![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() -- And by the way, Mr. Speaker, The Second Amendment is not for killing ducks and leaving Huey and Dewey and Louie without an aunt and uncle. It is for hunting politicians like in Grozney and in 1776, when they take your independence away". Robert K. Dornen, U.S. Congressman. 1995 "Michael Petukhov" wrote in message om... "Bill Silvey" wrote in message . com... "Michael Petukhov" wrote in message om http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/englis...265466,00.html "A Bottomless Pit" Armaments: The Eurofighter is turning into a nightmare. According to a report by the Federal Audit Office, the mega project will not only cost five billion euros more than planned - it also suffers from severe flaws. Defence minister Peter Struck's budget is not big enough to continue to maintain an army of 285,000 with modern equipment at its disposal. In particular, the minister wants to economise on arms. The room for manoeuvring available to army planners is minimal. To the intense annoyance of the army and navy, more than two thirds of the money is earmarked for aeronautical equipment: helicopters, Airbus transport aircraft and in particular the airforce's controversial Eurofighter. But the first Eurofighters, which are now being delivered considerably behind schedule, are virtually useless. It is an interesting contrast between modern, industrialized societies' weapons procurement versus Eastern Bloc nations' command economy Wrong. If you read the arcticle in full you would learn that 8 EF2000 just arrived to German airforce have huge number of purely technical problems which according to that report make them "useless" as combat aircraft. Given the cost paid rather the story proves inefficiency of industrialized societies' weapons procurement versus Eastern Bloc nations' command economy. and the diktat that forced various industries therein to essentially create and perform with little or no regard to reward or payment; surely if files covering all Soviet aircraft developments All this is certanly contrary to very vell known facts that soviet command economy was more cost effective in arms production than US market economy was. (and currently, that's all Russia has to fly beyond a few never-never technology demonstrators) dispite the obvious fact that 100s of Su-27, Mig-29, Mig-31, Tu22Ms and Tu160 are newer and more than enough match to their US opponents F16, F15, B1 abd B2. That's why. Was it you who was just complaining about cost inefficiacy of soviet command economy? And your ships are better and your subs more advanced and you won the cold war and put down your crack pipe... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , "Christians for
Cheeseburgers." wrote: So where are the results of all this Russian innovation? Flavored vodkas? I hear there was this guy named Yuri Gagarin. . . Wasn't the T-55 the first true MBT? The USSR/Russia also was the first nation to install gas turbines in an operational warship design. Soc.culture groups snipped -- Regards, Michael P. Reed |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Michael P. Reed wrote:
:In message , "Christians for :Cheeseburgers." wrote: : : So where are the results of all this Russian innovation? Flavored vodkas? : :I hear there was this guy named Yuri Gagarin. . . But the Russians didn't invent space flight and there was nothing particularly innovative about the 'man in a can' approach. :Wasn't the T-55 the first true MBT? Define "true MBT". Under whatever definition, unless you're quite careful to tailor it specifically to the T-55, I would say 'not'. :The USSR/Russia also was the first nation to install gas turbines in :an operational warship design. Which subsequently had one explode, which was predicted by Western sources. Now, if you were to want to talk metallurgy or high energy beam physics.... -- "Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute." -- Charles Pinckney |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Michael P. Reed" wrote in message
Wasn't the T-55 the first true MBT? No. The Germans beat that out by about two decades. -- http://www.delversdungeon.dragonsfoot.org Remove the X's in my email address to respond. "Damn you Silvey, and your endless fortunes." - Stephen Weir I hate furries. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Michael P. Reed" wrote in message ... In message , "Christians for Cheeseburgers." wrote: So where are the results of all this Russian innovation? Flavored vodkas? I hear there was this guy named Yuri Gagarin. . . Wasn't the T-55 the first true MBT? The USSR/Russia also was the first nation to install gas turbines in an operational warship design. Certainly the Centurian beat the T-55, but how will you define MBT? Gagarin was hardly an innovation, just the first across the line. Gas turbines in ships, putting them there and making them work are 2 different things. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Peter Kemp wrote:
On 24 Sep 2003 08:07:53 -0700, (defaultnot) wrote: When did Europeans do anything right??? In Iraq, Europeans only stood idle and watched and supplied the equipment Saddam massacred millions of innocent human beings until the USA stepped in again. Now the Europeans are still doing nothing but bitching about USA. Don't talk crap. The US was standing idle watching Iraq as well you halfwit. Or if you don't get back under your bridge I'll bring up some of the US' less golden moments in recent history. Oh don't let alleged trolls under the bridge stop you! Brining up "US' less golden moments in recent history" has been de rigeur in discussing American foreign policy for some time now. I presume that is because they seem so much better documented than the "less golden moments" of others. SMH |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:26:24 -0400, Stephen Harding
wrote: Peter Kemp wrote: On 24 Sep 2003 08:07:53 -0700, (defaultnot) wrote: When did Europeans do anything right??? In Iraq, Europeans only stood idle and watched and supplied the equipment Saddam massacred millions of innocent human beings until the USA stepped in again. Now the Europeans are still doing nothing but bitching about USA. Don't talk crap. The US was standing idle watching Iraq as well you halfwit. Or if you don't get back under your bridge I'll bring up some of the US' less golden moments in recent history. Oh don't let alleged trolls under the bridge stop you! Brining up "US' less golden moments in recent history" has been de rigeur in discussing American foreign policy for some time now. I presume that is because they seem so much better documented than the "less golden moments" of others. Hardly, I doubt there's a country in the world who's happy for their closets to be examined for skeletons (although Iceland doesn't seem to have done anything too bad........yet), and they're all documented, even if not in the US, which does have the biggest media voice. Hell, I'm proud to be a Brit (ok, ok, half-Brit), and we did some damn nasty things in our past. Peter Kemp |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Peter Kemp wrote:
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:26:24 -0400, Stephen Harding wrote: Brining up "US' less golden moments in recent history" has been de rigeur in discussing American foreign policy for some time now. I presume that is because they seem so much better documented than the "less golden moments" of others. Hardly, I doubt there's a country in the world who's happy for their closets to be examined for skeletons (although Iceland doesn't seem to have done anything too bad........yet), and they're all documented, even if not in the US, which does have the biggest media voice. Yes most countries of the world have done bad things at one time or another. I mention US atrocities being much better documented because of two major factors: A free press for most of its history, and the hugh leap in technology that has occurred during a significant part of its national history (say 150 years) in conjunction with that free press. I think that puts US deeds under better focus than those of many other nations. European nations have done far more to brutalize indigenous peoples, steal their lands, exploit their populations, enslave and kill than Americans have ever done, yet the standard for underhandedness seems to be American slavery and colonial through national Indian policies, followed perhaps by CIA operations during the Cold War. Hell, I'm proud to be a Brit (ok, ok, half-Brit), and we did some damn nasty things in our past. Yet the focus always seems to be on the nasty things done by the US. BBC, CNN, ABC and the like can be right in that Baghdad neighborhood when an errant bomb from those aggressive, bloodthirsty Americans goes off, but are absent when Saddam's thugs round up Kurdish villagers "for interrogation" never to be seen again. Wonder what our opinion of the Swedes or Danes would be if BBC was on scene in 900 AD to record [on *film*!] the results of a Viking raid, and we could bring up that footage for viewing whenever we had a disagreement with nationals from those countries? SMH |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Stephen Harding
writes BBC, CNN, ABC and the like can be right in that Baghdad neighborhood when an errant bomb from those aggressive, bloodthirsty Americans goes off, but are absent when Saddam's thugs round up Kurdish villagers "for interrogation" never to be seen again. But isn't that Saddam the same one the west armed in the '80s and fought a war against in '90/91, only to leave him in power? Aren't those the same Kurds the west said they'd help if they rose up against Saddam, but didn't and allowed him to use helicopters against them when they did? What about Turkey, are they bombing the Kurds in northern Iraq? -- John |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Halliwell wrote:
In article , Stephen Harding BBC, CNN, ABC and the like can be right in that Baghdad neighborhood when an errant bomb from those aggressive, bloodthirsty Americans goes off, but are absent when Saddam's thugs round up Kurdish villagers "for interrogation" never to be seen again. But isn't that Saddam the same one the west armed in the '80s and fought Not that I know of. US followed a policy of cautious favoritism for Iraq as opposed to Iran (for obvious reasons). This "US armed Iraq" line is way out of proportion from truth. Pretty much, the Soviets armed Iraq, and did so throughout the Saddam reign, and if the UN (French) get the US out of Iraq within 6 months, will be arming Saddam again inside of 5 years. Yet only the American flirtation with Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war seems to be remembered. a war against in '90/91, only to leave him in power? Aren't those the Why are you arguing against this? Isn't this the UN line? Isn't this what many of the "hate Bush so much I'll help Saddam" crowd believes? Why criticize something you seem to believe in? same Kurds the west said they'd help if they rose up against Saddam, but didn't and allowed him to use helicopters against them when they did? For all the same reason spoken today by anti-Bush people for getting out of Iraq. If you argue in favor of immediate withdrawl, or non-involvement to begin with, how can you bring up American non-involvement in 1991? What about Turkey, are they bombing the Kurds in northern Iraq? Don't think so. The PUK seems largely under control now. SMH |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: Piper PA18 / L-18C Flightmanual of German Luftwaffe | Maik | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | February 5th 04 12:32 PM |
German Stereotypes? | Keith Willshaw | Military Aviation | 3 | August 19th 03 04:05 AM |
Eurofighter Costs | John Cook | Military Aviation | 0 | July 9th 03 11:58 AM |