PDA

View Full Version : Chavez says may give US F-16 jets to Cuba, China



troung
03 Nov 05,, 02:45
Chavez says may give US F-16 jets to Cuba, China

By Patrick Markey

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Tuesday his government may give its U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets to Cuba or China and replace them with Chinese or Russian aircraft after accusing Washington of blocking purchases of U.S. military parts.

Any exchange of military hardware to those countries would break an agreement with the U.S. government on the transfer of technology without Washington's permission and further strain fraying ties between Venezuela and the United States.

A fierce critic of the Bush administration, Chavez has rattled Washington by strengthening ties with anti-U.S. states like Cuba and promoting his self-described socialist revolution as a counterweight to U.S. regional influence.

"If they don't comply with the contract ... we can do whatever we want with these aircraft, whatever the hell we want. Maybe we'll give 10 planes to Cuba or to China so they can study the technology," Chavez said.

"We could give them away and buy aircraft from China or from Russia. ... We don't need any U.S. imperialism," he said.

A U.S. defense official said there had been no communications with Venezuela's government about any sale of F-16s to other countries, but he noted that U.S. laws on foreign arms sales were "quite strict" regarding third-party transfers.

The United States does not trade with Cuba and keeps a tight rein on any technology transfers to China.

Israeli media reported last month that Washington had blocked a sale of technology to Venezuela to upgrade its F-16 fighters, which are made by Lockheed Martin Corp. and powered by engines made by General Electric Co. or Pratt and Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp.

U.S. officials have not confirmed the reports.

Chavez, a former army officer, made his statement during a ceremony to sign a contract with China to build a Venezuelan communications satellite and train Venezuelan specialists in China to manage the technology.

Venezuela, the world's No. 5 oil exporter and a key supplier to the U.S. market, was a traditional military ally to the United States. But relations deteriorated steadily after Chavez was elected in 1998.

Washington sold Venezuela 24 F-16 fighter aircraft in the 1980s when Caracas was seen as an ally against communist Cuba. It was unclear how many of the jets are operational now.

In constant tit-for-tat sniping, Chavez often accuses Washington of planning his assassination, while U.S. officials counter he has become a regional menace by using his oil revenues to finance anti-democratic groups in South America.

Venezuela still sells most of its crude oil to the U.S. market, but Chavez has moved to diversify economic partners by strengthening ties with countries like Russia, China, Iran and his South American neighbors.

In a sign of deteriorating relations, Chavez last year downgraded military ties with the United States by asking Washington to close down liaison offices at Venezuelan military bases.

Venezuela recently announced the purchase of automatic rifles and attack helicopters from Russia, naval vessels from Spain and military aircraft from Brazil in an effort to revamp its armed forces.

Parihaka
03 Nov 05,, 03:01
"Yes Mr Chavez, it's this way for an ass-whopping"

indianguy4u
03 Nov 05,, 05:49
Does Mr. Chavez really think that Venezuelan are so dumbheads that they need other country's help in such things[study the technology].

PS: Sorry if i have insulted ppl of Venezuela.

Leader
03 Nov 05,, 06:23
He's trying his best to vindicate Pat Robertson.

Samudra
03 Nov 05,, 07:33
He is a commie aint he ?
Congratulations Mr.Chavez, you have just earned a little more contempt.

giggs88
03 Nov 05,, 10:02
or to China so they can study the technology," Chavez said.
Take this bastard out! :mad:

cirrrocco
03 Nov 05,, 10:25
Take this bastard out! :mad:


for wat..just because he dislikes the prez

Garry
03 Nov 05,, 13:26
I doubt he would do it.... those F-16s are worth some money and giving them for free is pointless. I also doubt that Cuba or China are stupid to pay for grounded aircraft..... Russia may want to buy one or two but not 10. So this was just another political statement which makes is electorate happy/

I am not an engineer but it seems to me that there are really few technology secrets which you may get from such an old version of such an old aircraft.... in addition to that F-16s with Venezuealla are an export versions which are probably stripped off most interesting secrets.

Jgetty, do you think that those F-16 can be any value to Russian engineers? You have much better understanding of that.

leib10
03 Nov 05,, 15:13
I'm sure the Russians know a lot about the Falcon, and have known it for some time.

platinum786
03 Nov 05,, 15:21
It makes no difference, the F-16 is todays aircraft, by the Time China could do anything with it we will be in tommorow.

I mean don't they have F-16a/b....China and Russia already have some knowledge of them. The future is block 60....the difference is huge, even in the frame of the plane.

then you have the F-22, F-15, F-18, F-35....all the today of tommorow aircraft...

Ray
03 Nov 05,, 18:59
He might sell them.

What are the repercussions?

Officer of Engineers
03 Nov 05,, 19:56
He can't sell them without the US's permission. That's stated in the contract.

Leader
03 Nov 05,, 21:34
He can't sell them without the US's permission. That's stated in the contract.
But it's just a piece of paper. What do you think the reaction would be if he did it anyway?

troung
04 Nov 05,, 01:42
But it's just a piece of paper. What do you think the reaction would be if he did it anyway?

Official military sanctions not the run around he gets now...

Looks like he is more screaming for parts then wanting to sell off the planes...

Officer of Engineers
04 Nov 05,, 02:09
That not only means no spare parts but any orders currently on the books is cancelled and the funds frozen within the US. Any intel exchange is cancelled, meaning he's more deaf and blind than usual, and all officer exchange are over.

That's the military part. The civie part can include freezing all assets within reach of US law.

essay
04 Nov 05,, 14:48
He can't sell them without the US's permission. That's stated in the contract.
I don,t think this deal would be made between China and Venezuelan,unless they sell it at lowest cost.Because it,s unreasoning to spend so much dollars to get outdated fighters,and Chinese has successfuly created it,s j-10 fighter(it,s seemd to be a upgraded f-16).what,s their most wanted is to but as more su-30MKI as possible.

Dreadnought
04 Nov 05,, 17:00
I don,t think this deal would be made between China and Venezuelan,unless they sell it at lowest cost.Because it,s unreasoning to spend so much dollars to get outdated fighters,and Chinese has successfuly created it,s j-10 fighter(it,s seemd to be a upgraded f-16).what,s their most wanted is to but as more su-30MKI as possible.

If he attempts to sell the technology voiding the contract don't be surprised to see them have an accident or disappear altogether. :biggrin:

Leader
04 Nov 05,, 19:24
If he attempts to sell the technology voiding the contract don't be surprised to see them have an accident or disappear altogether. :biggrin:
One cruise missile

TopHatter
04 Nov 05,, 19:37
If he attempts to sell the technology voiding the contract don't be surprised to see them have an accident or disappear altogether. :biggrin:


One cruise missile
Indeed :)

I wonder how he plans to get them to China? Disassemble and airmail them? Come to think of it, several flights by those monsterous Antonov air freighters could probably do the job. Assuming of course the operators want to tick off the United States.

Probably much easier to ship them by..erm, ship. :redface:

Leader
04 Nov 05,, 19:53
Indeed :)
I figure if he has some sort of accident or even is offed by one of his own people, people are going to think we did it anyway. So make it obvious and say it was the right thing to do.

Dreadnought
04 Nov 05,, 20:01
I figure if he has some sort of accident or even is offed by one of his own people, people are going to think we did it anyway. So make it obvious and say it was the right thing to do.

OMG ROFLMAO ingenious :cool:

TopHatter
04 Nov 05,, 20:45
I figure if he has some sort of accident or even is offed by one of his own people, people are going to think we did it anyway. So make it obvious and say it was the right thing to do.
Sure, why not? We can always invade afterwards at our lesiure. :)
After all, he's been whining that we're going to do just that for weeks. Why disappoint? :biggrin:

Sometimes I think the world is holding it's breath, just waiting to see who we're going to invade next.... :rolleyes:

JG73
05 Nov 05,, 00:40
I don't think Venezuela is going to give F-16's technologies to China. Chavez is just a little bit angry about the american behavior regarding to blockade israelian updates on their F-16s and preventing spain of delivering US technologies to Venezuela just because the US government doesn't like the venuzelean government. Among other things that's the reason why Saudi Arabia wants to get more independent of american military technologies and wants to buy the Typhoon.
In my opinion Chavez should shut up because it's the right of the USA to prevent other nations exporting US technologies and should buy some MiGs or Sus.

Praxus
05 Nov 05,, 00:58
for wat..just because he dislikes the prez

No, because he's a socialists that not only violates the rights of it's citizens but controls a large portion of the western hemisphere's oil.

troung
05 Nov 05,, 02:27
If he attempts to sell the technology voiding the contract don't be surprised to see them have an accident or disappear altogether.

Doubt it highly... Iran still flies its American planes around...

He'll get slapped with military sanctions if he does... which he won't as this is blackmail for spares and allowance for an upgrade...


Take this bastard out

Let him run Venzuala into the ground for the next couple years and then American companies will be back... he is an elected head of state so killing him would be dumb...

Leader
05 Nov 05,, 02:39
" he is an elected head of state"

That's in question.

TopHatter
05 Nov 05,, 02:47
Guys, I've got him all figured out.

He's the next incarnation of Castro.....albeit before Castro kicks off.

In other words, the guy just wants to tweak the tail of the lion as much as possible, say whatever outrageous things he can and why?

Because it plays well at home with the people!

He's Mister Popularity because he's "standing up" to the norteamericanos

troung
05 Nov 05,, 02:51
Yep...

Basically don't feed the troll... don't "express concern".. no threats... he does this stuff to get a rise out of us...

As for his election results still we don't want to prove hm right... let the locals see the nation is being run into the ground and let them do something about it...

troung
05 Nov 05,, 06:02
Venezuela Threatens to Defy U.S. on Planes

Sign In to E-Mail This
Printer-Friendly
Reprints
Save Article
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: November 4, 2005
By The New York Times

BOGOTÁ, Colombia, Nov. 3 - Unable to get spare parts for a fleet of American-made F-16 fighter planes, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez has warned that he is prepared to give the planes to Cuba and China and replace them with Russian and Chinese aircraft.

"We can do whatever we want with these aircraft," Mr. Chávez, whose relationship with American adversaries like Cuba and Iran has angered the Bush administration, said Tuesday in Caracas, Venezuela.

The American ambassador in Caracas, William R. Brownfield, reminded Venezuela on Wednesday that transferring the planes without United States permission would violate the 1983 contract.

Venezuela's vice president, José Vicente Rangel, told reporters on Thursday that Washington was violating the contract by not providing parts or servicing. American officials say Venezuela ignores diplomatic requests and declines to sign agreements the United States requires to transfer or service American-made military equipment.

"There's been resistance on Venezuela's part to live up to or sign any new agreement that the United States usually requires for military sales or third-party transfers," said an American official in Caracas, who asked that his name not be used, following protocol.

Last year, Venezuela gave Bolivia aging American-made planes without telling the United States.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/04/internat...4venezuela.html

---
He wants spares as we have him under less then official sanctions... simply not clearing spares... yet there is a "black market" for F-16 spares out there...

Leader
05 Nov 05,, 06:13
"Basically don't feed the troll... don't "express concern".. no threats... he does this stuff to get a rise out of us... "

I don't think we should threaten him either. Just end the prick. Then put out a statement taking responsibility and defending it.

BenRoethig
05 Nov 05,, 18:31
Go ahead buddy, give those A-model F-16s to the cubans and chinese. The Chinese are building a falcon clone and I dare el Presidente to do anything with them. If he did, I'd be smoking a cigar in a Havana nightclub by the end of the week.

TopHatter
05 Nov 05,, 22:56
We can do whatever we want with these aircraft," Mr. Chávez

Is it me or is this pajizo sounding more and more like some spoiled little kid who is about to tell you that his dad can beat up your dad? :rolleyes:

Commando
05 Nov 05,, 23:20
Time for some assasination squads to go hunting for Chavez.

Ray
06 Nov 05,, 18:59
" he is an elected head of state"

That's in question.

There can be no question that he has been elected by his people.

In fact, twice!

While one may not agree with his views, one cannot deny reality.

The first lesson in psyops or disinformation is that always keep the facts that one wants to convey as near to the truth so as to plant a serious seed of doubt!

In the event of blatantly being partisan, it merely make even the truth one wants to convey, a lie!

Leader
06 Nov 05,, 20:57
There can be no question that he has been elected by his people.

You are, quite simply, wrong. I can and do question it with good reason.


Venezuelans, who have been voting 2-to-1 against Chávez in opinion polls, waited in absurdly long lines to cast more meaningful votes on electronic machines. But did the machine really record the vote as registered on the paper ballot?

According to experts, it is relatively simple to tamper with encryption codes in electronic voting machines. American Enterprise Institute resident scholar John Lott says, "You can easily write a program that tells the voting machine to record something different in its memory than what it prints out on the receipt that is to be dropped in the ballot box."

To rely on the tally sheets alone, as Messrs. Carter and Gaviria did, is to abdicate the heavy responsibility an observer accepts when overseeing an election. A Venezuelan who is a former U.N. deputy high commissioner of human rights wrote of his suspicions in Wednesday's International Herald Tribune (right beside a pro-Chávez New York Times editorial, by the way). Enrique ter Horst cited as cause for concern the fact that "the papers the new machines produced . . . were not added up and compared with the final numbers these machines produce at the end of the voting process, as the voting-machine manufacturer had suggested."

An exit poll done by the prominent U.S. polling firm of Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates showed 59% of voters opposed to Chávez and only 41% in favor. (Messrs. Penn and Schoen both worked for Bill Clinton in his 1996 re-election bid.) Raj Kumar, a principal at the polling firm, told me Thursday that the firm has gone back to try to explain the 34-point spread between the PSB poll and the results announced by the government. "While there are certainly biases that can impact any exit poll, we do not see any factor that could account for such a significant difference," he said.

At 3:00 on Monday morning two members of the National Electoral Council who are politically opposed to Chávez announced that they had been shut out of the audit process and warned the public that the established protocol had been violated. Some 50 minutes later pro-Chávez Electoral Council member Francisco Carrasquero emerged alone to proclaim Chávez the winner.

There is much to question. Mr. ter Horst cites one example: "In the town of Valle de la Pascua, where papers were counted at the initiative of those manning the voting center, the "yes" vote had been cut by more than 75%, and the entire voting material was seized by the national guard shortly after the difference was established." "Yes" was a vote to remove Chávez.

There is also a reasonable accusation that the number of "yes" votes at some polling stations was "capped" by software tampering. The charge is supported by the discovery, in some locations, of two or three machines recording the exact same number of "yes" votes and substantially more "no" votes. The opposition is claiming that it has proof that this occurred at 500 polling stations. Again, if Mr. Carter and the OAS observers had demanded an open auditing process instead of blindly endorsing government claims, cheating would have been uncovered. But Chávez refused open audits and the observers went along with him.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/wsj/?id=110005509


The Hotline was evidently having a little fun twitting a polling firm. But was the result as clear as they—and official election observer Jimmy Carter—thought? There is good reason to believe it was not. In fact, it's something of a scandal that American news media have been taking the official vote count in Venezuela at face value. There is very good reason to believe that the exit poll had the result right, and that Chavez's election officials—and Carter and the American media—got it wrong.

Let us look at the reasons.

Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez has been running an authoritarian regime. By various means he has taken control of the legislature, the courts, the armed services and the police. His thugs have been intimidating and even killing the regime's opponents. The literature on this is voluminous, but consider these reports from the Wall Street Journal: www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005494 and www.opinionjournal.com/wsj/?id=110005478. Chavez is an ally of Cuba's Fidel Castro and an enemy of the United States, and he has shown no commitment to democratic principles. He sought to block the referendum by extralegal means and, having failed at that, resorted to intimidation to win it. There is no reason to believe that he would stop at election fraud.

One weapon against such fraud is the exit poll. As Doug Schoen of Penn Schoen points out, his firm has conducted exit polls in Mexico and, just a few days ago, in the Dominican Republic, which produced results very close to the election results. His partner Mark Penn points out that the firm conducted two previous exit polls in Venezuela, both of which were on the mark. Warren Mitofsky's firm, Mitofsky International, has produced exit polls with similar results in Mexico and Russia. Mitofsky recalls that in 1994, Mexican President Carlos Salinas, seeking credibility with foreign investors for that year's Mexican elections, asked him for advice on what to do. Allow independent exit polls, Mitofsky advised, sponsored by the media, and allow the results to be announced soon after the voting. Mitofsky's exit poll results, announced soon after the polls closed, did in fact come close to the official results, as did another Mitofsky poll in 2000. More important, they provided independent confirmation of the fairness of the count.

Interestingly, Mitofsky points out that Jimmy Carter has opposed independent exit polls in countries where he has observed elections. In 1994, Mitofsky says, he persuaded South Africa's election authorities from allowing exit polls. As a result, there was considerable confusion and skepticism in the course of the five-day election process. Nevertheless, the chief South African election official tried to persuade Mexico not to allow exit polls. Salinas, fortunately, showed better judgment.

In Venezuela, Schoen's firm was hired by businessmen who were almost surely opponents of Chavez. The Chavez regime intimidated local interviewing firms, who refused to provide interviewers for Penn Schoen at the polls. As a result, the firm trained volunteers. Critics of the firm might argue that these volunteers, undoubtedly mostly anti-Chavez, may have tried to present a false result.

But that would in fact be difficult to do. Mitofsky points out that in countries emerging from autocracy into democracy, about 90 percent of voters approached by exit pollsters agree to participate. That is almost double the rate in the United States. Moreover, exit pollers work in teams; there would have to be massive collusion for them to produce fraudulent results. The Penn Schoen exit poll was conducted at about 200 polling places and produced more than 20,000 responses. Changing those results from something like 42-58 (the Chavez announced figure) to 59-41 would be quite a feat. The firm employed supervisors to make sure the polling was done right. And its results by precinct can be checked against the official results reported for that precinct.

In contrast, it would be far easier, given the touch-screen voting method and central tabulation used in Venezuela, for the central counting center to falsify the results. All you would have to do is program the computer to count every sixth "yes" vote as a "no." That would transform a 59-41 vote to 42-58. And the results would still show pro-Chavez areas voting for him and anti-Chavez areas going the other way—just by different margins.

Jimmy Carter did not remain in Venezuela long after the polling and, after a superficial look at the central counting center, pronounced the election fair and the result accurate. He could not have determined whether the counting computer was misprogrammed. Chavez had every motive for cheating: polls before the election mostly showed him under 50 percent, and he should have reasonably concluded that those not for him were against. Adjusting the count was one sure way to win.

By way of comparison, Penn Schoen has no motive whatever for cheating. It is a reputable American firm in a competitive business. Over more than 20 years it has worked for successful American politicians like Bill Clinton in 1996, Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2001, Michael Bloomberg in 2001 and many others. I have had experience, as a political consultant and a political writer, dealing with Penn Schoen during that whole time, and have found the firm to be reliable and fully observant of professional standards. They are high on my list of Democratic, Republican and independent polling firms whose numbers I trust and whose professional integrity I respect. Penn and Schoen are not likely to squander a hard-won good reputation to please a client in a foreign country where they are not likely to work again any time soon.

Schoen has little doubt what happened. "I think it was a massive fraud," he told me. "Our internal sourcing tells us that there was fraud in the central commission." This was not the first time he has encountered such things. "The same thing happened in Serbia in 1992, by [President Slobodan] Milosevic. He did it again in the local elections in 1996. As a result, hundreds of thousands of people died. Had he been caught [in this fraud] in 1992, this would not have happened."

In Venezuela this year, as in Serbia in 1992, I think it's overwhelmingly likely that the exit poll was far closer than the officially announced results to the way people actually voted.

Unhappily, the prospects for Venezuela are not much better than they were for Serbia. The Chavez regime has been given a patina of respectability by Jimmy Carter and the New York Times editorial page that it almost certainly does not deserve. Warren Mitofsky was not involved in Venezuela, and is a competitor of Penn Schoen, but he draws similar conclusions to Schoen's. "I find it extraordinary that, with only one exit poll and no quick count, people are willing to take one side's word," he told me. "This doesn't smell good."

Independent exit polls are one of the guarantors of democracy in countries emerging from or under authoritarian rule. Political junkies may think it amusing that there is such a wide discrepancy between an exit poll and official results. But for people in Venezuela and perhaps in other parts of Latin America it's more likely to be tragic.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_040820.htm

Is this proof that Hugo boy is a fraud? Not quite, however it does show that you need to be a little more careful next time in proclaiming what can and cannot be questioned.

Ray
06 Nov 05,, 21:20
The largest election in the world is in India.

We have electronic voting machines.

Leader
06 Nov 05,, 21:39
The largest election in the world is in India.

We have electronic voting machines.


So what? I have legitimate cause to question the election. When you said that no one could question it, you were wrong.

troung
07 Nov 05,, 01:12
Time for some assasination squads to go hunting for Chavez.

Stop watching movies... that's not even how we get rid of people...


I don't think we should threaten him either. Just end the prick. Then put out a statement taking responsibility and defending it.

Then what help the military put up a dictorship? Wack a nations elected leader and see how the next elected leader acts like. We will just have proved Chavez and his large number of supporters in the region right and he will be a matyr in the region.

Leader
07 Nov 05,, 01:17
"elected leader "

I DON'T AGREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I direct you to the post #35.

troung
07 Nov 05,, 01:32
Still that doesn't provide a rational to make him into a martyr... those articles really don't prove much... like listening to Dems after 2000... :tongue:

And please respond to the rest of the post... :redface:

Franco Lolan
07 Nov 05,, 01:45
Chavez is an elected leader, even though he rigged the elections.

Leader
07 Nov 05,, 01:45
Still that doesn't provide a rational to make him into a martyr...

If we killed OBL, he'd be a "martyr" too. I'd rather have a dead martyr rather then a free criminal.


those articles really don't prove much... like listening to Dems after 2000... :tongue:

That's just wrong. US elections are nothing like Venezuelan elections and Bush and the Republican party are nothing like Chavez and his gang of thugs. And if you have a smart ass comment about that you can save it.


And please respond to the rest of the post... :redface:


Then what help the military put up a dictorship?

Syntax? The military would likely be better then Chavez. A free election would be even better.


Wack a nations elected leader and see how the next elected leader acts like.

He'll have nothing to worry about since Chavez likely wasn't elected.


We will just have proved Chavez and his large number of supporters in the region right and he will be a matyr in the region.

The Martyr argument is unpersuasive. If Chavez deserves to die and we kill him that hardly validates anti-Americanism.

troung
07 Nov 05,, 02:35
The point is he is not OBL. He pulls our tail to get us to respond to him to prove his "points" and play to an audience. Killing him because he think that he cheated in his last election is a joke. A real joke. I'm sorry. He might have cheated he might not have. Using exit polling as proof is too thin to kill an "elected leader". So killing him with what he has done thus far proves him and people like him right. And then of course we have how and the tool would more or less be the local army which would probably put the nation into a dictorship. Armies running nations doesn't work, as has been shown in the region and the world (Burma for example).

Then agian this all comes down to personal ideals... so we would/will likely run in circles... :redface:

Leader
08 Nov 05,, 03:49
The point is he is not OBL. He pulls our tail to get us to respond to him to prove his "points" and play to an audience. Killing him because he think that he cheated in his last election is a joke. A real joke. I'm sorry. He might have cheated he might not have. Using exit polling as proof is too thin to kill an "elected leader". So killing him with what he has done thus far proves him and people like him right. And then of course we have how and the tool would more or less be the local army which would probably put the nation into a dictorship. Armies running nations doesn't work, as has been shown in the region and the world (Burma for example).

Then agian this all comes down to personal ideals... so we would/will likely run in circles... :redface:

It's clear if you read my posts that I'm not for killing Castro Jr. because we "think that he cheated in his last election."

smilingassassin
12 Nov 05,, 06:52
It's clear if you read my posts that I'm not for killing Castro Jr. because we "think that he cheated in his last election."

I read your posts and I generally agree, the focus has shifted away from the fact that a leader (unelected?, possibly) is threatening to turn over U.S. tech to nations it does not want to possess said tech!

Troung, if you think its ok to turn over tech to the Chinese or Cubans I hope you can live with the reprocussions.....