Chavez - give us parts or we give Castro F-16s
Rebel PPRuNer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So?
I don't think that, from a technology-transfer perspective, the US will care too much even if he does go through with his threat.
The FAV operates Block 15 A/B-models that feature *degraded* technology from the 1970s. I suspect China is well beyond that time-frame in foreign technology exploitation terms. Give them to the Cubans and they won't be able to fly them (no spares) and probably wouldn't be able to do anything meaningful with anything they learned from them, either.
Politically, however, it's a different story...
The FAV operates Block 15 A/B-models that feature *degraded* technology from the 1970s. I suspect China is well beyond that time-frame in foreign technology exploitation terms. Give them to the Cubans and they won't be able to fly them (no spares) and probably wouldn't be able to do anything meaningful with anything they learned from them, either.
Politically, however, it's a different story...
Rebel PPRuNer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think just the thought of Fidel ordering his boys to turn them into scrap outside Guantanamo for the laugh for the benefit of European and Canadian TV cameras would give the US pause. Never happen of course...
Chavez might begin to wonder why no one will sell him stuff with all the cool buzzers, bells and alarms should he transfer the aircraft. Just the stripped down model if anything will be all that any government will be willing to risk.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is typical of the Americans. They sell this hardware to foreign nations, there is a change in leadership and then they suddenly have a problem. The famous cases of course being Afganistan and Iraq in recent times
I would like to say, I hope the American Government gets everything it deserves, but I can't because at the end of the day there are lives on the line, and not just American. But they see the chance to make a profit and to hell with what ever happens in five or ten years. The UK sells a lot of arms, why do we not see this issue on the same scale. Maybe because we have the smallest amount of forethought?
G
I would like to say, I hope the American Government gets everything it deserves, but I can't because at the end of the day there are lives on the line, and not just American. But they see the chance to make a profit and to hell with what ever happens in five or ten years. The UK sells a lot of arms, why do we not see this issue on the same scale. Maybe because we have the smallest amount of forethought?
G
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lowlevel UK
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
g126. Not sure that history supports a UK-good/USA-bad consideration for weapon sales; a bit of googling certainly doesn't. Meanwhile this F16 spat is a gem. The CNN version adds China as a possible beneficiary while the BBC's Robin Lustig interview with Venezuela's President, Hugo Chavez, suggests this is a man who really understands George W.
Reuters expect this Nov 4-5 summit of 34 leaders from the Americas, in an Argentine beach resort, to offer a rare chance to see the two sparring partners in the same forum. Washington is struggling with an increasing number of Latin Americans angry over the Iraq war and years of U.S.-encouraged market reforms.
Sit back and watch the sparks.
He is in possession of intelligence showing that the United States plans to invade his country and that the US was after his nation's oil, much as it had been after Iraq's.
Sit back and watch the sparks.
Rebel PPRuNer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
West Coast
I don't think he really gives a crap because with $60 oil and a willingness to give it cheap to people he likes he has no shortage of friends... for now.
I don't think he really gives a crap because with $60 oil and a willingness to give it cheap to people he likes he has no shortage of friends... for now.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not saying that our weapons sales are good weopons sales, or that they don't have a habit of blowing up in our faces (if you'll exuse the pun) because they do, but it just seems like the yanks seem to provide weopons to a lot of countries that then end up turning them around and pointing them at American Soldiers, albeit politically this time.
Like with the first gulf war. The USA had just provided Saddam with a shed load of munitions to fight the Iran-Iraq war and then under a year later they are being used against American and coalition forces.
We are not entirely beyond blame, I agree, we've had our fair share of mistakes when it comes to the arms market as well. Although not quite on the same scale as the yanks. Or maybe we just don't hear about when our weapons get pointed against us.
Like with the first gulf war. The USA had just provided Saddam with a shed load of munitions to fight the Iran-Iraq war and then under a year later they are being used against American and coalition forces.
We are not entirely beyond blame, I agree, we've had our fair share of mistakes when it comes to the arms market as well. Although not quite on the same scale as the yanks. Or maybe we just don't hear about when our weapons get pointed against us.
Last edited by g126; 3rd Nov 2005 at 18:41.
I don't think you can sit there and pretend that we're somehow a better race of people because we've sold less than the Amercians. It's certainly not been for want of trying; the reality is that since the 70s, they've had better kit to sell. OK, so we did good business selling the Tornado ADV/IDS and Hawk to the Saudis, but more recently they've bought the F-15C/D and F-15S. Guess which ones they think are 'best'?
Law of averages says that if you sell more kit to more nations, you'll get a proportionally higher number of problems like this in the decades that follow.
Law of averages says that if you sell more kit to more nations, you'll get a proportionally higher number of problems like this in the decades that follow.
g126,
Not wishing to rain on your parade but weren’t the Iraqi and Afghan armed forces absolutely chock full of Russian and French arms rather than US or UK made?
Hordes of Migs, Sukhois, Mirages etc rather than Brit or Yank shiny stuff.
Not wishing to rain on your parade but weren’t the Iraqi and Afghan armed forces absolutely chock full of Russian and French arms rather than US or UK made?
Hordes of Migs, Sukhois, Mirages etc rather than Brit or Yank shiny stuff.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did not mention anything about race, so please don't bring that into it. And as I said, we are not beyond blame, by any stretch of the imagination. Ok, being sporting I will add this before someone uses against me, the UK has provided training to many rogue nations including Iraq and Argentina pre-Falklands. So yes, we are still at fault. So why is it the Americans seem to come a cropper? Maybe they get into more scuffles than we do?
But if you take the Saudi's as your example and the Iraqi's as mine, then which one is really more likely to turn?
And the same in Afganistan where the USA provided arms to terrorists who they knew were anti-American at the time. The arms business its self I think is a seperate discussion and one that could fill many pages, but returning to my point I still think that they could be a little more selective as to who they sell to and if they are not willing to do this then maybe they shouldn't be policing the world as much as they do.
And pr00ne, yes this is true, but I was referring to the items like the Stinger missiles that the Americans were rather keen to re-aquire after the Russian-Afghan war. I shudder to think what damage could be done to one of our harriers out there.
But if you take the Saudi's as your example and the Iraqi's as mine, then which one is really more likely to turn?
And the same in Afganistan where the USA provided arms to terrorists who they knew were anti-American at the time. The arms business its self I think is a seperate discussion and one that could fill many pages, but returning to my point I still think that they could be a little more selective as to who they sell to and if they are not willing to do this then maybe they shouldn't be policing the world as much as they do.
And pr00ne, yes this is true, but I was referring to the items like the Stinger missiles that the Americans were rather keen to re-aquire after the Russian-Afghan war. I shudder to think what damage could be done to one of our harriers out there.
Last edited by g126; 3rd Nov 2005 at 18:42.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Tongue in cheek, right?!
quotes:
But they see the chance to make a profit and to hell with what ever happens in five or ten years. The UK sells a lot of arms, why do we not see this issue.....
Or maybe we just don't hear about when our weapons get pointed against us.
I still think that they could be a little more selective as to who they sell to and if they are not willing to do this then maybe they shouldn't be policing the world as much as they do.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
g126,
So BAe, et al, are in the milk and cookies business? (BTW, I am not slamming BAe or other companies for selling arms, or the UK, for that matter, there's always a demand....)
So your history books of UK intervention in Borneo, Indonesia, Muscat/Oman, various African countries, etc. etc. are exactly examples of what?
When it was the UK's turn at bat as a superpower, your governments did the same things and caught the same flak from the less-enamored with things British world during the 19th and early 20th century. For now, we're it. Probably within my lifetime, it'll be the Chinese. Being American does not inherently = bad. Just the reality of, for now, being the biggest kid on the block. Wish we did some things better, but it still amazes me how the countries that hate us still keep trying to get their citizens in.......
Now, to get back on thread - Chavez, posturing little simp. South American governments have a way of sorting themselves out with or without US government and/or corporate intervention. A/B models of F-16s aren't exactly state of the art anymore.....
But they see the chance to make a profit and to hell with what ever happens in five or ten years. The UK sells a lot of arms, why do we not see this issue.....
Or maybe we just don't hear about when our weapons get pointed against us.
I still think that they could be a little more selective as to who they sell to and if they are not willing to do this then maybe they shouldn't be policing the world as much as they do.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
g126,
So BAe, et al, are in the milk and cookies business? (BTW, I am not slamming BAe or other companies for selling arms, or the UK, for that matter, there's always a demand....)
So your history books of UK intervention in Borneo, Indonesia, Muscat/Oman, various African countries, etc. etc. are exactly examples of what?
When it was the UK's turn at bat as a superpower, your governments did the same things and caught the same flak from the less-enamored with things British world during the 19th and early 20th century. For now, we're it. Probably within my lifetime, it'll be the Chinese. Being American does not inherently = bad. Just the reality of, for now, being the biggest kid on the block. Wish we did some things better, but it still amazes me how the countries that hate us still keep trying to get their citizens in.......
Now, to get back on thread - Chavez, posturing little simp. South American governments have a way of sorting themselves out with or without US government and/or corporate intervention. A/B models of F-16s aren't exactly state of the art anymore.....
I used the term 'race' in the broader sense, if it offends you, substitute it for the term 'nation'.
What munitions did the US give Iraq to fight Iran? Certainly nothing of significance - Iraq's IADS was built by the French, and its Tanks, APCs and entire Air Force came from Russia and the French (Mirage F1.EQs etc.).
As for Stingers in Afghanistan, have you ever heard of a 'shelf life'? The biggest threat in OEF was from midairs with other coalition aircraft, and, I'd hasten to add, it was the Americans that did the overwhelming majority of precision strike, time sensitive taskings and CAS out there. So, if you insist that yours is a valid argument (which it isn't because the unaccounted Stingers were considered to be knackered), then it was the Yanks that went in and faced any possible repurcussions.
I haven't had the threat briefing that the Harrier guys get in Afghanistan, but I doubt very much that it includes warnings about Stingers. It's much more likely that the MANPAD threat from the Taliban consists of SA-7/14s, which are, erm, Russian...
Bottom line is that if our policy allows us to sell to the likes of Malaysia and Saudi, then I doubt we'd shy away from selling hardware to many other nations. It's more a question of whose kit is better, not who has the fewer scruples.
What munitions did the US give Iraq to fight Iran? Certainly nothing of significance - Iraq's IADS was built by the French, and its Tanks, APCs and entire Air Force came from Russia and the French (Mirage F1.EQs etc.).
As for Stingers in Afghanistan, have you ever heard of a 'shelf life'? The biggest threat in OEF was from midairs with other coalition aircraft, and, I'd hasten to add, it was the Americans that did the overwhelming majority of precision strike, time sensitive taskings and CAS out there. So, if you insist that yours is a valid argument (which it isn't because the unaccounted Stingers were considered to be knackered), then it was the Yanks that went in and faced any possible repurcussions.
I haven't had the threat briefing that the Harrier guys get in Afghanistan, but I doubt very much that it includes warnings about Stingers. It's much more likely that the MANPAD threat from the Taliban consists of SA-7/14s, which are, erm, Russian...
Bottom line is that if our policy allows us to sell to the likes of Malaysia and Saudi, then I doubt we'd shy away from selling hardware to many other nations. It's more a question of whose kit is better, not who has the fewer scruples.
Mark
He may get some kit from some one, but no one is going to sell him top of the line equipment (read avionics and weapons) I don't care who it is, the Yanks, the Chinese, Brits, French, etc. He may end up with a gutted F22 in a few years but with Cessna radios and a radar from a F4 in the boneyard.
If he sells the vipers today, whats to stop him or his successors from selling the top of the line Chinese stuff tomorrow after the winds of political change sweep through? Nothing, and I don't believe any country would want that exposure with the best they have. There have been arguments here about transfers to our closest allies, let alone a questionable buyer.
He may get some kit from some one, but no one is going to sell him top of the line equipment (read avionics and weapons) I don't care who it is, the Yanks, the Chinese, Brits, French, etc. He may end up with a gutted F22 in a few years but with Cessna radios and a radar from a F4 in the boneyard.
If he sells the vipers today, whats to stop him or his successors from selling the top of the line Chinese stuff tomorrow after the winds of political change sweep through? Nothing, and I don't believe any country would want that exposure with the best they have. There have been arguments here about transfers to our closest allies, let alone a questionable buyer.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about the 8-12 million landmines, of which approximately six million were sold to Iraq by the U.S. The U.S. knew that Iraq was a rogue state, and that it had used gas on the kurds, which was one of their major arguments for entering Iraq in the first place (WMD's, supposedly), and that the gas itself was sold to Iraq by the US.
Also, many of the bunkers were designed and built by German companies. It's all one big dangerous game, and everyone is involved all the 'friendly' nations including us, and i say this again, because it sounds like people believe that i think the UK is resolved from blame, which i do not.
Ok, fair enough about the stingers, i'm not up-to-date with that obviously, but they were concerned about them post Afghan War.
Also, many of the bunkers were designed and built by German companies. It's all one big dangerous game, and everyone is involved all the 'friendly' nations including us, and i say this again, because it sounds like people believe that i think the UK is resolved from blame, which i do not.
Ok, fair enough about the stingers, i'm not up-to-date with that obviously, but they were concerned about them post Afghan War.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like with the first gulf war. The USA had just provided Saddam with a shed load of munitions to fight the Iran-Iraq war and then under a year later they are being used against American and coalition forces.
Did the US provide Saddam with AK47s and RPGs? No, that was all sov-block stuff.
Did the US provide Saddam with squad automatic weapons and AAA? No, that was all sov-block stuff.
How about artillery? Nope, that was sov-block and some South African.
Did the US provide Saddam with armor? Nope, he got those T72s and BMPs from the sov-block.
Did the US provide Saddam with Migs and Sukhois and Mirages? Nope, those came from the USSR and France.
Did the US provide Saddam with IL-76 transport aircraft? Nope.
How about his helicopters? Most were Soviet, some French.
How about his SAM? Nope, Soviet and French.
So do tell, g126. Where are the shedloads of weapons that the US provided to Saddam?
If you're going to do the usual pprune yank-bashing willy-waving, next time how about bashing us for something we actually did?