That is what you and people in other countries where government rules their lives simply are incapable of understanding as they have never had the freedom we had and still have to a lessor degree.

Ah yes, the United States, where more folks are imprisoned than ever were in Stalin’s gulags. The most extensive prison-industrial complex the world has ever known, where citizens slaughter each other on a daily basis when the police aren’t gunning them down instead — Land of the Free indeed.

The T-10/Flanker is arguably the defining military aircraft design of the late 20th and early 21st centuries, competing for that honour only with the F-16. It is a remarkable aircraft and a remarkable story.

That said, the west is not missing out by not having its own Flanker to nearly the extent that Russia is missing out by not having a robust supply of modern PGMs, targeting pods, and other mundane things.

The new Eagle, the F-15 2040C will be a direct equivalent of the Su-35S.

Except for the new airframe, new engines, thrust vectoring, FBW and podded IRST … sure.

The F-15SAs scheduled for Saudi Arabia already compare well with the Su-35 (at least on paper, in reality I don’t think the Russians are too concerned about anything operated by the Royal Saudi Flying Club), no need to speculate about projects that will probably never eventuate except in scattershot form as upgrades to existing airframes.

Good Riddance to Great Britain

Westminster wants unlimited access to the common market, but declines any fiscal or social obligations. It engages in unfair fiscal and social competition that results in tax paradises for the rich and low wages for the poor in Britain, and forces more civilized countries to follow it in this race to the bottom, leading them to dismantle, against the will of their own citizens, a welfare state model that has long assured security for all. As long as Britain remains within the European Union, this clash will continue to dominate internal European politics, and thus, will continue to feed EU citizens’ growing aversion toward Brussels and the enormous growth of anti-European right-wing parties.

It is unhealthy for the EU to have a member state that is constantly talking about how awful it is — how much it hates all that it stands for, and that, in fact, embraces the idea that it is fundamentally out of sync philosophically with the rest of the Union’s member states. Thus, far from being the last straw for a struggling polity, a Brexit might be just what Brussels needs to reverse course and to gain back the necessary support of its own citizens again.

Many eons ago I wrote that Brexit is probably a necessary precondition for serious reform within Britain (because only once the flashing cape is gone will the bull gore the ringmaster, i.e. Westminster) and now here’s the flip-side of that argument: Brexit as a precondition for reform and revival of the EU.

Well I’m glad at least some people are willing to acknowledge the blatantly obvious.

Thomas Mair to face trial under Terrorism Protocols

Rii, Friday’s Daily Star front page.

Having consulted Google, I assume you are referring to this:

Although clearly sensationalist and unhelpful in the great tradition of British tabloids, this does not match your characterisation that “in the eyes of some, the killer of Jo Cox becomes representative of everybody who is voting to leave the EU.”

That there is a clear association between the beliefs and motivations of the terrorist and the beliefs and rhetoric driving the Brexit campaign is undeniable. There can be little doubt either that the man is a “nut” or that he was intending to vote Brexit (do prisoners get to vote?). To acknowledge this is far from the suggestion that he is representative of everyone who plans to vote for Brexit.

Really, you can’t do any better than to call the opposition Nazis?
The “stay” campaign must either be desperate or totally bereft of better arguments.
What’s next, revert to the schoolyard dictionary of taunts….perhaps “stinkers” or ” a droody booby”. 🙂

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you haven’t actually looked at the link.

France is going to want to lead the project for the same reason it has always wanted to lead everything in Europe. And if other major parties don’t have that same level of investment, because they are not so reliant upon a single project, because they have other platforms and other industrial parternships as well, then the French can get their way and everyone is happy. Else you could well end up with a repeat of Typhoon/Rafale. Because once you add even the slightest hint of security considerations into the mix, the chance of France compromising on control of the project drops to zero: either other partners accept an arrangement that preserves French national interests, or they will go it alone as they did before — which, needless to say, is not exactly an optimal outcome for anyone else either.

As to what role England will play, I don’t know. Things could go any number of ways. In any case, if we are not yet at the point where contingency plans regarding potential instability within Europe are being quietly drawn up and entering as a factor in assessing long-term international projects, I suspect we will get there over the course of the next few years.