I really , really like that congress is upset but why can’t we build our own? I’m concerned about security in France also.
Pratt and Whitney is sure upset by the decision. I’m in Connecticut and they are all over the radio talking about they build a better engine for the tanker.
I really don’t like this either but since it has caused Murray and Cantwell to go into hysterics, I think I’ll lean back, eat some popcorn through my smirk and sit this one out.
Everyone should call/email every Congressional representative you have (I already have) to protest this foolish decision. It is extremely offensive that my tax money is being given to the parent of Airbus. However, it is even more offensive that we are allowing a foreign country to supply the airframe for a defensive project. It is not only offensive, it is extremely, absolutely stupid!
President Bush, where are you? You are the Commander in Chief, and you need to quash this idiocy! American defensive programs need to be built by Americans! Because you cannot predict who our enemies are going to be in 20 years!
Whoot! Way to go Northrop Grumman!
I would like to know why they did this. If it’s payback to congress for sitting on bills and not supporting the military, I can support this. I wish they would have picked a small American company though.
If you want on or off this aerospace ping list, please contact Paleo Conservative or phantomworker by Freep mail.
Here are some other related threads.
EADS/Northrop upsets Boeing in Air Force tanker competition — analyst
Seattle Times ^ | February 29, 2008 | Dominic Gates
Posted on 02/29/2008 3:53:16 PM CST by skeptoid
Hope Congress un funds the Air force for a few years.
And makes them all wear Berets and knickers.
Best Bid being awarded to a foreign nation on a security project is the equivalent to Bernard Shaw saying he needed to remain impartial with the info he had while at the El Rahseedd hotel.
If this happens I may need to vote for Osama to slow the money being spent offshore for future military projects.
And to think it all began with a mess of porridge...
I’m not outraged. My stock went way up today, and my retirement fund is tied to Northrop.
Alabama won this contract fair and square. Boeing was having production problems on other contracts. More importantly, the Northrup-EADS tanker will hold 3 times as much fuel and can supply fuel in flight in two different ways. It is clearly the better plane for the Air Force. And it’s being manufacured in Sweet Home Alabama!!
Additional reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa, editing by Richard Chang
We should have seen what Iran could offer.
Fewer Muslims there than in France.
Who was that Senator that brags that he put the kibosh on the Boeing deal?
Was it John Kerry who was brought up in France?
Oh yeah, that guy that was a war prisoner and says he's a conservative.
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCERhttp://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/353313_tankereverett01.html
Dismay in Everett over tanker deal
Last updated February 29, 2008 6:06 p.m. PT
By JOSEPH TARTAKOFF
P-I REPORTEREVERETT -- At Machinists Lodge 751, across the street from Boeing's plant, workers were outraged by the shocking news Friday that the Air Force contract to build refueling tankers would not be theirs.
The main gathering room had been prepped for the media in anticipation of a celebration, with an over-sized poster of a tanker being fueled, along with the words, "The American Dream Bring It Home!"
But within a half hour of the announcement that Boeing had lost the deal to a team of Northrop Grumman and Airbus parent EADS, union organizers had plastered the room with posters scrawled with slogans such as, "We Will Get a New Tanker Made in France?", "R.I.P. U.S. Built Tanker," and "How could this happen?"
When Tom Wroblewski, the president of the Machinists union, addressed the gathered workers and media and mentioned that the winner was a "European company," he was interrupted with shouts of "Boo!"
"It is a paper airplane only," he said, adding that that plant for the EADS-Northrop tanker still needed to be built in Mobile, Ala., while Boeing workers could have started work right away on a 767 tanker.
Almost all of the workers at the hall said they expected Boeing to land the lucrative contract.
Sandy Hastings, a quality assurance lab technician, who was putting up posters in the main room, said it was "a shock that they would send something for the military somewhere else other than here."
Gee, you would have thought that Sen. Obama could have saved the deal being as how he is such a wise and effective senator for Illinois < /s>
A bad decision in every possible way. I’m stunned.
This benefits no less than John McCain, who did his level best to deny Boeing the business. Google on [mccain boeing tanker scandal] for more info.
It’s bad, and sad.
