<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Boeing Goes Begging … Again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://defensetech.org/2006/11/01/boeing-goes-begging-again/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://defensetech.org/2006/11/01/boeing-goes-begging-again/</link>
	<description>The Future of the Military, Law Enforcement and National Security</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 10:08:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tibia coins</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2006/11/01/boeing-goes-begging-again/#comment-23535</link>
		<dc:creator>Tibia coins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 07:06:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2208#comment-23535</guid>
		<description>Characters have a variety of Tibia coins skills that will raise through training.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Characters have a variety of Tibia coins skills that will raise through training.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Silk road gold</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2006/11/01/boeing-goes-begging-again/#comment-150475</link>
		<dc:creator>Silk road gold</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 07:05:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2208#comment-150475</guid>
		<description>Now I cherish the memory of my better friend who once help me and give me much more Silk road gold.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now I cherish the memory of my better friend who once help me and give me much more Silk road gold.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: VNC.C.C.</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2006/11/01/boeing-goes-begging-again/#comment-150470</link>
		<dc:creator>VNC.C.C.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Nov 2006 17:58:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2208#comment-150470</guid>
		<description>Not only the RAF cannot wait, the Dutch KLu (Royal Airforce) doesn&#039;t have the patience to buy European either.
Strange, considering that air force deemed one C-130 enough for years. It was a great help in Afghanistan during the build-up and recently came home with its detachment, lauded by those in power. Now that it is gone, the Dutch take command of all of South Afghanistan,
This was funny too: When the big earthquake hit Marocco some years back, an MP asked in parliament, if the KLu could help not out with transport of humanitarian aid goods. MP Mat Herben, the greatest proponent there of buying into the JSF (pun intented), answered No;  and that NGO&#039;s should talk to the Maroccan government because they had (have) far more Herculeses.
The Dutch help keep Boeing going by leasing from NATO </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not only the RAF cannot wait, the Dutch KLu (Royal Airforce) doesn’t have the patience to buy European either.<br />
Strange, considering that air force deemed one C-130 enough for years. It was a great help in Afghanistan during the build-up and recently came home with its detachment, lauded by those in power. Now that it is gone, the Dutch take command of all of South Afghanistan,<br />
This was funny too: When the big earthquake hit Marocco some years back, an MP asked in parliament, if the KLu could help not out with transport of humanitarian aid goods. MP Mat Herben, the greatest proponent there of buying into the JSF (pun intented), answered No;  and that NGO’s should talk to the Maroccan government because they had (have) far more Herculeses.<br />
The Dutch help keep Boeing going by leasing from NATO</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wilmet</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2006/11/01/boeing-goes-begging-again/#comment-150469</link>
		<dc:creator>wilmet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Nov 2006 09:17:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2208#comment-150469</guid>
		<description>The RAF was interested in the C17 because they needed to fill the gap until the european made airbus A400M was ready (which will replace europe&#039;s C127s and the UK&#039;s C130s).
Originally four C17s were being leased, but the brits liked them so much they bought them off and wanted one more. I think the RAF maybe a target worth exploring for this plane, only 25 A400s have been ordered so far, there may be room for a few more globemasters (and with the defense budget slated to go up rather than down this year...)
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The RAF was interested in the C17 because they needed to fill the gap until the european made airbus A400M was ready (which will replace europe’s C127s and the UK’s C130s).<br />
Originally four C17s were being leased, but the brits liked them so much they bought them off and wanted one more. I think the RAF maybe a target worth exploring for this plane, only 25 A400s have been ordered so far, there may be room for a few more globemasters (and with the defense budget slated to go up rather than down this year…)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elizzar</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2006/11/01/boeing-goes-begging-again/#comment-150468</link>
		<dc:creator>Elizzar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 20:07:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2208#comment-150468</guid>
		<description>Sorry to be all nit-picky, but its the UK that has bought 5 C-17s, not England (lest our Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish brothers complain ;-)).
On that point, the foreign military sales account for, at most, 17 of 208 planes, according to these figures. Wouldn&#039;t it be advisable for Boeing to try to push foreign sales more, especially to the western european militaries, that seriously lack heavy airlift? It seems embarrasing, as usual, us european types are so lacking in modern, vital, expeditionary military assets and have to come begging to the US for help - it&#039;s not as though we can&#039;t afford it or anything! (btw 3-4 for NATO? Should be at least three times that!)
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry to be all nit-picky, but its the UK that has bought 5 C-17s, not England (lest our Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish brothers complain ;-)).<br />
On that point, the foreign military sales account for, at most, 17 of 208 planes, according to these figures. Wouldn’t it be advisable for Boeing to try to push foreign sales more, especially to the western european militaries, that seriously lack heavy airlift? It seems embarrasing, as usual, us european types are so lacking in modern, vital, expeditionary military assets and have to come begging to the US for help — it’s not as though we can’t afford it or anything! (btw 3–4 for NATO? Should be at least three times that!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JH</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2006/11/01/boeing-goes-begging-again/#comment-150467</link>
		<dc:creator>JH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 19:46:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2208#comment-150467</guid>
		<description>It is a widely know FACT that the USAF needs more C-17s, and less F-35s.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is a widely know FACT that the USAF needs more C-17s, and less F-35s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Haninah</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2006/11/01/boeing-goes-begging-again/#comment-150466</link>
		<dc:creator>Haninah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 17:58:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2208#comment-150466</guid>
		<description>Not to sound too much like a broken record... but isn&#039;t it worth mentioning at least the role that a certain aircraft, whose development has gone catastrophically over budget, has played in creating this Air Force budget crunch at a time when the overall defense budget is at a record high? I&#039;m thinking of something that starts with an &quot;R&quot; and ends with an &quot;aptor&quot;...
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not to sound too much like a broken record… but isn’t it worth mentioning at least the role that a certain aircraft, whose development has gone catastrophically over budget, has played in creating this Air Force budget crunch at a time when the overall defense budget is at a record high? I’m thinking of something that starts with an “R” and ends with an “aptor”…</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

