Israels JSF plans

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

DarthAmerica 6/22/2009 3:04:16 PM

Given the protests in Tehran and other Iranian cities over the past week, I think that much of the

preceding analysis will have to be revisited. To a significant degree, Darth is correct.

Saw a lot of effort back and forth over the last two years to establish influence. A lot of things people may not appreciate who weren't local. As we discussed some time ago, Iran suffered a severe setback in Q4 of 2006. Their political and regional calculous was publicly proven quite wrong. This had to send shockwaves through the Iranian government. An aftershock was the election of BHO. Whatever questions remained about the commitment of the USG to the region were answered when everyone from Liberals and Conservatives in America to Mullahs in Iran realized that the USG wasn't about to reverse or even significantly change policy. This included everything from staying in Iraq to emphasizing a diplomatic approach. Especially with regard to Iranian nuclear capabilities which have always been a side show to the USG and the real issue being growing Iranian regional influence as opposed to US interest. This dictates everything from the rhetoric coming from POTUS mouth to what weapons we export to Israel. The United States and Iran have very similar regional interest and in spite of the public war of words both parties know that a negotiated settlement and possibly even understanding is better if at all possible.

-DA

Quote Reply

JFKY Darth 6/22/2009 3:39:45 PM

Darth you need to take a step back from your Obama- Man-Crush...the current regime in Tehran and the US have NO interests in common....unless you believe the imposition of Farsi Theocratic Authoritarian Kleptocracy in a region containing over half the world's proven oil reserves is something you think is in the US' interests.

Now sometimes you make good points, and you can't be all bad if you anger Herald...but this last little bit was just a bit over-the-top....

Quote Reply

Shirrush DA 6/22/2009 4:37:11 PM

Hi Darth. Speaking about facts, apart from the continuation of demonstrably failed Western diplomatic efforts that have only served the purpose of giving the Mullahs time to complete their nuclear arsenal, there's definitely something new in the US approach to the Middle-East. Let us not recall that Obama spent 20 years in his youth worshipping towards Mecca, and another 20 years intently listening to Rev. Wright's rantings about "them Jews": the present administration's supine, apologetic and outright shameful posture vis-a-vis the world's tyrants, America's and freedom's enemies, is definitely innovative.

War with Iran is certainly not in Israel's best interest. Quite the contrary: regime change followed by ormal relations with a post-Islamic government is. The One's policies of buttressing the illegitimate, fascistic Mullah regime are making such a war inevitable, and since the US diplomacy and its armed forces in the area are de facto defending Iran from any Israeli military action aimed at the islamonazi's nuclear program, the only choice left to Israel is between a fiery extinction or a slow, painful death at the hands of Iranian-sponsored terrorists operating under a nuclear umbrella, and an OOB, all out preemptive nuclear strike using ballistic missiles arcing through outer space above the US-controlled Iraqi and Gulf airspace.

I think you're a bit too quick crediting St. Hussein for the miracle of the awakening of the courageous

Iranian people. There is a possibility that what has happened in the barbarian country next door has had more impact on the Iranians than the antics of the MSM around BHO. The credit for the Iraqis freely electing their government and enjoying freedom of expression belongs to the Bush administration, and Obama actively opposed it.

If anything, Obama's story is a true caveat against democracy, a system which enabled the use of mass psychology and collective hypnosis by unanimous media during the most protracted campaign in human history, to bring about the election of a candidate not congruent with the interests and the psyche of his country.

As to the future front-line fighter of the IDF, I think it would be unwise to blindly go for the black-box offering of a rather inconsistent ally, even considering the very generous aid package granted by the
previous administration. It may make sense, from a financial and technological point of view, to design a domestic air combat-and-SEAD-only platform, a stealthy and modern F-104 if you will, from the ground up rather than to commit to an horribly expensive platform with too many strings attached. The Swedes have done just that, and they're not a lot bigger than we are.

Quote Reply

strat-T21C Time to stir the pot! 6/22/2009 5:16:52 PM

Would a nucular Iran make the nations in the region sit down and have constructive, bi-lateral relations instead of hate filled retoric? I know what Ajjissyyrrbb or whatever the Iranian pres said regarding the state of Isreal and holocaust, but does he really have the power? No, it's with the Surpreame Council.

Quote Reply

strat-T21C further 6/22/2009 5:35:08 PM

It's my understanding that the IDF/AF wishes to put their software etc on the plane so they can use their own weaponry.

Quote Reply

Herald12345 6/22/2009 6:54:42 PM

Now sometimes you make good points, and you can't be all bad if you anger Herald...but this last little bit was just a bit over-the-top....

Well, we may hate each other's guts as well as each other's opinions, but friends do that, JFKY.

Herald

Quote Reply

usajoe1 DA 6/22/2009 8:05:19 PM

The United States and Iran have very similar regional interest and in spite of the public war of words both parties know that a negotiated settlement and possibly even understanding is better if at all possible.

Dart, have you lost your mind! similar regional interest? Let me ask you this, do you think the US wants to see this peace loving and stable region of the world

have 4 or 5 nuclear armed states. The currnet Iranian regime is leading us down this road. Now tell me is that in our interest? or is it our interest to see Hamas and Hezbollah and other terrorist organazations supported by this criminal regime murder hundreds if not thousands of innocent people on a yearly bases, whether they be Jews, Palestinians or Lebanese. Maybe Darth, it is our interest to see this criminal regime kill American slodiers and deny the existence of the Holocaust. Iran wants to deminish our role in the ME. We want to keep our influence in this oil rich region, so Dart tell me what interest are you talking about?

Quote Reply

Spiky Things are heating up in the lovely Middle East 6/23/2009 12:39:45 AM

I am pasting a section of a post that I wrote (Subject: Israel to lose US support?) on June 2, 2009. This before the Lebanese elections, the Iranian elections, and the Iranian demonstrations:

"This is my opinion, backed by diplomatic and military Arab/Israeli/U.S. history since 1948:

First, Obama's diplomacy for a two-state solution (Israel/Palestinians) will fail.

Second, by the time diplomacy fails after a year or more, Iran will be that much closer to nuclear weapon capability.

Third, after diplomatic failures, under the Obama administration the U.S. will resign itself to accept a nuclear capable Iran.

Fourth, after all these failures, Israel will be forced to take matters into their own hands, whether the U.S. likes it or not, inpart to assure their survival as a nation. And, yes they have done the impossible before in three wars and many strikes that have left their adversaries reeling in unbelief. Again, many of the Arab neighbors will protest but not too much since those Sunni nations in the Persian Gulf fear the aggresive Shia Iran and their mullahs more than they do Israel."

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica 6/23/2009 4:52:39 PM

Dart, have you lost your mind! similar regional interest? Let me ask you this, do you think the US wants to see this peace loving and stable region of the world have 4 or 5 nuclear armed states. The currnet Iranian regime is leading us down this road. Now tell me is that in our interest? or is it our interest to see Hamas and Hezbollah and other terrorist organazations supported by this criminal regime murder hundreds if not thousands of innocent people on a yearly bases, whether they be Jews, Palestinians or Lebanese. Maybe Darth, it is our interest to see this criminal regime kill American slodiers and deny the existence of the Holocaust. Iran wants to deminish our role in the ME. We want to keep our influence in this oil rich region, so Dart tell me what interest are you talking about?

USAJOE,

Please take a look at the following...

...What I want you to pay attention to is the make and timing of this VERY ADVANCED at the time combat aircraft relative to say...various F-15 exports. When I say the USA and Iran have similar interest, I don't mean to compare the current local politics of either country. Such things change with the wind. I'm speaking from a geopolitical point of view. While a lot has changed in the world and indeed Iran and the USA since 1979, many of the motivations and reasons for the US and Iranian partnership still remain and IF the current governments of both countries could reconcile differences you would be very likely to see a very vigorous reengagement.

I can't stress enough Joe. You have to look beyond RHETORIC on both sides. What is shown on MSM is not how things really are between the USA and Iran. We are already in discussion with them and have been for several years. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH OBAMA other than he is continuing on the last admin's policy which is working. Additionally, his new perspective and different political affiliations give him an added advantage in any negotiations because there are people who cannot at all even hint at negotiating with President Bush in public. This has everything to do with past grievances against other GOP admins to race. Yes, race matters.

If you want to discuss this as the MSM surface propaganda/rhetoric level that both countries use to manipulate public opinion for leverage in negotiation that's fine. However, if you want to get into what's really going on and why it seems that both the USA and Iran are doing things that in public seem completely contrary to rhetoric then that's what I'm explaining. You also need to understand the difference between ra-ra go Israel rhetoric and the truth that THEY ARE DEPENDENT ON THE USA FOR SURVIVAL and sometimes their interest do not line up with our agenda. This means every once and a while you will have public disagreement on issues that to the average Joe don;t make sense. For instance, attacking nuclear sites.

Israel knows full well the limits of such an operation and is using the threat of war TO PRESSURE the USA to act on it's behalf while it deals with Iran. The USA uses its economic and military power to pressure Israel into yielding on issues that affect US-Arab/Persian relations which are also obviously critical to US economic and military interest. This isn't about "friends". It's about interest. You need to understand that.

It is important to remain utterly objective here. It makes a difference to the USA what Israel does. That can affect things like whether or not we export advanced weapons systems. For instance, some of you say, well, if Israel wants to attack Iran, what right do we have to stop it? Well, for one, if they are planning on using that eq

Quote Reply

Shirrush This just in. 6/23/2009 4:57:17 PM

The Hebe Globes website has a news item... on the F35 procurement by Israel.
Budgetary cuts are hitting hard, as there has been a 40% drop in exports, and the Pentagon has been rather inflexible, so the IDF/AF has expressed a willingness to give up on its demand for the integration of Israeli avionics, commos, weapons and EW. Globes is quoting a Defense News item I was unable to find on their website....

Israeli official sources reportedly told the weekly that such a compromise would save as much as one third of the total amount, some US$ 6G, reducing it to less than US$9G compared to the previous estimate of US$15.2G.

According to Israeli sources, giving up on the upgrades is a drastic cut in both operational capabilities and the air force's ambition to integrate local defense industries products in its next-generation fighter.

The depth of these concessions goes to the integration of a domestic EW suite, the ability to carry purpose-developed, indigenous weapons, and, most importantly, the option to purchase the STOVL F35B's is also off the board. What Israel is not willing to concede is its original demand conditioning the Lightning II deal, and it is to have access to the programming of the original EW suite in order to respond to the evolving threats in the AO.
These concessions will be officialized in a new document that the MoD will present to Washington at the end of this month. The IMoD officials, however, stress that no "letter of offer and acceptance" for the purchase of the first F35 squadron will be signed unless the Pentagon allows the IDF access to the EW suite's programming.

Pinhas Buchriz, the IMoD General Manager is reported to have told DN that "we understand the Americans' concerns, and we have adapted our expectations accordingly, but the gap between us is still
rather wide. We simply cannot be expected to compromise on critical operational requirements".

Buchriz also mentioned the fact that among all the countries expected to purchase this aircraft, Israel is the most likely to ever use it in war along its borders."We do not insist on our own electronics (anymore), nor do we demand the source codes, but we must have the capability to update the system in response to any new emergent threat".

Another contention between Israel and the Pentagon is about who should shoulder the development costs for adapting the systems to the IDF requirements. The Americans do not seem to think these
should be shared. The Israelis are getting the same package as the others. If they want to make specific modifications, they'll have to pay for them. Israel maintains that any improvements achieved in this process will also benefit the other JSF partners, and it is therefore just to see some of this money back.

Well, what can I say? Military procurement is out of the public debate and the citizens of this country are not consulted on defense procurement decisions, and even the Knesset does not have much of a say in this apart from voting on budgetary frameworks, so I guess I'll have to suck it up. We're surrendering to the Empire, again. Is this plane really worth all this trouble? Can't we really get a better deal outside, our at home?

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT