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.

 

Egypt unrest: US to go ahead with F-16 jets delivery

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by frazzle
 



NATO is FAR worse than the Taliban or Muslim Brotherhood ever dreamed of being. Get rid of them first, okay?


I see them all as a den of thieves - making deals and alliances with one another, constantly changing to meet their own agenda. The people, well they are just annoying inconveniences to them. If some have to be scrapped to further their goals that is of no consequence to them.


Yup, its always been about deals and alliances. For 6000 years or so its been one long train of lies and corruption, corruption and lies. The Muslim Brotherhood started out as a charitable organization to assist ordinary people who had been devastated by war. When they got into politics is where they made their mistake, they were either corrupted, or lied about. Probably a lot of both. By whom were they corrupted and lied about?

Thing is, we can talk about how "all" of them "over there" are doing this or that wrong when no one can even name our own 50 senators, whether they're R or D, whether they're neocon, tea party, moderate or liberal. We don't know more than a handful of their names (the ones who get all the news coverage) or who gives them money under the table to cut deals and co-opt their votes. Hell, with a few exceptions we don't even know HOW they vote.

But we think we know exactly what's going on in governments "over there".

People accuse me of being argumentative. I see me as being thoroughly disgusted by the entire world of finance and politics and if I have to go against the grain to make my points, well I've had a lot of practice at that over the past thirty or so years and it isn't a popularity contest. .

Sorry MT, I'm not intending to take out my ire on you, this has been a huge irritation for me for a long time before I came to ATS.




posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by badgerprints

Originally posted by dragonridr

Originally posted by badgerprints
People need to look further back in mideast history.
No matter who is in charge or who hates who in Egypt, all guns eventually point towards Israel.
Those F-16's will be used eventually.

Six Days of War by Michael Oren would be a great place to start reading if you really want to understand the middle east military mindset.


There are safe guards without replacement parts within 2 yrs will be non operational one year if they fly them around to make hearts in the sky like i saw in another thread.And dont believe we cant hack into the avionics any time we want.


What makes you think "we" will hack into anything? "We" (you, apparently, not me) gave the jets to them in the first place.

There are no actual safe guards when politicians play with military hardware.


Ok first f 16s are very high tech they stay in contact with other assets constantly flight avionics can be reprogrammed.They can even receive flight control laws through there software.In fact this is often done on the flight line during military excersizes they can set boundries for example or maybe surface cieling.The aircraft recieves live updates from missiles as well this is handled through encrypted communications but guess what we desighned the encryption do you really think its that hard to crash the aircraft? Or maybe redirect its missiles right back to the aircraft? In fact were you aware theres a friend or foe feature built in that wont allow the aircraft to track friendlies.Anything that is in communication with something else can be hacked period.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Again of course they are. I do not understand why this confuses people. The primary interest of the US in Egypt is to have a friendly military presence on one the most important shipping routes in the world. The real power in Egypt is and has always been the military. Whoever is in gov does not really matter because they need the military to stay in power and the Egyptian military needs the US to support it. Now the US could get a case of the stupids and pull support from the Egyptian military. That would lead to either another power Russia or China taking over and getting a nice client state right on a shipping route that is vital to US and European interests or the military could collapse and being betrayed by the west join up with Iran or a real radical islamic group and then you have a nice mix for complete collapse of the region. This is just common sense people. You do what is in your best interests. You do not cut your own throat and hand over one the most vital water ways in the world to someone who can use to blackmail you anytime it pleases them.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


Well if you want me to be blunt the only known system to tackle the bilderbergers effectively is communism. But it comes with lots of strings attached and a dictatorship. People have grown up to get revolted by it and in a way I don't blame them.

How else can we get rid of the elite? Kill them? New ones will pop up. Laws exist but they are not enforced by bought out politicians and beauracrats against the people who do the most damage.

There are other ways like voting libertarian, constitution, green, etc. People should wake up first though!

Al Nour is popular in egypt but after they found out what MB was up to they withdrew their support for them.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


IFF doesn't work that way. If it did there wouldn't have been any blue on blue incidents in the last few wars the US has been involved in, and there were several that were really bad. You also couldn't turn a missile back around on the launching aircraft, as it would run out of fuel by the time it would turn around (they have a huge turning radius).



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide

But back to Egypt, as long as the military hold the reigns of power (and is beholden to whoever pays them the most - to back this up after the latest coup Saudi Arabia donates 5 billion to Egypt and suddenly Sharia Law is now in their constitution) essentially the people of Egypt are going to get the raw deal. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.


edit on 12-7-2013 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)


I think it remains to be seen who will succeed morsi as president of egypt and what party.

Jumping to premature conclusions is wrong. The first indications from egypt is that the military supported a popular uprising while Obama and company "seem concerned". When Obozo seems concerned that is usually a badge of honor.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by frazzle
 


Well if you want me to be blunt the only known system to tackle the bilderbergers effectively is communism. But it comes with lots of strings attached and a dictatorship. People have grown up to get revolted by it and in a way I don't blame them.

How else can we get rid of the elite? Kill them? New ones will pop up. Laws exist but they are not enforced by bought out politicians and beauracrats against the people who do the most damage.

There are other ways like voting libertarian, constitution, green, etc. People should wake up first though!

Al Nour is popular in egypt but after they found out what MB was up to they withdrew their support for them.


Blunt never fazes me, I prefer it. The only kind of communism that ever worked was practiced by the American Indians before their life ways were banished by invaders. Clan mothers chose the leaders and they could also "dethrone" those leaders, with extreme prejudice if their crimes warranted it. But communism will never work as a hierarchal system over a widespread territory and huge populations. Same with democracy or a republic or any other form of governance because the power doesn't stay with the people but filters up to a chosen few. Every. Time.

If you want to get rid of the elites you'd probably need to take lessons from an old dead Indian.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


I think there will come a time in american history where kim jung un and north korea will look attractive, almost heaven like.


Capitalism in its current form is a pyramid scheme. Reagan was wrong to call it trickle down, its actually hoarde it up by the truckloads. Money equates to control, control equates to more money, and more money equates to more control.

Sooner or later 'elite' get bored and say its time for pest control. Thats when it gets scary!



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by MidnightTide

But back to Egypt, as long as the military hold the reigns of power (and is beholden to whoever pays them the most - to back this up after the latest coup Saudi Arabia donates 5 billion to Egypt and suddenly Sharia Law is now in their constitution) essentially the people of Egypt are going to get the raw deal. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.


edit on 12-7-2013 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)


I think it remains to be seen who will succeed morsi as president of egypt and what party.

Jumping to premature conclusions is wrong. The first indications from egypt is that the military supported a popular uprising while Obama and company "seem concerned". When Obozo seems concerned that is usually a badge of honor.


There isn't any choice, just the appearance of one.

The people will get to pick from a batch of individuals whomever the military allows. The military doesn't really care about popular uprisings, the generals care about cold hard cash.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 



Now the US could get a case of the stupids and pull support from the Egyptian military. That would lead to either another power Russia or China taking over and getting a nice client state right on a shipping route that is vital to US and European interests ...


How cogent!

Which is exactly WHY the US can't and won't pull support from the military. And the civil government of Egypt was actually doing just as you said mere days before the "spontaneous" uprising ~ dickering with Russia for a loan and with the intent to become the "E" in BRICS + E to avoid being dragged into an IMF loan that would have devastated the Egyptian people even further than they are with "austerity measures". Ummmm, where have we seen IMF do that before? If they're good for nothing else, they're damn good barbers. And they have a boatload of spontaneous protesters and militants in their pockets to deploy on a moment's notice wherever needed.



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 08:06 AM
link   
The Foreign Military Sales (FMS) office announced the delivery of the next four aircraft has been delayed.


The US government will delay deliveries of Lockheed Martin F-16 fighters to the government of Egypt, the Pentagon said on 24 July.

"Given the current situation in Egypt, we do not believe it is appropriate to move forward with the delivery of F-16s at this time," the US Department of Defense says.

Under current US law, the country is not legally allowed to provide military aid to foreign governments where the democratically elected leadership has been removed as a result of a military coup. However, the Obama aministration is not calling the removal of Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi by that country's armed forces on 3 July a coup.

"We do not believe it would be in the best interest of the United States to immediately change all of our assistance to Egypt," the Pentagon says. "We are reviewing our obligations under the law and are consulting with Congress about the way forward."

www.flightglobal.com...



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


No probs, the US will ship the equipment to Saudi Arabia who will forward it to the Egyptian Army. There's more than one way to skin a fledgling democracy.



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


No, I don't think they will. That would be too obvious. The Saudi Air Force doesn't fly F-16s, and has never shown an interest in them.



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Well, I didn't say F-16s specifically.


We've got quite a stockpile of weaponry for our friends to choose from.
www.nytimes.com...



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


Egypt has F-16s on order. Everything else (with the exception of Harpoon II and Hellfire missiles that I'm not sure what the delivery timeline is) is either tech support, or parts to be assembled in Egypt. The only thing announced as delayed is the F-16 delivery.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


We don't need tail numbers or serial numbers or bills of lading or ports of entry to know the US has long been the biggest exporter of weapons of mass destruction in the world.


Confessions of an Arms Peddler

At the age of forty, I had been catapulted from an ordinary government worker into the world's most select group of weapons peddlers, the international negotiators of our government's Department of Defense. There were only sixteen of us, divided into four teams. But we covered every corner of the earth's surface, meeting with representatives of foreign governments and helping them arrange for the purchase of U,S. battle tanks, jet fighters, artillery cannon, bombs and bullets, rifles and mortars. We sold all the marvels of technocracy designed to kill other people or destroy their war-making capabilities.
www.amfirstbooks.com...

Why do we do this?



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


Actually the US is still behind Russia (although neither exports "weapons of mass destruction" as you so lightly call them). It's called a proxy war. Would you rather the US and Russia fought each other, no holds barred?



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by frazzle
 


Actually the US is still behind Russia (although neither exports "weapons of mass destruction" as you so lightly call them). It's called a proxy war. Would you rather the US and Russia fought each other, no holds barred?


Ah, the everybody's doing it analogy. So which countries buying arms from Russia have used those weapons to attack other sovereign nations or to viciously suppress their own people? Why do you think the US wants to fight Russia in the first place and how does killing millions of proxies all over the world put these "wars" in the win column for the US? It doesn't. We have lost big time in the court of world opinion.

On another level this whole argument reminds me of the defense weapons vs. assault weapons argument we hear from our "we need to disarm the American people" friends. Of course which category anyone falls into depends on whose hands are holding the exact same weapons, government employee hands ~ good, the people's hands ~ double plus ungood.

Its pretty transparent anymore.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


It's hardly the "everyone's doing it" defense. The Russian government has sold millions of weapons and continues to do so. The AK-47 is the most popular gun in the world. Russian helicopters and surface to air systems are all over the Middle East and parts of Asia. You are far more likely to ruin into a Russian system than an American system, unless you are in an American ally nation.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by frazzle
 


It's hardly the "everyone's doing it" defense. The Russian government has sold millions of weapons and continues to do so. The AK-47 is the most popular gun in the world. Russian helicopters and surface to air systems are all over the Middle East and parts of Asia. You are far more likely to ruin into a Russian system than an American system, unless you are in an American ally nation.



We were originally talking about fighter jets. As I said, the buyers of Russian fighters have not used them to threaten or attack other nations or to suppress their own people.

Combat Jets Drive Russian Arms Sales
www.ainonline.com...

And yes, you might find American weaponry in any American allied nation, no argument there, although I suppose you might ask the average Turk on the street what they think about their government being an ally of the US. Not all of them support the idea, probably a lot less of them now than ever before.

I note you had nothing to say about the defense weapons vs. assault weapons mentality of this country.

Well, now that I think of it, the US IS buying up Russian weapons and ammo. I suppose they're good for that fog of war business.
www.infowars.com...


edit on 27-7-2013 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join