A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

China to acquire Backfires?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 22nd 04, 11:00 PM
Keith Willshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Peter Kemp" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 08:00:50 +0100, Pooh Bear
wrote:

"Thomas J. Paladino Jr." wrote:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ina/tu-22m.htm

Two part question; first, do you think that China will actually succeed

in
it's acquisition attempts regarding the Backfire, and if so, how many

would
they end up with?


Irrelevant


Second, what does this mean to the the US?


Bugger all !

China needs the USA ( and the rest of the western world ) to trade with.

That's
how they are modernising their country via a significant trade surplus.
Otherwise it's back to the paddy fields.


Trade isn't the be all and end all of avoiding war. France was
Germany's biggest trading partner in 1939.


And from June 1940 onwards, the difference is that the West is
unlikely to resume trade with China while a
war is going on.

Keith


  #2  
Old August 23rd 04, 02:43 PM
Jim Yanik
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in
:


"Peter Kemp" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 08:00:50 +0100, Pooh Bear
wrote:

"Thomas J. Paladino Jr." wrote:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ina/tu-22m.htm

Two part question; first, do you think that China will actually
succeed

in
it's acquisition attempts regarding the Backfire, and if so, how
many

would
they end up with?

Irrelevant


Second, what does this mean to the the US?

Bugger all !

China needs the USA ( and the rest of the western world ) to trade
with.

That's
how they are modernising their country via a significant trade
surplus. Otherwise it's back to the paddy fields.


Trade isn't the be all and end all of avoiding war. France was
Germany's biggest trading partner in 1939.


And from June 1940 onwards, the difference is that the West is
unlikely to resume trade with China while a
war is going on.

Keith




These days,with the French and Germans having illegally traded with Iraq,I
would not be so certain that some 'Western' nations would not continue
their trade with red China even if war broke out against Taiwan with the US
supporting Taiwan.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net
  #3  
Old August 23rd 04, 03:41 PM
Keith Willshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in
:



These days,with the French and Germans having illegally traded with Iraq,I
would not be so certain that some 'Western' nations would not continue
their trade with red China even if war broke out against Taiwan with the

US
supporting Taiwan.


There's damm little evidence for either of those nations
trading on any significant scale with Iraq and they are
unlikely to rush to buy the plastic gewgaws China makes
for Walmart etc.

Keith




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
  #4  
Old September 25th 04, 11:32 PM
Krztalizer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Back to the IO -- as one of the "junior" Ensigns, I had the
"privilege" of walking vice flying onbd at cruise start. As we passed
the row of liberty boats with IKE on their sterns, I was thinking
"this is going to be one long cruise...."

Will Dossel
Last of the Steeljaws (VAW-122)


I felt exactly the same way - it was a glum ship that left Pier 12 that day.
When the Chaplain dropped dead outside his stateroom, that sealed it. To look
back across the next year and realize we didn't lose anyone else is still
amazing to me. When we got home, I was flown off in a CH-53, on my way to
aircrew school at Pensacola. That next year turned out pretty exciting, too!

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR

Its always better to lose -an- engine, not -the- engine.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CAAC in China had approved below 116kg aircraft sold in China without airworthiness cetificate Luo Zheng Home Built 0 June 27th 04 03:50 AM
"Boeing sale to China skirts ban on technology transfer" Mike Military Aviation 1 February 6th 04 04:57 AM
China to buy Eurofighters? phil hunt Military Aviation 90 December 29th 03 05:16 PM
Vietnam, any US planes lost in China ? Mike Military Aviation 7 November 4th 03 11:44 PM
RUSSIAN WAR PLANES IN ASIA James Military Aviation 2 October 1st 03 11:25 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.