Originally posted by SOC
Interesting thought. If we withdrew from the entire world, pulling back our entire military, what about the idiot Islamic extremist terrorist (no, I didn’t just call all Islamic people idiotic) who gets the idea to strike us again, here or abroad (tourists or business types I’d guess)? What would a proper response be then?

Well, 9-11 has shown that terrorist attacks can’t be avoided by having troops deployd all over the world.
American deployment overseas also has its clear disadvantages in the “war on terrorism”: It can raise anti-American feelings, and therefore make recruitment for terrorist groups easier. (Most Al-Qaida terrorists are Saudi- Arabians, remember?) It also creates more terrorist targets all over the world. (Numerous examples from the bombing of the MC-base in Beyrut up to the latest terrorist attacks against troops and Civilians cooperating with troops in Iraq can be found).
To counter terrorist threats other measures are far more effective. Here’s just three: Cooperation with allies’ secret services, efforts to increase social justice at home and abroad, reinitiation of Arab- Israeli peace talks.

Originally posted by SOC
If you want a trainer that can replace a good number of the smaller aircraft in your inventory as trainers, attack aircraft, and the like, why bother with the M-346? Isn’t it markedly inferior to the EADS Mako, which benefits from having been designed with a single-seat version in mind?

Because the Italians might prefer an Italian aircraft at a lower price. A two seater doesn’t need to be at a disadvantage in A2G (in fact they are becoming quite “fashionable” again) and the difference to the Mako (which doesn’t fly yet) might not be that big.
After all you pointed out yourself that the threat to Italy is not very big at the moment, so why spend more?

Well, my post was intended as an absurd proposal and I didn’t think anybody would take the matter seriously, but why not play this game.

To set a proposal, we would first have to start with a threat- analysis. Canada to the north doesn’t pose a serious threat. The Bering strait is a different matter: Put a big base up there with three updated F-15 fighter- interceptor groups. (Later to be replaced by the F-22). This should be able to deter the Russians from ever getting their feet back on Alaskan soil.
Mexico and the countries south could be easily kept at bay with one group in New Mexico. One group should be down in Florida to keep Castro from dreaming of an invasion to pay back the bay of pigs. Coast defence could be left to the Coast guard and a couple of marine patrol aircrafts. No country poses a serious threat of a marine landing. Let’s see. Adds up to about 180 interceptors. As the F-15 and F-22 should have quite good multi-role capabilities there’s no real need for special fighter bombers. Keep a few bombers and submarines to maintain a retaliation threat.

Right, very unlikely…
Italy is committed to NATO, you know that. And I assume they would like to be taken serious as a partner. That’s why they probably would consider the M-346 less than adequate as their main asset in air defence, even though it’s “their baby” sort of.
Of course they will be fully NATO- compatible, but for a very limited role as trainer and light attack aircraft. It will never match NATO expectations for a multi-purpose air defence fighter jet outlined by Vortex. (Remember your former ambassador to the Czech Republic’s “concern” when they chose the Gripen?)

Vortex’ “proposal” to Italy was a side-kick against the EF, nothing more that would have to be taken serious. That’s why I posted a just as absurd proposal for the USA. We were both having a little fun, I guess.

Originally posted by SerbPVO
What do you guys think Serbia is? Some kind of terrorist nation?
What do we need SCUDS, filled with chem/bio weapons for?

Half of those Italian citiies have large Serb populations too.

Two to four squadrons of fighter jets, plus an integrated PVO(SAM) system is all we need.

And who says US/NATO would attack us again?
As far I see, situation has been changed. Now, Serbian forces are preparing to go to Afghanistan, to weed out mujahadeen and other Taliban scum.

This really sounds a little more reasonable. My perception of S&M is also influenced by what I read in forums like this one. This is sort of “unfiltered” by media and I truly don’t hope a majority in Serbia thinks as belligerent towards NATO and its neighbours as expressed by some here. Threatening with WMDs would be the last thing you wanted to start doing except if you really take pleasure in being Europe’s pariah.

Nobody here feels you shouldn’t be rebuilding your air defence, but if you start accumulating offensive weaponry and WMD’s, “we” just won’t like it. Acquisitions are always taken as signals, you should be aware of this.

It’s really time we stop thinking as enemies of eachother if this is still the case with some.
This doesn’t mean that you’d have to become “Americanized”, as some here try to tell you, using the worst stereotypes.
Take a close look at Western European countries, most of them allies of the US in one way or the other. We don’t all suffer frome obeisity due to too much hamburger consumption, and it’s not Mickey Mouse teaching our kids. You might find out that critical thinking is still high priority in our school and university curriculum.

Originally posted by Vortex
look Phil…i’m talking from the hypothetical Italian point of view, why is it that you can talk about certain things about certain aircraft from certain countries in order to get other certain country to feel good about their product but others can’t do the same? :rolleyes: You are telling me that you don’t agree that if the M346 is stretched by 10ft, use AB version of the engines, and go supersonic that it’s not going to be one quite advanced fighter aircraft, albeit light? If not just say so, if you agree just say so too why is everything got to do with some kind of issues? Keep in mind, i’m an aerospace engineer and i love aircraft from engineering perspective from small details to large…what does this have to do with b@llocks? anyway, pardon my ignorance, is that the same as we Americans called b@llsh!t?…just use BS

You’re quite right, Vortex. With the Cuban threat diminishing, the USA could go ahead with the good example, abolish their Carrier Battle groups, cancel F-22 and F-35 and procur a couple of Golden Eagles to cover home defence.

Originally posted by GarryB
“As for the countries that pose a threat to Serbia I wouldn’t exactly call Slovenia, Croatia or Bosnia a threat. Serbia would still kick their respectives butts in any war.”

I think it rather depends who is supporting who…

Do you honestly think any of the surrounding countries would get support from the NATO if they attacked Serbia?

Originally posted by GarryB
Yes, flip flop and be the US’s whore. I am sure your children will love you for all the rap music and McDonalds and other junk food.

Their children will love them for giving them an opportunity to grow up in a peacefull, more prosperous and less paranoid country, no doubt. They might embrace the stereotypes you mention above or they won’t, but at least they are given a choice.

Originally posted by GarryB Russia has never been considered part of Europe and I doubt it ever will be.

This shows how little you know of Russia. Ever been to St. Petersburg? It’s a European city. There has always been two sides to Russia, an Asian and a European one. Zar Peter the Great was a European emperor.

Originally posted by GarryB
You said above that it is time for the west to change its thinking about Serbia… ie you admit the west does still think of Serbia as the enemy.

Non consequitur. “We” may think of them as nationalistic, paranoid and unwilling to open up. This doesn’t mean that we must think of them as enemies.

Originally posted by GarryB You bombed them. Which NATO country exactly did Serbia attack? If NATO is now butting into internal problems of countries when is NATO going to sort out the problem of Northern Ireland?

Well, Northern Ireland is not slaughtering their catholic minority, so there’s a small difference. Would you also have thought of the extermination of the Jews as an “internal German problem”? The NATO intervention is justifyable. Mistakes have been made on all sides. I know ethnic cleansing was not only committed by Serbs, but it was getting a little out of hand there. I’m glad though that there’s also Croatians and Bosnian muslims on trial. It may help some Serb hotheads find out that the people -no matter what ethnicity they’re from- committing such crimes are the true enemies, not the West.

Originally posted by GarryB Perhaps instead of being so keen to bomb countries into submission it should be the west that initiates these friendships. What reason have you given them to be your friend… you have split up their country, bombed them and now you expect them to like you? A child in a principals office whining and justifying his bullying of the other children is because they won’t be friends with him… gee whiz I wonder why the kids he beats up don’t like him… afterall his parents are rich… isn’t that what is important?

Well, there are plenty of European countries who weren’t involved in the bombings to start with. Ties with such countries could probably be established more easyly. And this can indeed help S&M a lot: Ties can give their economy a boost again. I’m sure this can be a lot more profitable than ties based on arms deals with questionable countries like Burma.

Originally posted by GarryB “Strange thing: In 2003 there were more asylum seekers from S&M coming into our country than from any other nation.”
Well after being bombed they probably want to live somewhere safer. Do you not understand that?

Wrong. You don’t understand it. 90% of these refugees come purely for economic reasons. They don’t see a future in S&M for themselves because things are still so run down, and this is years after the war.
At that period in Germany and Japan after the second world war an economic boost was kicking in. Refugees started returning, not flowing out of the country. The people there didn’t look at the West as enemies anymore. They put the past behind them and started rebuilding. And don’t tell me they were hit less hard. The damage in Serbia must look pretty negligeable in comparison.

Originally posted by SerbPVO
I thought Albania was still isolated, poor and paranoid.
Hence, the 21 people died last week on a rubber boat, trying to flee the country.

A little less isolated at least. But S&B is getting there fast, especially if you take refugees into consideration. Strange thing: In 2003 there were more asylum seekers from S&M coming into our country than from any other nation.