Is Rafale dead?

Go and learn latin language...and you will perhaps, if you get more than
a neurone, what's mean Nemo

Tony Volk wrote in message
...
snip
For the record, I think the U.N. should have gone in as a whole
and
taken out Saddam for breach of GW 1 agreements, and for his atrocities
against his people.
snip

That's very funny or your car has a very bad exhaust leak. I suppose
the UN would ride in on their purple dinosaurs and fling time-traveling
arrows while wearing anti-gravity boots. 12 years to enforce sanctions,
try 12 more years to agree on the date of the planning conference and
the menu for the welcome banquet for the pre-plenary session to discuss
the military action.

--

Scott
--------
Monitor the latest efforts of "peaceful Muslims" at
http://www.jihadwatch.org/

Tony Volk wrote in message
...
Remember the Monroe Doctorine. its for this reason that the US didnt
get involved. If Germany would have invaded a country in the western
hemisphere that would have been a differnet matter. Let Europe worry
about Europe was the motto of the day, for it was a foreign war.
But when we were attacked it no longer became a foreign war.
P.S. there was no western world or eastern world, only western
hemisphere(new world) and eastern hemisphere(old world). West and
east
didnt come into play until the cold war. And the US wanted to keep
the
war, and Europe out of the New World, therefore we didnt step in
theirs.

I'm not sure if this is an argument, or an agreement that France
(now)
acted very much like the U.S. (then). It sure seems to back up what I
said
before. Thanks for the details. Cheers,

Tony


Yet the US seems to have learned the lesson while France seems to have
adopted appeasement and isolationism as a religion.

--

Scott
--------
Monitor the latest efforts of "peaceful Muslims" at
http://www.jihadwatch.org/

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 18:06:29 -0500, "Tony Volk" wrote:

The US was a neutral, you know, like the Swedes, the Swiss, etc. We had
just recently completed the clean up of a euro mess (WW1). The fact that
the French screwed up the Armistice was getting them into another mess.
We, quite reasonably, decided that, since Europe had evidently decided
that a war every few years was a good thing, we would decline to
participate.

You didn't answer the question. The U.S. ignored the need to defend
"peace, freedom, etc." as the Germans and Japanese began the war. They only
got involved when they themselves were attacked. So why would you blame
France for not wanting to join a U.S. fight when France wasn't attacked (no
one was actually, but assuming you're going with the Bush 9/11 line of
garbage). Why is it "quite reasonable" for the U.S. to back out of a war
they're not involved in, and cowardice/betrayal for France to do the same
thing? France just fought in GW 1, US starts GW 2, and sits out. That's as
close to an exact parallel to your WW1 and WW2 comments as you could get!
Your answers strike me as deeply hypocritical.
For the record, I think the U.N. should have gone in as a whole and
taken out Saddam for breach of GW 1 agreements, and for his atrocities
against his people. I'm glad that a monster was removed (I think that they
needn't have, and shouldn't have lied about removing WOMD). But to accuse
France of being cowards in not joining this relatively minor war makes me
wonder what you think of the actions of the U.S. in early WWII when the
stakes were much higher, the need much direr, and the evil much worse. How
was the U.S. reasonable while the French were not?

Well, for one thing there was about a 60 year difference. The UN will never
be an effective organization, its Charter ensures that. You will also note
that in WWI the French army mutinied, and in WWII they rolled over and
played dead.

Tony

p.s.- to any veterans of WWII, I am in no way questioning the incredible
valor and sacrifice of the Americans during WWII, only trying to illustrate
that any country can be or has been selfish and complacent in the face of a
common danger so it's ignorant or hypocritical to single out any one country
as such; I apologize in advance for any implied insult (none was intended)
and can only offer that I'm trying to make a complex point in a brief
fashion

There was very little "common danger" involved. In WWI we were not attacked
at all, and in WWII the "danger" to the US was the Japanese.

Al Minyard

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:09:51 -0500, "Tony Volk" wrote:

Remember the Monroe Doctorine. its for this reason that the US didnt
get involved. If Germany would have invaded a country in the western
hemisphere that would have been a differnet matter. Let Europe worry
about Europe was the motto of the day, for it was a foreign war.
But when we were attacked it no longer became a foreign war.
P.S. there was no western world or eastern world, only western
hemisphere(new world) and eastern hemisphere(old world). West and east
didnt come into play until the cold war. And the US wanted to keep the
war, and Europe out of the New World, therefore we didnt step in
theirs.

I'm not sure if this is an argument, or an agreement that France (now)
acted very much like the U.S. (then). It sure seems to back up what I said
before. Thanks for the details. Cheers,

Tony

You do not seem to be able to realize that the world was a vastly different
place in 1911 and 1941. At that time there were very few countries
capable of world wide destruction. Today, even a dump like Iraq
could, and did, attack many countries. The French were, as their
recent comments show, only interested in the money that Elf, etc
were making in Iraq. The French refused us overflight permission
in the attack on Libya, and hoped (as they did before WWII) that
"making nice" with the enemy would prevent them from being
attacked. They were wrong.

Al Minyard

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 21:19:46 -0500, "Charles Talleyrand" wrote:


"Paul F Austin" wrote in message ...

"WaltBJ" wrote
IS the Rafale dead? Nobody answered the question.
BTW the US armed forces, with the exception of the Navy, didn't have
anything to fight with in 1941, let alone 1939. Look it up.

It's not dead but it is very ill, for lack of foreign military sales. France
alone can't manage Rafale procurement at a rate that would give them a
viable force in reasonable time, not when she is funding the A400M, a new
carrier, procurement of the fourth Triomphant.. All those things are also in
competition with social security funding as the French population ages.

It seems very unlikely that the Rafale will *ever* have a foreign
military sale. The best chance is 25 years from now when France wants
to upgrade, and the planes are both used and cheap. Or maybe politics
can force someone like Taiwan to buy them (but I doubt it).

Seriously, it's hard to imagine the nation that would pick the Rafale
when the Typhoon and the F-16/18 are available.

Not to mention the F-35. Stealth, VSTOL if desired, CTOL and runway
options available, and quite affordable. About 30 countries are involved
in the project, and will most likely purchase it.

Al Minyard

Mike wrote:
Bla bla bla...

Yeap, BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA

"Mike" wrote in message
...
Is F.22 dead?If you're not american,no one cares...
Is "Dreamliner" (pfff!what a name!) dead?If you'are not american,no one
cares...
Is LCA dead?If you're not indian,no one cares....
Is Su.35 dead,if you're not russian,no one cares...

With such a logic,why not to make a newsgroup for each country,where one
can
speak about planes from its own country,and only about those...




"J" a écrit dans le message de news:
. ..
If your not french, no one cares.



Very good suggestion! Maybe we can get rid of all you top-posters.

You didn't answer the question. The U.S. ignored the need to defend
"peace, freedom, etc." as the Germans and Japanese began the war. They
only
got involved when they themselves were attacked.

I thought Europeans were against "preventive wars". I thought Europeans
were against wars not fought for one's own defense. That seems to be
what you have been telling us since September 11, 2001.

Before the US officially entered the war in 1941 America was providing
massive amounts of aid to Britain and Russia and Army Air Corp pilots
were fighting the Japanese in China under the transparent cover of being
"mercenaries". We were doing a great deal to keep you Germans from
destroying the world long before December 8, 1941.

Would you want do describe this massive aid from USA to Soviet Union before
december 8 1941?

"tadaa" wrote in message ...


Would you want do describe this massive aid from USA to Soviet Union
before
december 8 1941?




Hell yes

The Lend Lease act was amended to include the USSR following
the invasion of Germany and between October 1941 and June 42
the US supplied 1285 aircraft , 2249 tanks, 81,000 machine guns,
37,000 trucks, 56,000 file telephones and 30,000 tons of
explosives.

Keith