Maybe they see NATO rejection as a good thing - after all they are after a fighter 'rejected' by every NATO air forces apart from the country of origin.

The IAF are a great bunch, but they also have a unique or even odd view on things.

Indeed JTO, their fighting spirit and will is quite something! Interesting that most of the higher GDP NATO countries are actually buying the F-35.

There's a strong faction within Israel that has argued in favor of advanced F-15/16 with standoff weapons and strong ISR support. There are also those who have posited the idea of F-35B as a dispersed missile-resistant force, but I don't know how serious that's ever been.

One thing that is a certainty is you will never have to put your life on the line in a F35 A1b...

Which, to be fair, probably applies to 99.9999999% of the people on this forum; the population of those countries buying them, and the internet!

It is, after all, one thing to buy them but a completely different thing to do so and then deploy and use it in anger - how long was F-22 in service before it went on ops?

Ah, sorry 'gr', you were trying to be horrible to A1b. That wasn't too obvious in your post.

How is that any different than the countless accusations that F-35 supporters are bought and paid for stooges in the pocket of LM? If that justified personal attacks, then personal attacks on a whole lot of folks on this forum would be fully justified. Is this hypocrisy or inconsistency?

Why does that description sound familiar?

O yeah........

KenV, MSOCS - If you have any evidence to show that F-35 supporters have been accused of accepting improper or illegal payments or inducements in these pages, it is time to produce it.

It's hardly defamation, for example, to observe that the SLDInfo site has listed Lockheed Martin as a "gold sponsor"; or to point out that the USAF has written policy directing that its airmen and officers present a positive account of the F-35 to the media and public; or indeed, to observe that some pilots do indeed work for LockMart. These are matters of fact.

Equally, the babblings of a1bill would not be defamation if he could produce factual evidence supporting them - but he will not and cannot do so. So I'd be wary of being his white knight if I were you.

KenV,

Some of our more prolific contributors, being journalists, I find quite literate.

Oh, on cue.....as ever.

LO, I gave a link to cash for comment. a quick search of your posts would show you saying things about jurno and web sites insinuating all sorts of shenanigans.

I don't know why you are arcing up because I wonder why sweetman thought the shornet was a pig one day and a superstar the next, why he didn't report on the boeing tanker fiasco. why SAAB gripen is going to be a trainer for the US and next a wonder weapon of 6th gen. I wouldn't know any financial arrangements he may have. do companies pay/induce people for being their mouthpiece, would the aero industry be any different?

I wouldn't know any financial arrangements he may have.

Of course you don't. Which, by the way, further confirms that your comments are defamatory.

yet you feel fine slagging jurno's and websites insinuating all sorts of things, being a bit hypocritical aren't you? I would hate to count how many times you accused someone of being a paid shill

As I pointed out to your friends MSOCS and KenV, I'm rather careful not to accuse anyone of being a paid spokesman unless that is what they are (which I hasten to point out is entirely legal and normal). So count away, and don't forget to take your shoes and socks off if you get past 10.

me thinks you protest too much. sweetman is more than welcome to front me if he has an issue with what I have said. until then this is finished.

Oh I was careful not to accuse anyone also LO. It doesn't bother me one bit whether people take cash to write that X is a heap, or X is a hot rod. Just because there is no evidence against a named individual who could then claim defamation or libel, even if guilty, it doesn't mean that it doesn't still go on. I merely wished to say that Ying has a Yang when it comes to such things. In all probability.

This is a rumour network after all.

well the rumor I heard was that sweetman is on the payroll of boeing and saab. doing fluff pieces and slagging off other makers. let us hope it is wrong. though it does make me wonder.

MSOCS,
I think you need to define what "most NATO countries" are, today there are 28. If you return to the era the F-16s were offered through FMS contracts, NATO was much smaller then. Those countries that became EPGs were Belgium, Denmark, Netherland and Norway. Collectively, they bought 505 F-16s. But, if you want to move on to newer members, Greece, Italy, Poland, Portugal and Turkey all bought F-16s (Italy's 34 were leased and eventually returned). Collectively, they bought 485 F-16s of various models. So, at least 990 F-16s were purchased by NATO member countries. There are three countries that didn't purchase F-16s, France, Germany and the UK. But I suspect their own aircraft industries had something to do with that, don't you think? Do you think upward of 1,000 F-35s will be purchased by NATO countries?
There is nothing new here, gone on for years. Israel really wanted F-15s which have long range capabilities (longer range than F-35s) among other things, but Obama wouldn't sell them, only F-35s. So although you may see some reluctance within the Israeli military (IAF) and in some Israeli political circles, Israel will buy F-35s. 800+ sets of F-35 wings sold to L-M by IAI will assure that along with accompanying US military assistance funding to Israel...

I think it's more a question of who the US will sell F-35 to, because it isn't just anyone! 1000 European F-35s? Maybe....maybe not. It's the US services that will predominantly ensure the longevity of the F-35; not so much the FMS customers in my mind. I couldn't call it TurbineD - let's see how wet other nations get in a few years, once the wrinkles are ironed out of the jet, the cost curve has stabilised to something more palatable (for them), and they've had a chance to work with it on training exercises and ops. Maybe they'll all agree with the 'no, hell no!' camp and look elsewhere. Maybe they'll see it as the game to be in and there'll be lots of orders. Hey, I've even known some countries buy something just because a well-regarded different country has bought the same thing. Too many variables at this stage for me to guess.

The F-15E is a beast of a machine with astounding range. It isn't mentioned anywhere in the JSF ORD......so, Israel have backed their horse knowing they couldn't get what they wanted off Obama. That's cute.

This is a good time to sign off from this board for a while. Until someone among the Mods does some research into defamation (and I'm not talking about defaming journalists, either).

And curtail your eagerness to trash the F-35 and insult anyone who posts the least good word about it?

Seriously? :)