be aware that the European arms embargo is still there.

You must also be aware that regardless of the EU's desire to increase military sales further the USA is by far the greatest arms dealer to the Chinese.

I'm simply saying that on the basis of what planeman posted anyone could make similar speculations about the USA (who have a history of selling high tech to China, a large part IBM recently for instance).

Frankly I find much of the US comment about this sheer hypocrisy; IMO what is really intended is that China should be a market for what the USA wishes to sell her and everyone else should just keep out.
Ain't going to happen.

[edit on 17-12-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lonestar24
Same goes to the Agosta Submarine: In the pure sense of the word EVERY submarine is "stealth", its one of their most basic features. But it isnt in the sense of Radar "stealth" as the topic implies.

Did I miss something here or did you, Lonestar24?
Your semantics surrounding the wording of stealth is intriguing but incorrect, especially when you consider that the Agosta Submarine has incorporated stealth technologies. We are not talking the natural stealth characteristics of a submarine, Lonstar24, that is redundant and self-evident. If we were, then China already has stealth, for they already have and produce submarines.





Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Frankly I find much of the US comment about this sheer hypocrisy;

About as much so as I find your anti-US insinuations that you habitually make and mask, then when confronted, hide behind issues of sheer hypocrisy and personal affront.





seekerof

[edit on 17-12-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
About as much so as I find your anti-US insinuations that you habitually make and mask


- What are you on about Seekerof?

I have insinuated nothing, when I am critical of America I am quite open about it.

Sadly some people insist on sometimes seeing criticism in any or almost everything, even when it is not my intention so, if or when asked, I will correct an errant view, that is 'masking' nothing.


then when confronted, hide behind issues of sheer hypocrisy and personal affront.


- .....and where did I do that then?

The fact is that planeman's point was and was made as I described - and so are the surrounding facts to the matter.

If I have been hypocritical or claimed a personal affront then you'll be able to point it out, won't you?
Feel free to because I really do not understand what has provoked this kind of personally belligerent attitude.



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

Oh wait....it cannot be that Europe would do a such a dastardly deed, but because Boeing has an arrangement to let China build certain civilian components of the 787, which has no stealth characteristics at all, lets point the finger towards the US, eh, sminkeypinkey?

Sound logic there.





Thats as trange form of 'defence' you're adopting there seekerof as, if planemans original point is true, then it is the US that seems to be doing the baseless finger pointing, isn't it?

After all, why is it alright for China to have 787 technology, but not any Airbus'?

That does seem to be the crux of the matter; uncle Sam says 'whooo, they're selling those nasty chinese Airbus airliners, this is a threat to our national security, unlike the Boeings they will buy!'


It just looks like more depressingly predictable, anti European ,stirring from Washington to me.



[edit on 17-12-2005 by waynos]



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Baseless finger pointing?

Yes, of course waynos, as with sminkeypinkey, you both are always correct.
I certainly stand corrected....
No fear or merit to what planeman or Washington asserts, eh?
As such, Europe is never in the wrong.
Europe will never sell the Chinese military stealth technologies, much less high-end military hardware.
Washington's concerns are always, always unwarrented.



Some in Washington fear that EADS (the main European aerospace company, a merger of many famous companies such as Airbus, Eurocopter and MBB, and the second biggest aerospace company in the world) may sell high grade military technologies to China.


I presented some of Washington's concerns along with those European trendings coincidences in my initial post, with links.
But of course, instead of addressing those trending coincidences that would indicate a possible valid Washington concern and/or fear, such gets dismissed as hypocritical, baseless claims, baseless finger pointing, and anti-European. Interesting, no?

What a load....







seekerof

[edit on 17-12-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 05:48 PM
link   
My post is merely reporting rumors in Washington. I am neither siding with nor against the “hawks” in the US’s administration’s position. I have seen similar rumors reported in the Aviation press also, for example the generally reliable Flight International which has an editorial comment and several articles discussing the US’s concerns (Dec 2005 issue).

Feel free to criticize the US concerns, or back them up. But don’t shoot the messenger.



posted on Dec, 18 2005 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Some in Washington fear that EADS (the main European aerospace company, a merger of many famous companies such as Airbus, Eurocopter and MBB, and the second biggest aerospace company in the world) may sell high grade military technologies to China.


But some in Washington (in fact, quite a few in Washington) were convinced Saddam Hussein had WMDs etc etc...

Sometimes people stir the pot for their own ends - don't place too much trust in politicans (myself, I place no trust in the worms, no matter who or where they are from).



posted on Dec, 18 2005 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Seekerof:
Can you give me one reason why europe shoudn't sell tech to China?
The way i see it:
1 USA is not sharing it's top tech with europeans
2 Europe needs funds to keep it's R&D Going
3 China needs technology, and has the money

Second way:
1 US is tied to Taiwan, maiking it hostile to China
2 Most european nations don't want to fight with China
3 By turning the atention from Washington to Beijing they secure their assets in china

An for the last USA;s foreign policy is making most of the world hostile to USA (IMHO invasion to Iraq was good, but US troops/politicians #ed it up by not taking the resistance seriously from the begining)
In the (US)hostile world, getting some new friends wouldn't be too bad...
And the latest CIA Prisoner flight scandal isn't helping USAs reputation in europe



posted on Dec, 18 2005 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by northwolf
Seekerof:
Can you give me one reason why europe shoudn't sell tech to China?

Just one?
Sure: How about because the US maintains its own arms embargo against China. Is not Europe allies with the US, you know, NATO, etc?
Page 4: European Union's Arms Control Regime and Arms Exports to China ...




The way i see it:
1 USA is not sharing it's top tech with europeans

Such as? Furthermore, though allies, each nation has its own R&D programs, as well as its own military priorities.




2 Europe needs funds to keep it's R&D Going
3 China needs technology, and has the money

Yeah, I can understand the issue of funding and money, but in understanding that, are you indicating that the EU, or the US's European allies, should simply ditch its ally, the US, begin military exporting to China, all for money?
Interesting.





Second way:
1 US is tied to Taiwan, maiking it hostile to China

Umm, Taiwan was hostile to China long before the US got involved.




2 Most european nations don't want to fight with China

Much less anyone else for that matter.




3 By turning the atention from Washington to Beijing they secure their assets in china

The US has assets in China, as well, but do you see the US seeking to end its arms embargo against China, forsaking European allies, all for money?




An for the last USA;s foreign policy is making most of the world hostile to USA (IMHO invasion to Iraq was good, but US troops/politicians #ed it up by not taking the resistance seriously from the begining)

As a once "US troop" myself, I find your mention as being subjective opinion and strangely anti-American, which is interesting being that in this very thread, I have been openly accused of being anti-European. You from Europe? Hmmm...if so, 'pot calling kettle black comes to mind'.




In the (US)hostile world, getting some new friends wouldn't be too bad...
And the latest CIA Prisoner flight scandal isn't helping USAs reputation in europe

Okie dokie.
The US has a relationship with the China, and I do believe that each guardedly consider themselves to be friends with the other, and despite that friendship, the US will not end its current arms embargo with China any time soon, unless of course, China monetarily paves the way for another Clinton to get into the Oval Office.







seekerof

[edit on 18-12-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 19 2005 @ 04:36 AM
link   
ok, first of all i'm not anti-american, but i feel that current US Regime is dragging its country into something they can't easily cope with... And i personally would like to stay out of it (Being in rapid deployment force for UN/EU operations)
And to be honest China is only an economical threat to Europe not a military one...

But when it comes to war against terror, i'm behind it, but feel that current US methods are wrong... My country is staying out of because we haven't been involved yet (no casualities in terrorist attacks) but the first few dead Finns come, I'll be down there with 3000 (brigade) friends to kick some serious ass, you can be sure of that..



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join