Europe cries foul over US defence tender [A330 tanker]

The Financial Times ^ | 3/9/2010 | Peggy Hollinger in Paris, Sylvia Pfeifer in London and Jeremy Lemer

[ohioman]

I have worked in the military contracting industry for almost 20 years and the problem with Boeing is that it is infested with liberals/socialists (especially in upper-level management)who care more about meeting diversity quotas than our military. The only good thing they have done in awhile is the move of part of their facilities to South Carolina and out of the liberal hellhole of Seattle.
In fact, if they totally dumped Seattle and moved South maybe they would lose some of these liberal employees.

[mdmathis6]

If you can improve the efficiency of “old concepts” by newer lighter materials and much improved avionics and computer systems that have power unimagined in the 80’s, then I think you have entirely new innovative systems.

Look, we need to get fuel from plane to plane while trying to maximize range and fuel storage of the “refueler”. Those aren’t “new” concepts; we know how to do it. The use of lighter stronger materials, and the decreased size / increased power of the electronic systems I think will allow for more storage of fuel. The engines will be better, stronger with improved fuel economy. So even if we use a plane that looks vaguely like a late 70’s airliner...it’s the new stuff inside that will make it innovative. Though I think they should try to redesign the outer airframe to make it more stealthy!

[mdmathis6]

I totally enjoyed watching the angst of Seattle when Boeing moved those facilities, could’t happened to a more deserving bunch of loons.

[ohioman]

I agree. Boeing will also find out that most Southerners could care less about their communist unions.

[Oztrich Boy]

It's the Chicago Way

[ntmxx]

Thank you, well thought-out and detailed. Would not the real issue be that EADS or other A&P manufactures should compete at a higher level to provide a quality product at better value/price. Further, will these products other than having an American outlet, maintain their own monopoly (setting aside that these marginal profits will be moved off shore). One more item, EU members have also proven themselves less than honorable in maintaining alliances such as Siemens, Nokia and several others… selling to the same countries which threaten them directly and indirectly.

[wolf78]

And that’s how they came to be called and known as Euro-trash and Euro-bitches.

So when US politicians do the same kind of lobbying on behalf of Boeing, Northrop or Lockheed, that would make US citizens Ameri-trash and Yankee-bitches? No. Seriously, relax, this is just standard operating procedure. The US is the biggest weapons exporter and of course US politicians lean on prospective buyers, too. And of course they whine when the other guy wins.

[ntmxx]

“No. Seriously, relax, this is just standard operating procedure.”

Agree to some extent, and yes they are Euro-trash! America should pull out from underwriting Europe, letting them fend for themselves, without causing another World War. Yes, they should be able to provide and compete based on quality, quantity and reliability…however, who really believes major components of America’s airline industry and national security interests should be left to a foreign multi-national government business. One does not have look any further than Siemens or Nokia, or how EU businesses are unable to compete directly with Microsoft; or the many foreign entanglements they engage in against American interests…

[wolf78]

Agree to some extent, and yes they are Euro-trash! America should pull out from underwriting Europe, letting them fend for themselves, without causing another World War. Yes, they should be able to provide and compete based on quality, quantity and reliability…however, who really believes major components of America’s airline industry and national security interests should be left to a foreign multi-national government business. One does not have look any further than Siemens or Nokia, or how EU businesses are unable to compete directly with Microsoft; or the many foreign entanglements they engage in against American interests…

So what? It's the same with the "Ameri-trash", as the US also constantly acts against European interests. That's the difference between an alliance and a union: You don't do everything together.

I actually agree with the isolationist argument, namely that Europe should invest more in its own defense. But one shouldn't feign outrage over a European company vying for a US defense contract while at the same time expecting Poland and the UK to buy F-16 and F-35s.

Also: continued involvement is the price for Germany and Japan not having a nuclear arsenal of their own (with the nuclear industry and the supercomputer density in both countries that would be a matter of a few months, other than e.g. Iran). So indeed the US can change the status quo if it wants to. The real question is: Does it want to?

[ntmxx]

“…invest more in its own defense…”

And here in lays the rub, for 65 years what has become the EU is a non-factor, living large on the work of others, and still thinking the world owes them a living. EU has painted themselves into a corner, through their Politically Corrupt and Homo-Leninist constructs exposing themselves to be the bunch of whiny little bitches which they are… So when the freedom of man is in the balance. Who will defend them this time; especially regarding the social dynamics that have been created to extinguish the modest depiction of western culture which remains. So, no matter what fraudulent concept which is laid upon America, does not equate, however, the fact that Euro-trash is what it is, does stick. Therefore, buck-up and fix the problem! Oh, here’s a hint, “nuclear arsenal” has nothing to do with any of this.