BF2S Forums Venezuela To Sell Us-made Fighter Jets To Iran

SO because we're not going to sell him more arms, he's going to sell the ones he has to a country that we don't like?  That is just stupid.  Talk about spitefulness.

Well, it'll help Venezuela economically, that's for sure...

But it wont matter if he sells them to Iran/Cuba where will Iran/Cuba buy spares for the planes? Besides surely the F-16 is outdated compared to the planes America is bringing into service today and your pilots our obviously superior to there Iranian counterparts. And I doubt that selling fighter aircraft will affect there economy, Venezuela is one of the largest oil exporters in the world.

Chavez is only trying to piss off America to gain support in South America, its all the rage now days!

Cheers

atlvolunteer wrote:

SO because we're not going to sell him more arms, he's going to sell the ones he has to a country that we don't like?  That is just stupid.  Talk about spitefulness.

It's stupid to switch to plane he can buy parts for?

So basically Chavez is selling something he no longer has use for, pretty much like selling a car on eBay for spares/repair.

Sounds like he's got the American lifestyle down pat.

JahManRed wrote:

. He has survived a coop

did they remove the chickens first?

seriously - the guy is considering suppling military hardware to a rogue nation that has made threats towwards a neigbouring state to prove a petty point  - yeah hes a top bloke.

Bubbalo wrote:

Ah yes, because Israel isn't overtly militant.  Also, George Bush is sane and competent.  And America can do no wrong.

No israel has not threatened to wipe another country from the face of the planet, with comments of that ilk coming from countries oin the same region and given the recent history Israels military looks like a sensible deterrent to me.
Tell me; How do you think Hezbollah and Hamas would have acted during the last intifada where there only a token Israeli military? Would Israel still exist as a nation?



That George Bush is either insane or incompetant is a ridiculous statement ( you could argue that perhaps he has made some bad decisions or been driven by less than altruistic ideals or even that he is corrupt etc - pick your own crazy left caricature of choice.) you have obviously got yourself so wound up in your anti Bush fervor that you have become a little disconnected with the real world yourself.  When you start arguing that Dubya is personally deficient you are only hurting your own argument, Its the political equivalent of shouting "you stink" at a kid in the playground.

No-one said the US was squeaky clean, but I think it speaks volumes that you could stand outside the whitehouse and decry bush all you like and you wont catch a bullet. i suggest you go try critisizing mr Amedinejad outside his Teheran residence and see what happens. America may not always be right but the intention is there to protect freedom and liberty.

I don't see how Iran's a rogue nation, its just posturing when they make those threats against Israel IMO.
Its like politicians around election time, they promise to fix the health care system and then do jack when there in power!! (in my country anyway)

I'd agree with Aardfrith about the jets, why kept these expensive to maintain planes if they don't work!? And even if they did sell them to Iran I doubt 21 planes could re-supply the Iranian Air force!

I used to like Chavez and his policies because he seemed to be helping the poor but lately he's acting a bit power mad. I heard he passed a law a while back to changed the direction of the lion (I think its a lion) on the national flag from right to left!! With the backing of the military he may end up another crazed dictator...

Jepeto87 wrote:

I heard he passed a law a while back to changed the direction of the lion (I think its a lion) on the national flag from right to left!!

I think's that's right, but IIRC it wasn't just a random change.  It had something to do with the civil war, with the direction implying nationalist sympathies........or something..........

Or to make back some money on jets which cannot be maintained before replacing them?

Bubbalo wrote:

No, they just created their state by driving thousands of refugees into other countries with the help of terrorist organizations, before militarising on a massive scale, and chucking around rumours that they have nukes.  No biggie.

I agree the way Israel was founded was not ideal. However you appear to be trying to use a they did it first argument( I have no desire to debate the rights and wrongs of Israel/Palestine in this thread). Simply the issue as it is today is that Israel exists as a sovereign nation. It is incredible to think that you are justifing the stance that a sovereign nation should be wiped from the face of the planet. plenty of countries were founded in blood, I don hear you supporting advocates of their destruction

Bubbalo wrote:

Kinda like the Israelis who drove the British out, I imagine.  And that's ignoring the fact that the intifada was based on very real grievance.  What was your point again?

GIven the current situation of Israel existing essentially surrounded by hostile countries, they need to be militarisic to protect themselves, but you would prefer they had no military and israelis were slaughtered wholesale as the area became "palestinian"? Of course not. I dont care how real any grievance is it DOES NOT justify attacking civilians and children (Note to all the US haters out there, Palestinian terrorism is targeted at the civilian population. This is of course very different to "Collateral Damage" where civilians are caught up in fire between a uniformed army and a force posing as civilians)

Bubbalo wrote:

Ah yes, because getting oneself mired in an unwinnable war when you haven't yet stabilised the last country you've invaded before not negotiating with another one on a key issue is a perfectly reasonable and logical thing to do.  Those countries would be Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran respectively, in case you're having trouble.

That is a childish attitude unbecoming of you Bubbalo.

Bubbalo wrote:

On this one I do owe you an apology: it is others who have gone on about America always gone on about the greatness of America.

However:  The fact that America is better than other countries doesn't make it good.  Nazi Germany (Ah!  Godwin's Law!  Run!)*  is better than Soviet Russia, does that make them good.

Unfortunatly there is no pure "good" in the real world. Essentially i would rather live under US Hegemony than    Iranian (or venezuelan or chinese whatever). for the simple reason that I will have more freedom and less impingement of my rights.

Bubbalo wrote:

*I'm not sure whether this is technically a good example, given that it applies to the letter of the law but not the spirit, insofar as in this comparison the Nazi's are the good guys (relatively speaking).

Im glad you said that because i was going to make the same comment.

I do want to draw your attention to the comparison though, because the concept of Germany circa 1933-45 being better than soviet russia is very subjective.
YOu have 2 options:
Option 1:you are an Iranian living in israel.
Option 2: you are a Jew in Iran.
WHich option would you prefer to exercise? I think that sums up my argument pretty succinctly.

vedds wrote:

I agree the way Israel was founded was not ideal. However you appear to be trying to use a they did it first argument( I have no desire to debate the rights and wrongs of Israel/Palestine in this thread). Simply the issue as it is today is that Israel exists as a sovereign nation. It is incredible to think that you are justifing the stance that a sovereign nation should be wiped from the face of the planet. plenty of countries were founded in blood, I don hear you supporting advocates of their destruction

But it wasn't just they way they were founded.  Even today they engage in a "if you attack us, we attack you" system of diplomacy.  If Israelis were serious about peace, they'd take the first step.

vedds wrote:

GIven the current situation of Israel existing essentially surrounded by hostile countries, they need to be militarisic to protect themselves, but you would prefer they had no military and israelis were slaughtered wholesale as the area became "palestinian"? Of course not.

Given a choice between that, and the current situation, I'm not so sure my answer would be yes.  If Israel were willing to create a secular state, then I'd certainly change my opinion.

vedds wrote:

I dont care how real any grievance is it DOES NOT justify attacking civilians and children

I think that depends on how far the civilians are complicit in the action.  Besides which, riots aren't exactly targetted at any one.

vedds wrote:

(Note to all the US haters out there, Palestinian terrorism is targeted at the civilian population. This is of course very different to "Collateral Damage" where civilians are caught up in fire between a uniformed army and a force posing as civilians)

Of course some would argue that the military chooses to hit civilian targets.........not me though

vedds wrote:

That is a childish attitude unbecoming of you Bubbalo.

How so?  Bush has made a series of grievous errors in the Middle East.  I think I'd find it hard to find anyone who would disagree.

vedds wrote:

Unfortunatly there is no pure "good" in the real world. Essentially i would rather live under US Hegemony than    Iranian (or venezuelan or chinese whatever). for the simple reason that I will have more freedom and less impingement of my rights.

Which is fine for you, but what about the countries US and Co. bully around (e.g., Indonesia)

vedds wrote:

Im glad you said that because i was going to make the same comment.

I do want to draw your attention to the comparison though, because the concept of Germany circa 1933-45 being better than soviet russia is very subjective.
YOu have 2 options:
Option 1:you are an Iranian living in israel.
Option 2: you are a Jew in Iran.
WHich option would you prefer to exercise? I think that sums up my argument pretty succinctly.

If I was quiet and avoided trouble and overt signs of religion?  Jew in Iran.  The Israelis have a nasty policy of pushing Muslims out of the way to make room for Jewish homes.

vedds wrote:

Ok. the rogue nation thing has to do with the non-cooperation with weapons inspectors

Right, and the last time a UN weapons inspector counted up the US nuclear arsenal was when, exactly?

vedds wrote:

the support of terrorist organisations

Which is different from the CIA kidnapping and interrogating Europeans?  Or French operatives sinking the Greenpeace flagship?

vedds wrote:

and the sabre-rattleing.

Do I even need to make the comparison on this one?

In short, according to your list, the US, and Israel, are rogue nations.