I think you missed my point.

Australia’s actions in the SW Pacific are similarly extensive (much, much, more so than the UN for example), and have spanned decades. But in terms of producing global impact, global influence, they are not that significant.

No I think you are deliberately forgetting yours, you said that France has no influence outside Europe, dont back track on it now.:p

I strikes me that this missile sounds like a good enough idea, though I always wondered why Britain never thought about putting something like Sea Eagle or Harpoon in a land based launcher. It would have given the Army a precision strike capability, out to around 150-200km, which would be a very useful ability! The real problem of course with this missile is that, being prop driven, it may have long endurance, but it will take a long time to reach the target…

Becouse that sort of talk upsets the RAF.;)

From a global perspective, it is. A bit like Australia’s influence in the South West Pacific.

lol your funny. Try doing some research you will find that French involvment in Africa is substantial and influential.:rolleyes:

Gents, what will become of Russia is completely unknown. All feeling, very few hard facts.

Only thing I say is that quite a (growing) number of people-in-the-know, and I mean Russians in the upper and top operative management of big++ companies, not only Expats, are pretty gloomy about the devlopments.

90% of “what is going on” is very shallow, nothing sustained. I’m afraid one fine morning in about 15 years Russia will wake up and find, that it’s strategically broke (whatever that means).

That fits pretty much with what I have been told. The economic improvements are almost entirely related to energy exports with manufacturing still very weak and a very limited design and knowledge base outside of the defense sector. In the mean time the Demographic situation just gets worse.:( Its a shame really, all the oil and gas wealth could have been put to good use developing a truly modern economy instead it is being frittered away on pathetic little shows like the bear flights.

And how does that translate into real influence for France as a nation? From a wider perspective, does the UN itself have any real influence? For example East Timor and Rwanda.

I thought you said that French influence in Africa was irrelevent.:rolleyes: You claimed that France has no influence outside Europe and you have been proved wrong, get used to it.:rolleyes:

If it really is capable of loitering for ten hours, it would be useful for neutralizing pop-up targets or threats to friendly ground forces. But cost benefits aside, why not use a UCAV like the RQ-1 Predator armed with AGM-114s instead?

Or the new Reaper with SDB, that was my thought, and you get a better sensor package and it would probably work out cheaper over time as your not destroying your engine and sensors when you hit the target. I dont think threat of interception is a problem where this thing would be used in the Ghan or the Sandbox.

Did you compared the those aircraft prices, delivery condition and dates?
Why buy Toyota or Nissan, when you have VW, Renault or Fiat?

dranio

That analogy makes no sense what so ever. I think what you mean is why buy a 1997 Dodge Viper (F-16) when you could buy a 2007 Koenigsegg CCX (Gripen).;)

Yep, just like Russia……. Isn’t Belgium currently on the Security Council, just like that other influential country, the Republic of the Congo…..

permanent.:rolleyes: Also unlike Belgium and the Congo France has Nuclear weapons.