How would you explain why the Japanese are using indigenous missiles that are not compatible with US systems at all, and why the Japanese systems are not compatible with US missiles at all?

I did not say that the Japanese had to buy EVERYTHING from the US. Needless to say, quite a few important aircraft components, such as engines, airframe parts, maintenance equipment, munitions, are held in common with US equipment.

Other examples exist, the 767 AWACs, E-2 Hawkeyes, AGEIS radars, Patriot Missile systems, etc.

Granted, now that the Cold war has ended and the threat is less real, Japan can more afford to go its own way. However in areas where a threat still exists, North Korean/Chinese ballistic missiles for example, you continue to find them cooperating the the US.

Don’t give me that Japan buys US stuff out of gratititude story. That’s far from the truth.

Not out of gratitude, but more likely the military advantages of shared logistics support, tactics, and training.

You’ve got massive amounts of US military hardware in Japan. If it came to war, the US and Japan could support each other if they were using the same equipment. That’s not possible in the European case.

As for the talk of corruption in military contracts, Lockheed is far from the only case. I recall that there has been a great deal of talk about the UK / Saudi military aircraft purchases. Are you suggesting that the only reason that Saudi purchased Tornadoes is that the UK offered kickbacks of some kind?

I think it highly unlikely that France would be able to sell a Rafale to Japan.

There is no law that Japan must buy US weapons. The reason US weapons do so well with Japan is that, much like South Korea, the US actually defends Japan and has done so for the last half century. You see no commitment like that from any European nation and as such you see no subsequent Japanese interest in European military hardware.

The day you see a European country step up to defend asian countries is the day that you see asian countries take a stronger interest in European hardware.

I’d agree with Gatling. However much, aviation enthusiasts like ourselves might love the aircraft and the ships that carry them, I think that most countries are better off without carriers.

I’ve yet to see a potential threat that the US would not face down if Austrailia was in any way threatened.

It’s time for a military coup here in Britain I think.

I think that’s called treason.

It’s for a movie.

Some light reading for you

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000100&sid=agnWQY6GCj98&refer=germany
http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=594322004
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/europe/view/86686/1/.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/05/30/nmod30.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/05/30/ixhome.html