Well I hope the RAAF is smart enough avoid the EH-101.

Sauron

sferrin

You are right. Pay no attention to this kind of knee-jerk anti-American BS. The only Canadians who remember the Arrow are either ready to enter the old folks home or already in one.

As for Norway, it is of no real consequence what product it decides to buy. A lightweight like the Gripen is all they need to participate in war-games.

Sauron

Well it isn’t hard to understand why Europeans are so touchy about the Balkans given that they wouldn’t deal with the issues there until the U.S. got involved. Lack of faith in their collective military power I suppose.

What is hard to understand, given the WWII experience, is that they would collectively tolerate genocide in their midst again.

I believe the U.S. should maintain some military presence in the Balkans and press for the political reforms necessary for the new countries in the area to comply with membership in the E.U. which will hopefully provide economic benefits for all in the area.

It remains to be seen, however if the political, ethnic and security issues in the Balkans will be resolved before those in Afghanistan and Iraq. In any event, the U.S. should not use the lack of support from some europeans as an excuse to avoid it’s own responsibilities. Some of them are still better at receiving help, than giving it so they have no problem with sitting back while others take make the effort, take the chances and pay the price.

Sauron

If I was a Serb and proud of my country, the last thing that I would want is an a SERBMIG posting here. 😮

Sauron

8 B-2’s and only 1 B-1! Are you sure? I thought it was 8 B-1’s and only 1 B-2. 😀

Sauron

Puffadder

I didn’t suggest you are an American hater but your own words now bring that into question.

No thoughts about the chances of the EU3 and Russian diplomatic initatives persuading Iran to behave? Surely you have some faith in their superior diplomatic skills and more nuanced view of Iranian culture. No?

I was expecting a bit more from you on this issue, but you simply make claims such as the U.S. has not “handled Afghanistan well” and mutter about military field comanders but you give no specifics nor details about how the Germans, British etc, would do or have done better. I would have thought that you would at least give a few specific examples. You could say that the Americans are too heavy handed and don’t have the language or diplomatic skills. That they don’t respect local customs and history (perhaps that they should have treated 9/11 as a crime and sent the police).

And Iraq! Well just another bad idea and the U.S. is screwing that up as well.

Anyway, I get your point. Europeans are superior to Americans and never screw things up and it’s the U.S. that is to blame for everything that has and may yet go wrong in Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. And you know all this from tuning into the BBC news and hearing comments made by an American solder (twice).

I was hoping to hear some kind of reasonable response but you are obviously not interested. Instead we get a series of rambling, disconnected opinions about everything from states of flux to marriage customs in Pakistan. Afghanistan one minute, Iraq the next.

Perhaps you are annoyed by the fact that europe lacks the moral credibilty and the military clout to influence events such as this one without the backing of the U.S., that you avoid any real debate and resort to blaming the U.S.

Sauron

Puffadder

Calling U.S. leadership neocon chumps may provide momentary satisfaction but I notice you have no specific policy on how to deal with this situation other than the vague suggestion that everyone should “relax”. Then what happens? Wait for the youthful population in Iran to rise up? Vote the current leadership out? That could be a long wait and if the current leadership is determined to develop nukes they gain the time to do it. Ranting about the U.S. is easy and accomplishes zero.

I understood that the U.K. France and Germany (the EU3) are in charge of negotiating a solution to this issue with Iran. I think the U.S. agreed with this approach, the assumption being that eruopeans have superior diplomatic skills and experience in solving such critical issues. Der Stern was interviewing Donald Rumsfeld a few weeks ago and the interviewer kept asking him about Iran, pressing him and repeatly asking what the U.S. was going to do. Finally Rumsfeld got fed up and said, you have leadership on that issue- lead!. Apparently Der Stern wasn’t aware that the EU3 was in charrge. :rolleyes:

I have no idea how this issue should be approached but I believe these are safe assumptions:

A North Korea approach will result in a Iran with nuclear weapons.

There will be no revolution in Iran any time soon without an outside push. No one will push.

The U.N. will not take any serious action against Iran. Not economic and certainly not military.

NATO will not take military action against Iran. 😉

If any military force is used it will be the U.S. alone. The U.S. will keep Israel out of it at all costs.

Islam will continue to be exploited by radical elements for a long time to come.

There are just random points I know.

Regards.

Sauron

Paul762

Yes there have been rescue missions completed by the Cormorants in very difficult conditions. I thought that that would be a reasonable expectation given it is a modern design. Other less technically advanced, much older aircraft in Canadian service have also completed very difficult missions.

I problem I have, is the Cormorant is not the quality product we were supposed to get. We waited 10 years or more to get them. I would have thought that during that time while they were in service with other forces they could have dealt with “a few teething problems – inevitable with any new piece of kit entering service”. This is the oldest new design that I can remember ever remember entering service in the CAF and it still needs to be grounded due to structural issues not to mention the fact that it takes far more routine shop time than expected.

Perhaps we should have been tipped off by the fact that the thing needs 3 engines to complete a mission most reasonable people would expect a design with 2 engines could complete with a safety and performance margin to spare. Even airliners carring 100’s of pasengers across the atlantic only need 2 engines but the EH101 needs 3 to go from Nova Scotia to NFL.

Sauron