The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
USAF planes to be built by the FRENCH???
Kagera
Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
Do they come with free white flags or do we have to make them ourselves?
Well that's the sentiment from some Congressmen after hearing that the Air Force awarded a big defense contract to Northrup which is owned by EADS AKA Airbus manufacturers. The decision is a pretty big deal because most were sure that Boeing would get it (in fact they had the contract before but because the person making the deal with Boeing was also trying to get a position at Boeing at the time it was nullified and the bidding reopened).
The decision is sound in and of itself as the tanker (the planes are air tankers for refueling) is bigger and can carry a greater payload and fly farther than Boeing's proposal (while being more expensive though), but never let logic get in the way of lobbyists and good ol' fashioned nationalism.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2004252363_webeverett29.html
But as I said this is something that is going to be brought before Congress by politicians 'outraged' that them there foreigners are getting the contract.
And of course, for response from Washington's Democratic Senators (it's a joint statement):
Anyway all the red tape and such are predicted to hold up the agreement for a year while lobbyists and flag-wavers try to stop it.
Now I'm all for protecting American jobs but I'm also for the best design being built for 'our boys in the military'. And it's not just America that will get these planes the UK, Australia, hell even Saudi Arabia chose this design over Boeing's.
But when is the fear of foreigners going to stop? I know the people directly and indirectly tied to Boeing are gonna get upset but does it have to get to the point where it's going to waste time in Congress over? Is there some national security risk I'm not seeing here? And hell why can other countries accept defense contracts from American businesses but not the other way around? Doesn't that kind of hypocrisy make us look petty and paranoid?
It just weirds me out that they had to throw nationalism in the mix against this deal. I expect better than this from my country even if that leads to constant disappointment.
Of course I'm not in anyway an expert of the aerospace industry so if someone who knows more or even works in it says I'm completely wrong on the subject there's a good chance he's right. I just think it's odd that this is all that big of a deal.
Well that's the sentiment from some Congressmen after hearing that the Air Force awarded a big defense contract to Northrup which is owned by EADS AKA Airbus manufacturers. The decision is a pretty big deal because most were sure that Boeing would get it (in fact they had the contract before but because the person making the deal with Boeing was also trying to get a position at Boeing at the time it was nullified and the bidding reopened).
The decision is sound in and of itself as the tanker (the planes are air tankers for refueling) is bigger and can carry a greater payload and fly farther than Boeing's proposal (while being more expensive though), but never let logic get in the way of lobbyists and good ol' fashioned nationalism.
Signs posted throughout the building read "R.I.P. U.S.-built tanker 1930-2008" and "We will get a new tanker made in France?"
ed: Some parts will actually be built in Alabama and it is expected to bring 7,000 new jobs to the state."I just don't think the government should have allowed this to happen," he said. Hetland echoed the sentiments of other Boeing workers who said they were worried about national security, sending good American jobs overseas and the local economy in Snohomish County.
"I'm offended," said Cummins. "I'm offended because these are our tax dollars."
Tom Wroblewski, district president of the Machinists union, said "American taxpayers should be outraged."
He said that building the tankers should have been "a sacred bond" between American workers and the armed forces.
"The win went to the wrong side," he said.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2004252363_webeverett29.html
But as I said this is something that is going to be brought before Congress by politicians 'outraged' that them there foreigners are getting the contract.
Wichita's Rep. Tiahrt said, "I am deeply troubled by the Air Force's decision to award the KC-X tanker to a French company that has never built a tanker in its history.
"We should have an American tanker built by an American company with American workers. I cannot believe we would create French jobs in place of Kansas jobs."
And of course, for response from Washington's Democratic Senators (it's a joint statement):
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSN2925137720080301?pageNumber=3&virtualBrandChannel=0Washington Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, both Democrats, along with six other lawmakers from the state said in a joint statement: "We are outraged that this decision taps European Airbus and its foreign workers to provide a tanker to our American military.
Anyway all the red tape and such are predicted to hold up the agreement for a year while lobbyists and flag-wavers try to stop it.
Now I'm all for protecting American jobs but I'm also for the best design being built for 'our boys in the military'. And it's not just America that will get these planes the UK, Australia, hell even Saudi Arabia chose this design over Boeing's.
But when is the fear of foreigners going to stop? I know the people directly and indirectly tied to Boeing are gonna get upset but does it have to get to the point where it's going to waste time in Congress over? Is there some national security risk I'm not seeing here? And hell why can other countries accept defense contracts from American businesses but not the other way around? Doesn't that kind of hypocrisy make us look petty and paranoid?
It just weirds me out that they had to throw nationalism in the mix against this deal. I expect better than this from my country even if that leads to constant disappointment.
Of course I'm not in anyway an expert of the aerospace industry so if someone who knows more or even works in it says I'm completely wrong on the subject there's a good chance he's right. I just think it's odd that this is all that big of a deal.
My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
Kagera on
0
Posts
I figure that but there IS an underlying sentiment of mistrust in foreign businesses since even people not affected by the decision are complaining about someone not American making planes for the military, and I just don't get why since that's been happening for a LONG time in other countries. It just makes me sad that they use nationalism as a reason to change the decision, it aggravates me.
they use nationalism as a tool to motivate the public.
There are many, many, many, foreign companies that have US defense contracts for everything from cleaning and waste removal, to weapon systems and aircraft. Hell, Marine 1, the helocopter that president flys in? It's made in Italy. We get guns from germany(h&k, right). Recently heard that the replacement for the LAW is being produced in sweden.
My mom gets to travel around europe and north africa auditing these folk. We have shitloads of foreign contractors and the defense department relies on them heavily for a great many roles.
I think you are mistaking retoric for how people in power actually feel and act. I don't really understand how after the last 7 years someone is still incapable of understanding that the two are vastly diffrent and are pretty much independent of each other.
The "ololol protectionism" complaint is a bit misplaced, because a lot of the parts of the plane will be made in America even though it's under Airbus's umbrella. I can see why the WA senators are pissed though, because most of Boeing's business is up here, while Northrop is elsewhere. I think one of their big plants was in Alabama if I remember correctly.
Edit: I knew it was Alabama.
But of course, it is.
See Dubai.
I'm pretty sure whoever is complaining about this is a smaller subset of the people who were complaining about that, plus the "They took our jerb!" segment as well.
Also, I'm surprised that the US military industrial complex has become so incompetent that we've been beat out by the French? Seriously, the French? I know Boeing is a bad company, but yeesh, it has let itself go.
Because if we believe what the military industrial complex says then we get to believe that the military industrial complex is run by completely incompetent idiots and needs a good kick in the knees and a bunch of spending cuts. I personally like this view of the military.
Airbus has been edging Boeing out for years.
From what I've heard Boeing caught Airbus with their pants down on the 787. That thing is pretty swanky.
I'm all for keeping jobs in America, but does it have to be every single job?
I'm usually the first to hate the French, but they do make good military equipment (lololol maginot line). The Leclerc tank is regarded by many as one of, if not the best tank around (possibly behind the Leopard 2). I'm guessing the Swedish company that was being talked about regarding the LAW replacement would be Bofors, and they have been making cannons since like the 1500s. Quality is really not likely to be a real problem here. The USAF will have either chosen the cheaper option, the better option, or both. Taxpayers in general will gain from this (albeit a microscopic amount per capita), Boeing will be the main losers.
kpop appreciation station i also like to tweet some
You could be disappeared for talk like that. I think Benjamin Disraeli had some quote about what a politicians job is along the lines of talking nationalism while dealing in pork. Gotta go Google.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
I think it's probably nationalism and pork.
kpop appreciation station i also like to tweet some
Re: Boeing vs. France: I don't know where some of you are getting these ideas, but Boeing is not a shitty company, and France is not shitty (at least w.r.t. the aerospace industry) and hasn't been for a very long time. Dassault is French, and Airbus is based in France as well.
According to my limited understanding of the industry, that would still be a mistake.
It amuses me greatly that funds earmarked to give money to someone's district are being outsourced.
edit: the more I think about it, the scandal was the USAF requesting like, 5 new tankers, and the contract giving them 15-20.
The cognitive dissonance people are going through is remarkable.
I'm not passing judgement on this particular decision, I'm just saying it should be an important factor in these types of decisions.
There really aren't any big-name players in aerospace outside of the US. Airbus is about it, and it's getting its ass kicked over the A300 trainwreck.
I think all of you are talking about the A380, not the A300 which was the first design by Airbus. Second, the company is not getting its ass kicked over it, actually the books are filled with contracts, but because of the current bickering between Germany and France on who gets to produce which part of the plane the costs of making the plane do not leave a large enough margin - thus the whole company is needs to lay off jobs to get more efficient which is in turn hindered by politicians on both sides of the Rhine to avoid losing jobs in their country.
Anyway, the attitude against other countries by some of the posters in this thread is really starting to piss me off - I mean, I am not even French (nor do I like them that much) but it's still annoying to read through all that garbage.
They're doing great but the future is looking up for Boeing to say the least as far as civil aircraft go. The A380 is a great aircraft but the market for a long range and more importantly fuel efficient mid-sized passenger jet is arguably a more attactive place to be and the 787 is a pretty amazing aircraft as far as that goes. This is assuming that Boeing can get it's production problems with the 787 worked out and last I heard that hasn't been done yet.
This is also quite frustrating.
Also, the lack of respect that the French get is indeed unsettling.
I guess its because you can't get away with slagging off the traditional groups of people
its really rather funny to see a board characterised as lunatic liberals toeing the conservative line so closely. Who knew a joke involving monkeys and cheese could have such a hold.
Up with economic competition, down with monopolies.
I saw one comment about the French perhaps made ironically. Almost without exception the posts in this thread have been "Hey, great, yay merit, boo industrial-military complex." Apparently that is toeing the conservative line? Maybe in the sense of supporting market competition? Does "conservative" mean something else in Australia?
I think it is funny to see three or four posts flipping out about anti-French bias, and one insinuating that if it wasn't the French that people were taking crack at (if anyone was actually serious . . .?) then we'd be keepin' down them womens, darkies and fags.
A lunatic liberal board indeed.
Also, I'm really needling the local conservatives' characterisation of this board as excessively liberal, rather than its actual political status. Its pretty sensibly moderate around these here parts.
Why do they hate their freedom?
Did you read to OP?
Yeah, what a nationalist dick.
Looks to me like you read the title of the thread, but not the OP, then characterized the posters in it as pro-nationalist wankers when in fact they universally support foreign contracting.
Then when you got called on that you tried to say you were responding to the character of the OP - which you manifestly had not read.
Existentalism.