This proves that they were no friends of ours in the first place and congress has done the right thing (for a change)!!!
No it doesn't. It just means that they saw the writing on the wall. Why try to squeeze water out of a rock? And if they decide to disinvite our military assets from the Port of Dubai, we'll be a thousand miles from the Iranian fleet rather than thirty.
More Than Meets the Eye: F-16 Sale Precursor to Establishing U.S. Bases in UAE
Luke Warren, Arms Trade Insider No. 29, March 9, 2000
As initially revealed last November the Arms Trade News, the UAE purchase of 80 F-16 Falcon fighter jets from the U.S. will help grease the wheels for a new basing agreement between the two countries. A 7 March memo from the Air Force liaison office regarding the national security rationale for this sale states clearly that, "U.S. forces could respond to the region quicker and more effectively if bases, ports, and the infrastructure they require were available in other countries as well as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. The sale of F-16s to the UAE will allow the U.S. to work closer with this coalition partner."
So instead of just being seduced by the vast amount of money this deal offers, (the Pentagon assumes that over the Falcon's 20 year life cycle the deal will be worth $15 billion), we now can confirm that there is a larger seduction. According to Air Force, USCENTCOM's theater engagement plan calls for "enhancing and strengthening the strategic relationship between the US and the UAE...This plan seeks several specific long-term bilateral agreements including improved access to the Persian Gulf's only carrier capable deep-water port."
Arms sales for influence and access. This is not the first time this has been done, but not at this level of weapons technology. Selling weapons more advanced than your own for money and new bases is a dangerous game. Despite the Air Force's claim to the contrary, these F-16s may not "act as a stabilizing influence against forces in the region that could threaten this vital flow of petroleum."(i.e. Iran)
Iranian hard line clerics, who control the military, could react by initiating a pre-emptive strike on the UAE, or increasing terrorist attacks, or by accelerating Iran's research into ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction. This sale might also undermine the moderate influences of the Iranian Parliament and President Khatami. That is exactly the opposite of what the U.S. should be doing. The U.S. should attempt to bolster Khatami's reforms and power. Selling the world's best F-16s to the UAE will not accomplish this task.
And neither is setting up bases in the UAE. That will give Islamic radicals more evidence of U.S. encroachment in the Arab world, and hence more reason to launch terrorist attacks against the U.S. It also begs the question; given U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, why do we need access to the UAE?. Is this a hedge against the crown prince of Saudi Arabia not being pro- western? Is it designed to give us a launch point against an increasingly hardline, military government in Pakistan? The U.S. has been able to keep the Straights of Hormuz open for years without bases in the UAE. If so, why undercut the moderate forces in Iran, and possibly increase tension in the already precarious region, by building these bases?
Before this sale goes through, Congress should demand the real reasons for this sale, and if they are not adequate, kill the deal.
Don't be silly, the UAE is into the US for everyting from F-16's, to helicopters to Boeing 777....they like MONEY! and superior western weapons.....
What about Qatar?
Situations like that is why we have fleet replenishment ships and practice UnRep (Underway Replenishment). Same reason the Air Force has Tanker aircraft, pretty much anyway.