Miscellaneous News

H

hkbc

Junior Member
Janiz said:
Well, it's usally a problem for all of the countries with big economy. And of course it's easier to cut down existing numbers from a given level instead of rising and that's also what most of those countries do (aside from South Korea of course, but they are at war) and looking for cuts everyhere else. And sorry, I meant GDP, not the budget as indeed 46 billion is slightly more than 5%, I meant GDP of course. But stretching it might be possible with people's approval.
Click to expand...

Difference is South Korea runs a budget surplus, have done so for the last 3 years, so can actually afford to spend more than they do, despite the alleged war footing. If the Japanese economy had managed a reasonable amount of growth in the last decade then the 1% GDP figure (which they've kept to even in the Cold War) would have gone a lot further. As an island nation, Japan would best concentrate it's defence spend in the current climate on it's Navy, ABM tech and air superiority aircraft which they have, a home grown stealth project especially since they are able to buy off the shelf would just be a vanity project, as stealth tech doesn't really have any real civilian applications that can leverage the R&D. The western arms embargo on China meant that it's developed a more or less indigenous integrated armaments supply chain that with a growing economy and better allocation of capital has flourished, necessity is after all the mother of invention.
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Japan and South Korea use to brag that they were a stealth power because the US had stealth fighters meaning they had stealth fighters "on their side" and no one else did. Then the J-20 emerged where it was just laughable to claim to be a stealth fighter power when they had no stealth fighter of their own. Hence both Japan and South Korea announced they were going to build their own stealth fighters.

The notorious suspects charged that the J-20 was only a prestige project and was never going to reach production. If your stealth fighter program only comes about because of petty nationalism, your stealth fighter program is the prestige project or in this case a save-face project. Of course Japan's stealth fighter was going no where. The price for being an ally of the US is the US has the final say on everything you do. Is that because that's the price of being a US ally or they could never make all the components themselves, therefore the components would have to be supplied by the US hence why the US would have the final say? Then comes the cost. For smaller nations the high costs of developing a stealth fighter would have to be offset by exporting it. The US has the final say of who gets to buy it meaning no selling to countries the US wouldn't sell that type of hardware to. So that would mean traditional markets the US would sell to meaning competition against the F-35. Translation... You're out of luck.
 
Last edited:
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
AssassinsMace said:
Japan and South Korea use to brag that they were a stealth power because the US had stealth fighters meaning they had stealth fighters "on their side" and no one else did. Then the J-20 emerged where it was just laughable to claim to be a stealth fighter power when they had no stealth fighter of their own. Hence both Japan and South Korea announced they were going to build their own stealth fighters.

The notorious suspects charged that the J-20 was only a prestige project and was never going to reach production. If your stealth fighter program only comes about because of petty nationalism, your stealth fighter program is the prestige project or in this case a save-face project. Of course Japan's stealth fighter was going no where. The price for being an ally of the US is the US has the final say on everything you do. Is that because that's the price of being a US ally or they could never make all the components themselves, therefore the components would have to be supplied by the US hence why the US would have the final say? Then comes the cost. For smaller nations the high costs of developing a stealth fighter would have to be offset by exporting it. The US has the final say of who gets to buy it meaning no selling to countries the US wouldn't sell that type of hardware to. So that would mean traditional markets the US would sell to meaning competition against the F-35. Translation... You're out of luck.
Click to expand...

Wrong thread?
 
F

Franklin

Captain
Wow!

Trump fires Rex Tillerson, picks CIA Director Pompeo as secretary of State

Rex Tillerson is out as secretary of State, ending a tumultuous tenure as America's top diplomat.
Trump picks CIA Director Mike Pompeo to replace the former Exxon Mobil chief executive.
The president also says Deputy CIA Director Gina Haspel will run the spy agency.

Rex Tillerson was fired as secretary of State on Tuesday, ending a tumultuous tenure as America's top diplomat that was marked by a series of public disagreements with his boss — President Donald Trump.

Trump said he will nominate CIA Director Mike Pompeo to replace the former Exxon Mobil chief executive and Deputy CIA Director Gina Haspel to run the spy agency. She would become the first woman to do so.

The Washington Post first reported the news, which the president quickly confirmed in a tweet. Tillerson found out about his firing through Trump's tweet Tuesday morning, NBC News reported, citing a senior State Department official.

State Department spokesman Steve Goldstein said Tillerson had no plans to leave. He "did not speak to the president this morning and is unaware of the reason" for his firing, the spokesman added.

Trump later told reporters he disagreed with Tillerson on some issues and feels he "will be much happier now."

"Rex and I have been talking about this for a long time. We got along actually quite well, but we disagreed on things," the president said as he left for California. "When you look at the Iran deal, I think it's terrible, I guess he thought it was OK. … So we were not really thinking the same. With Mike Pompeo, we have a very similar thought process. I think it's going to go very well."

In a statement, Trump said he is confident Pompeo "is the right person for the job at this critical juncture." The Army veteran and former congressman will "continue our program of restoring America's standing in the world, strengthening our alliances, confronting our adversaries, and seeking the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula," the president said.

If confirmed by the Senate, Pompeo would take on Tillerson's tough task of coordinating policy with an often unpredictable president. Tillerson's departure was widely expected for months, but he reportedly wanted to serve a full year.

It is unclear what the secretary of State's exit means for other top Cabinet officials. Tillerson, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin reportedly forged a "suicide pact" in which the others would resign if Trump tried to remove one of them.

Since Tillerson took the post in February 2017, mixed messages repeatedly came out of the White House and a State Department with diminishing relevance. The intramural clashes between the president and secretary of State came amid major international crises, including a potential nuclear showdown with North Korea.

Trump confirmed on Tuesday he did not consult with Tillerson when making last week's decision to meet with North Korea's Kim Jong Un.

Trump asked Tillerson to step down on Friday, according to the Post in a report that contradicts the State Department's account. The secretary of State canceled scheduled events in Kenya on Saturday, and at the time the State Department said he was not feeling well. Then, he diverged from the White House this week in saying poison used on a former spy in the United Kingdom "came from Russia."

Tensions between the president and his top diplomat hit one high when Tillerson, 65, publicly distanced himself from the president's defiant response to violence at the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last year.

But there were numerous other clashes.

The policy rift emerged most sharply when Trump tweeted in October that Tillerson is "wasting his time" trying to negotiate with North Korea to end its nuclear and missile programs.

The president wrote: "Save your energy, Rex, we'll do what has to be done!"

In October, NBC News reported that Tillerson already came close to resigning last summer but was urged to stay in the job until the end of the year. He referred to Trump as a "moron" in July following a meeting with the president's national security team, according to NBC, which cited multiple high-level administration sources.

Tillerson never denied using "moron" to describe the president.

Tillerson was among Trump's deputies who tried to prevent the president from pulling the United States out of the Paris climate agreement and taking steps to scrap the Iran nuclear deal.

In an early clash, Trump criticized Qatar as "a funder of terrorism" in June about an hour after Tillerson urged Gulf states to ease a blockade against the tiny monarchy.
Click to expand...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top