China to buy Eurofighters?

"tscottme" wrote in message
...
Scott Ferrin wrote in message
...



In my opinion selling them top of the line stuff is the height of
stupidity. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what the
situation is going to be with China and the West in ten to fifteen
years.

What makes you think the Europeans don't want the next problem for the
US to be as bad as possible? They have no hope of exceeding the US
unless a full-scale war devastates the US. The fact that it helps
communists is a happy coincidence.


In fact there is no prospect of the ban being lifted anytime soon.
While the French Government and some corporate bodies
have pressed for it the EU itself has stated that it has no
plans to lift the embargo and even if it did has stated that
other agreements controlling the arms trade would prevent
such deliveries taking place.



In fact the main suppliers of high tech weaponry to China
have been Israel and Russia and even the USA supplied
dual use technology supposedly for satellite launching
that is believed to have been used in the Chinese
missile program. Finally of course we miust recall that Boeing has a
large operation in China, publically states that it supports
the one China policy and Condit is president of the
US China business council.

Keith

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 13:11:12 -0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:

In fact there is no prospect of the ban being lifted anytime soon.
While the French Government and some corporate bodies
have pressed for it

And the German govmt.

the EU itself has stated that it has no
plans to lift the embargo and even if it did has stated that
other agreements controlling the arms trade would prevent
such deliveries taking place.

That's a relevant point.



In fact the main suppliers of high tech weaponry to China
have been Israel and Russia and even the USA supplied
dual use technology supposedly for satellite launching
that is believed to have been used in the Chinese
missile program.

It seems to me that if Israel can supply China with missiles and
other technology, there should be no problems for Europe doing so,
since Israeli military tech is roughly on a level with European.


--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

"phil hunt" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 13:11:12 -0000, Keith Willshaw
wrote:

In fact there is no prospect of the ban being lifted anytime soon.
While the French Government and some corporate bodies
have pressed for it

And the German govmt.


Cite please.

the EU itself has stated that it has no
plans to lift the embargo and even if it did has stated that
other agreements controlling the arms trade would prevent
such deliveries taking place.

That's a relevant point.



In fact the main suppliers of high tech weaponry to China
have been Israel and Russia and even the USA supplied
dual use technology supposedly for satellite launching
that is believed to have been used in the Chinese
missile program.

It seems to me that if Israel can supply China with missiles and
other technology, there should be no problems for Europe doing so,
since Israeli military tech is roughly on a level with European.


The EU views supplying arms to China as a bad idea however as
does the USA since it was US pressure that stopped the development
of an AWACS type system for China by Israeli companies.

Keith

----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Willshaw"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 8:11 AM
Subject: China to buy Eurofighters?



"tscottme" wrote in message
...
Scott Ferrin wrote in message
...



In my opinion selling them top of the line stuff is the height of
stupidity. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what the
situation is going to be with China and the West in ten to fifteen
years.

What makes you think the Europeans don't want the next problem for the
US to be as bad as possible? They have no hope of exceeding the US
unless a full-scale war devastates the US. The fact that it helps
communists is a happy coincidence.


In fact there is no prospect of the ban being lifted anytime soon.
While the French Government and some corporate bodies
have pressed for it the EU itself has stated that it has no
plans to lift the embargo and even if it did has stated that
other agreements controlling the arms trade would prevent
such deliveries taking place.



There is a GAO report dating from 1998 that states that the current EU
embargo does not enjoy a common interpretation; what makes you think that
these "other" controls will have any real impact?


In fact the main suppliers of high tech weaponry to China
have been Israel and Russia and even the USA supplied
dual use technology supposedly for satellite launching
that is believed to have been used in the Chinese
missile program. Finally of course we miust recall that Boeing has a
large operation in China, publically states that it supports
the one China policy and Condit is president of the
US China business council.

You are sort of ignoring reality here a bit, Keith. You seem to have
forgotten the UK (like those "peaceful" Searchwater radars that were agreed
for sale?), French (everything from Crotale to the licensed helicopters that
form the basis for the only real attack helo that the PLAAF has, the WZ-9),
Italy (Aspide and current attempts to sell Grifo for the PRC's new fighter
programs). Yes, the US has (pre-89) sold some very limited weapons to the
PRC, and likely, despite some attempt to control it through the contract
conditions, some of the past satellite assistance did yield some support to
the PLA missile program. But if you are going to hang the US for that, just
what the heck do you consider the recent news that the EU and the PRC are
hopping into the same bed with Gallileo? *That* program is going to have
more impact on PRC military programs than did the old US tech transfers.

Brooks

Keith

You are sort of ignoring reality here a bit, Keith. You seem to have
forgotten the UK (like those "peaceful" Searchwater radars that were agreed
for sale?), French (everything from Crotale to the licensed helicopters that
form the basis for the only real attack helo that the PLAAF has, the WZ-9),
Italy (Aspide and current attempts to sell Grifo for the PRC's new fighter
programs). Yes, the US has (pre-89) sold some very limited weapons to the
PRC, and likely, despite some attempt to control it through the contract
conditions, some of the past satellite assistance did yield some support to
the PLA missile program. But if you are going to hang the US for that, just
what the heck do you consider the recent news that the EU and the PRC are
hopping into the same bed with Gallileo? *That* program is going to have
more impact on PRC military programs than did the old US tech transfers.


Which is going to be a real bitch. Imagine a decade or two in the
future (if that ) and something serious going on with the
US/Taiwan/China thing. Even if the US had the capability at that
point to take out the Galileo satellites their hands would be tied by
the prospect of all the users from "allied" countries being SOL. Not
to mention the heat the US would take for doing it. Would it be
possible for the US to jam Galileo while leaving Navstar working? Who
knows but I'll bet someone is thinking real hard about it.

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
t...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Willshaw"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 8:11 AM
Subject: China to buy Eurofighters?



"tscottme" wrote in message
...
Scott Ferrin wrote in message
...



In my opinion selling them top of the line stuff is the height of
stupidity. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what the
situation is going to be with China and the West in ten to fifteen
years.

What makes you think the Europeans don't want the next problem for the
US to be as bad as possible? They have no hope of exceeding the US
unless a full-scale war devastates the US. The fact that it helps
communists is a happy coincidence.


In fact there is no prospect of the ban being lifted anytime soon.
While the French Government and some corporate bodies
have pressed for it the EU itself has stated that it has no
plans to lift the embargo and even if it did has stated that
other agreements controlling the arms trade would prevent
such deliveries taking place.



There is a GAO report dating from 1998 that states that the current EU
embargo does not enjoy a common interpretation; what makes you think that
these "other" controls will have any real impact?


The fact that arms sales have not taken place would
seem a good indicator. Tje same GAO report you cite states

"GAO found no instances of EU members entering into new
agreements to sell China lethal military items after 1989, although some
delivered lethal and nonlethal military items to China during the
1990s--apparently in connection with pre-embargo agreements"

It also points out

"since 1989, the President has issued waivers to:
(a) allow the delivery to China of military items valued at $36.3
million to close out the U.S. government's pre-1989 defense agreements
with China; and (b) license commercial military exports valued at over
$312 million--primarily commercial satellite and encryption items"

In other words there is little to chhose here.



In fact the main suppliers of high tech weaponry to China
have been Israel and Russia and even the USA supplied
dual use technology supposedly for satellite launching
that is believed to have been used in the Chinese
missile program. Finally of course we miust recall that Boeing has a
large operation in China, publically states that it supports
the one China policy and Condit is president of the
US China business council.

You are sort of ignoring reality here a bit, Keith. You seem to have
forgotten the UK (like those "peaceful" Searchwater radars that were
agreed
for sale?), French (everything from Crotale to the licensed helicopters
that
form the basis for the only real attack helo that the PLAAF has, the
WZ-9),

Searchwater as I'm sure you recall is hardly the most modern radar
in the world but I'll agree that the decision was unwise but the Crotale
sale
(and that of Aspide) took place before 1989, at a time when the US was
also happy to sell arms to China.

Italy (Aspide and current attempts to sell Grifo for the PRC's new fighter
programs). Yes, the US has (pre-89) sold some very limited weapons to the
PRC, and likely, despite some attempt to control it through the contract
conditions, some of the past satellite assistance did yield some support
to
the PLA missile program. But if you are going to hang the US for that,
just
what the heck do you consider the recent news that the EU and the PRC are
hopping into the same bed with Gallileo? *That* program is going to have
more impact on PRC military programs than did the old US tech transfers.


I'm not planning on hanging anybody, rather it seems apposite to
point out that other nations including the US and Israel have
sold China technology that is rather more sensitive and directly
related to weapons production.

Lets not forget what your GAO report also says

"Russia and the Middle East have provided
almost 90 percent of China's imported military items
during this period"

Israel being the main middle eastern player.

Hell the Israelis sold China one of the best Air to Air missile
systems in the world and one that included significant amounts of
US technology.

As for Galileo its a satnav system that is being set up as a
civilian enterprise and will be run as a commercial
organisation. How is that different from Boeing setting up
shop build commercial aircraft in China ?

I'd argue that tying China in to dependency on such an International
system is a plus not a minus if we are considering collective
security.

Keith

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 06:11:46 -0600, "tscottme" wrote:

Scott Ferrin wrote in message
.. .



In my opinion selling them top of the line stuff is the height of
stupidity. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what the
situation is going to be with China and the West in ten to fifteen
years.

What makes you think the Europeans don't want the next problem for the
US to be as bad as possible? They have no hope of exceeding the US
unless a full-scale war devastates the US. The fact that it helps
communists is a happy coincidence.

Roger that. The europeans are hardly our "friends".

Al Minyard

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 10:43:41 -0600, Alan Minyard wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 06:11:46 -0600, "tscottme" wrote:

Scott Ferrin wrote in message
. ..



In my opinion selling them top of the line stuff is the height of
stupidity. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what the
situation is going to be with China and the West in ten to fifteen
years.

What makes you think the Europeans don't want the next problem for the
US to be as bad as possible? They have no hope of exceeding the US
unless a full-scale war devastates the US. The fact that it helps
communists is a happy coincidence.

Roger that. The europeans are hardly our "friends".

They certainly wouldn't be if people like you were running the USA.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

Alan Minyard wrote:

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 06:11:46 -0600, "tscottme" wrote:

Scott Ferrin wrote in message
. ..



In my opinion selling them top of the line stuff is the height of
stupidity. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what the
situation is going to be with China and the West in ten to fifteen
years.

What makes you think the Europeans don't want the next problem for the
US to be as bad as possible? They have no hope of exceeding the US
unless a full-scale war devastates the US. The fact that it helps
communists is a happy coincidence.

Roger that. The europeans are hardly our "friends".

Al Minyard

Sad as it is to contemplate very few countries are genuinely
friendly with others. Friendship is usually predicated on
usefulness and can be ruined rather quickly.

I believe that communication is the key to increasing this
valuable commodity and I think that the internet plays a part in
this.

Now if we can just keep from killing each other long enough for
this and other communication avenues yet uninvented to take
effect we just might avoid ruining it all irretrievably with WMD.

I hope so anyway...or am I barking up an empty tree?...and are my
little grand-babies doomed to become small pools of flaming
smoking matter running off the edge of the concrete sidewalk near
their school?
--

-Gord.

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 20:15:13 GMT, "Gord Beaman" ) wrote:

Alan Minyard wrote:

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 06:11:46 -0600, "tscottme" wrote:

Scott Ferrin wrote in message
...



In my opinion selling them top of the line stuff is the height of
stupidity. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what the
situation is going to be with China and the West in ten to fifteen
years.

What makes you think the Europeans don't want the next problem for the
US to be as bad as possible? They have no hope of exceeding the US
unless a full-scale war devastates the US. The fact that it helps
communists is a happy coincidence.

Roger that. The europeans are hardly our "friends".

Al Minyard

Sad as it is to contemplate very few countries are genuinely
friendly with others. Friendship is usually predicated on
usefulness and can be ruined rather quickly.

I believe that communication is the key to increasing this
valuable commodity and I think that the internet plays a part in
this.

Now if we can just keep from killing each other long enough for
this and other communication avenues yet uninvented to take
effect we just might avoid ruining it all irretrievably with WMD.

I hope so anyway...or am I barking up an empty tree?...and are my
little grand-babies doomed to become small pools of flaming
smoking matter running off the edge of the concrete sidewalk near
their school?

I would opine that "friends" and "they are about to nuke us" are many
shades of gray apart. France has nukes, and "hates" the US, but they
are at least smart enough to realize that attacking the US with Nukes
would be national suicide.

Selling the most advanced aircraft that you are capable of building
to obviously hostile, repressive regimes is not the act of a "friend"

Al Minyard