Nothing wrong with that; I just found it natural to point out since he was presented as a well known and well respected journalist; some may assume that he would report without bias. That is very hard to do when you have made up your mind about something.

A journalist reporting from a soccer match supporting team A may write “the referee made a lot of mistakes” wheras a journalist reporting the same match but supporting team B could have written “the referee had a difficult match but overall did quite well”.

Knowing the bias of the journalist is important to better interpret the writings from that journalist.

That’s all.

I disagree.

“make his mind” and “bias” are not the same thing.

If you are very neutral then you make a choice when you have all the data in hand is a natural and normal thing because you make a choice one day or another. It’s not the same thing as being biased.

To keep with your analogy it’s like if one say “the best team won today” after a team won 4-0

or was dassault just clever enough to know they got so badly scrubed in the aussie comp twice, the second time when they tried a few years again later, that they wanted to save face going up against the f-35 again

“Each days worth its duty” as we say here.

Yet we know now for almost certain that in the real world the Eurofighter got ‘scrubed’ in almost every area by the Rafale, even in AA – WWR and BVR – according to Captain Romain lately.

For now the F35 is just a bit more than a paper plane in the sens it actually takes of with a lot of difficulties…

Another comunication bubble to propose?

I would argue that the Norwegian conclusion actually could be interpreted as being in favor of the Gripen NG and not Rafale or SH — after all they did not even make it to the evaluation stage, whereas Gripen NG as the only 4.5 gen fighter did.

Dassault did not bid in Norway nor in Netherland, Japan, Australia or Canada for instance.

Because those coutries are to put in the “poodle” list and Dassault did not have time nor money to spend to help those countries to pull the price of the US kits down – and rightly so when we see the outcome.

The problem is that I suspect you to know it. So what is the aim of your little try? Do you really think people are that dumb on this forum?

Or maybe you are sincere and you’ve come to really believe your own propaganda?

In which case I understand now why Gripen fans cried so much after the Norway and Dutch evaluation…. expecting next river of cries after Brazil eval’ now.

Good news:
With the free fall of the €uro, Rafale offer become more competitive every day.
Against the F18 off course, but since the Gripen is a Americano-swedish plane, it’s doesn’t help either.

Speaking of coup-d’etat’s, Maldivas, etc.

I read France didn’t ship ordered Exocets to Argentine on Englands request, and provide information on the electronics of Exocet to England prior to the shooting.

Those lessons are arguably not forgotten in Brazil airforce.

This argument is really bad taste. Really! Especially when it comes from a British (don’t know if you are but such sad things happens ;))

On the contrary France just showed how she’s reliable as an ally here, even though she had to make a choice between a old ally with whom we suffered several wars,
and a customer who was then stupid enough to start a war before having been delivered of all its weapons (something like 60 Exocet ordered IIRC…)

What about:

– Suez,
– the raid of 60 B29 those of Dien Bien Phu are still waiting,
– WWII where the US have let their British cousins alone on front of the nazis for two years until the japanese showered their asses at Pierl Harbour,
– on another hand 39 million people France declared war to 80 million ppl Germany in 1939 simply because our Pole ally was attacked (in spite being in a very bad strategical position),
– 2003 when the US made a cold war to France to say the least ONLY because there were a TACTICAL disagreement on the way to conduct the common war against terror,
– etc.

So France has certainly no lessons to recieve here. And it can’t be more reliable ally in a “strategical alliance” context.

There is one thing i’m pretty sure of, now, it’s that Eurofighter communication departement read this forum, and probably only fora when they are looking for information about Rafale.

The arguments and counter-arguments are tested on the internet.

It’s a good “flight simulator” or more preciselly a “commercial arguments simulator”.
If some commercial arguments fall flat, it’s not a big deal here. It allows to test the comunication before going to the main media.

The only thing I can say at this point is that the French “amateurs” do better than the Eurofighter “professionals” IMO 😉

(That’s why I’ve said several times that Dassault should pay a free ride on a Rafale B one day to the good French posters here and elsewhere … Personal message to the Dassault PR who read us: for me Istres better than Mont de Marsan please: it’s more convenient to get there :D)

A lot of journalos who know nothing use the Internet to make their opinion too. So the point of view of the internet has some importance enven though none of us will ever buy a fighter. And actually we often hear about noticable points before the main media.

What’s in it for France, except a first sale? It seems that it’s only France helping Brazil ATM… Helping with subs, helping with choppers, helping with fighters, helping with KC-390, helping with security council seats…

The basic point is elsewhere. The business model of independance is diffucult to achieve. We could archieve it to date thanks to a strong political will and thanks to the success of the Mirage family. During the cold war, the US could live with it because the Mirage were adressed for those who didn’t want to depend neither to the US, not to USSR, and that was fine like this.

But now it’s much more difficult, Russia is now on the market with modern western electronic and the US now pretend to dominate this strategical area pulling all the strings.

Brazil alone has not neither a viable independant “business model”. Making alone a fighter industry from scratch would be too long and too costly, making business with small parts of a not ITAR free fighter will just generate business but will not solve any long term strategical independance problem.

On another hand, France + Brazil IS a viable long term solution on the fighter business and it’s obvious. Next fighter generation would be designed in common – and more and more in common.

Same for submarines. That’s why it’s called a “strategic partnership”. A parnership of equals.

For surface naval industry we now also discuss with Russia who also have the same needs on this area.

Europe has been a solution for some people with a ideal for a long time but the reality is a disapointment. I think that France remember more and more that she have a long tradition of the blue sea too, people forget too often that France has this tradition for ages, we don’t focus only the petite Mittle Europa.

Mode “smart ass off”, but it the beginning of the reply for those who don’t understand that defense business is not a business like any other.