Jump to content

Opposition Bloc To Hammer Air Force’s Plan To Purchase Unarmed F-35 Fighters


Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, mikebell said:

All of this wasted money spent on defence against who?  In my new book 'Noodles at Noon' I carefully explain to the Generals AKA The Government that an invasion at 12 noon would result in the Thai military being completely overrun as the whole country is shut; all administration ceases; roads are impassable; companies closed.  Only noodle sellers work.

I have offered this book to the forum but I am still waiting a response.

Soon to be banned in Thailand I'd wager.

  • Haha 2
Posted
1 minute ago, edwinchester said:

Soon to be banned in Thailand I'd wager.

It's in English so I'm as safe as all the contributors on here.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

This money could spend much better than the for the army... They do nothing/ don't need anything becausethere isno thread and they cost too much money already with all the generals, deputy generals and deputy deputy generals....People are poor start a programme for them.. Use the money for digging electricity wiring in the ground or so 

Quote

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

since when?

 

Buying the aircraft without weapons does make a lot of sense. Firstly, it gets pilots trained to use up to date aircraft. Secondly, it allays any fears that sensitive weapons systems may fall into the hands of Chinese or Russians and it allays fears of a regional arms race. Finally, it would not be huge stretch to arm these aircraft in the event of a war in which Thailand would likely support the US and its allies. If that weren't the case they would be buying Chinese jets not American jets.

Trained to fly an aircraft the Americans don't want to give them directly because of your second sentence? Bit contradictory innit?

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, starky said:

Trained to fly an aircraft the Americans don't want to give them directly because of your second sentence? Bit contradictory innit?

Not so. Clearly the objection is not giving Thailand the aircraft but the weapons. What does innit mean? This isn't twitter,

  • Sad 2
  • Haha 1
Posted

These are simply toys for the Generals and a mechanism to take some brown envelopes as part of the deal. Hence, weapons are not required.

 

I see them flying over our farm near Korat. Probably got one of their gigs along for the ride. Unfortunately and somewhat predictably, they cannot fly them properly so I am always a bit nervous when they are over the top of our property in case it comes down and explodes into a ball of flames, like this one did in March.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

since when?

 

Buying the aircraft without weapons does make a lot of sense. Firstly, it gets pilots trained to use up to date aircraft. Secondly, it allays any fears that sensitive weapons systems may fall into the hands of Chinese or Russians and it allays fears of a regional arms race. Finally, it would not be huge stretch to arm these aircraft in the event of a war in which Thailand would likely support the US and its allies. If that weren't the case they would be buying Chinese jets not American jets.

It was sarcasm.

And the purchase is yet another complete waste of money, simply more boys toys and no doubt a few bulging pockets.

  • Like 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Thailand said:

It was sarcasm.

And the purchase is yet another complete waste of money, simply more boys toys and no doubt a few bulging pockets.

The waste of money is your opinion. On one leveI I agree that any arms purchases are a waste of money in the bigger picture. In a smaller picture, Thailand does need to upgrade its airforce and the F-35 is really the only viable option to do so. Australia had the same experience. Another reason not to arm them is that there is a modernisation programme in place for the F-35. which was built under a different model (evolutionary development) to previous aircraft.

  • Like 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The waste of money is your opinion. On one leveI I agree that any arms purchases are a waste of money in the bigger picture. In a smaller picture, Thailand does need to upgrade its airforce and the F-35 is really the only viable option to do so. Australia had the same experience. Another reason not to arm them is that there is a modernisation programme in place for the F-35. which was built under a different model (evolutionary development) to previous aircraft.

My opinion and that of many others including those in the subject of the thread.

  • Like 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, Thailand said:

My dear old mum was a regular user of "innit" many many years before any form of social media.

 

My wife picked it up from mum and regularly uses "innit" in conversation much to many peoples amusement.

So, from my perspective the usage is acceptable- "innit"?

 

I think it's used only in some parts of the UK, not sure where.

Posted
2 hours ago, bdenner said:

Fighter aircraft without armament and submarines without engines - ya gotta wunda!

Forgoing the corruption will go along way in paying for these "options".

Missed off the rusty old Japanese trains

  • Like 2
Posted
8 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

Missed off the rusty old Japanese trains

the new once, some 30 years old, come only the last year.

As old and noisy they are, still good to ride.

I think they were donated, just cost of sea transport 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...