""Anyway , why did you copy/paste what I said on a different thread ?""

 

Sorry my bad . I was thinking about something different . 

 

Cheers .

""The French can allow a customer to heavily modify the Rafale.""

 

I 'm biting . What do you mean exactly ? If you 're talking about integration of indigenous weapons it is correct ,  but what "heavily modifications" are you talking about ? In what sense ?

 

Cheers .

 

I love the F-22 ass much as you love the Rafale but you don't see me posting about the Raptor every day and talking about how great it is and how it will destroy every thing in the sky. You know why I don't do it, because I let the facts talk. Any body who knows anything about fighter planes knows what the plane is capabale of, and I don't need to keep posting love stories of the Raptor to convince people of the fact. The reason people do what you do on here on a daily basis is to prove to themselves something that deep inside they know it is not true. If the Rafale was a good as you say it is, then there will be no need for you to defend it.

 

You can't say I hate the French, because I defended the French Navy, when Russian fanboys were out here saying the Russian navy was much more powerful than the MN. I also defended the Leclerc when many people here were bashing it. I also said that France builds some of the best armored vehicles in the world. I also said that even the CDG which had many problems, was still the only Nuclear powerd true carrier in the world and gave France the capabilities that no other country outside of the US had. When I see the facts I call them out. I have defended Russian, French, German, and British equipment and also slamed some of them, so for me to say that at the moment the Typhoon is a better A2A platform does not mean I am bashing France, it means the facts that are available at the moment to the public make it so.

 

With that being said we can return to the topic.

Joe , I respect and understand what you just said .

I know that you are not bashing France (you proved it alright), but the technical questions you are talking about have been answered many times already : the HMS is a bonus and not really needed yet , the Damoclès pod is on its way , the towed decoy is a non-sense with the Rafale , the AESA RBE2 is perfect and beats the actual MESA Captor hands down , the marginal edge of the Typhoon when flying high and fast is what it is : a marginal edge , and last but not least , the Rafale doesn 't need more powerful engines . This story has been grossly exagerated for marketing and has been taken onboard by internet fans who don 't know all the strings .

Listen Joe , the FAF and MN did NOT ASK for the latest M88-3 engines . They are perfectly happy with the actual updated version of the M88-2 . What is true , is the fact that some Nations would like to try the Fighter with more powerful engines .

There is a big difference , don 't you think ?

Between you and me , why they wouldn 't ask if it it possible ;-)

 

Cheers .

""Hell yes, Kardinal.  Look at all the doodads the UAE stuck on its F-16Es.  Kinda makes me wonder...they've got advanced targeting, conformal fuel tanks...but the UAE isn't at war with anyone at the moment, and has never tried to take on Israel.  (And for all the anti-Israeli rhetoric that occasionally comes out of there, aren't likely to try.)  Which means--the UAE is keeping a very wary eye on Iran.  I don't see a joint Arab-Israeli strike on the Iranians, but I wouldn't be surprised if some of the Gulf Kingdoms wouldn't take advantage of the confusion after a post-Israeli strike to get in some digs of their own.  The Bahrainis in particular utterly loathe the Iranians.""

 

Well , it took me time to try to understand what you meant . What you say is ... surprising and interesting .

The UAE are indeed very worried about Iran and this is the reason why they allowed France to set-up bases (Air and Navy) on their soil . They see it as a warranty (guarantee) for not being attacked from anyone , including Iran .

After building such new alliances in the Gulf , I was myself waiting for a stronger move from N. Sarkozy against Iran . It is part of France 's new position on the Middle-East .

It happens now .

France (and Sarkozy) is dead serious about Iran and I feel the same "urgent need" than back in 1991 before the GW1 .

Iran can 't get Nuclear weapons , it is a simple as that and if France and others have to bomb the sh*t out of their installations , we will . Then , letting israel do the job would lead to even more problems in the region .

 

To be honest , it would be better if Europe would take the lead on the Iranian problem for 2 reasons :

-1) nobody could say that the USA are "backing" Israel (usual Arab 's excuse)

-2) We do thing by the rules set by the UN and we follow them to the letter

 

To this extent , it seems that G. Brown and Medvedev are following .