Boeing loses $40 billion contract .......

........ to Airbus. This is great news - Boeing is one of the worst anti-white racist companies in the world - always good to see them get kicked in the crotch, ESPECIALLY when their F15 and C17 is winding down too.

 

This is assuming you are talking about some relatively old news, that the USAF chose as its new mid air refueler to replace the aging KC-135 design that is based on the Boeing 707 airframe with the KC-30 rather than the
KC-67

This might be the most liberal thread starter I have seen in a long time
I am begining to think you are moving to the "dark side", you might want to think about dropping the smasher part of your username. So...

You mean to tell me, you would rather have a government backed corporation based in Europe and specifically France and Germany with the several other European countries involved beat out an American company that as one single corporate entity has secured our national security more than probably any other along with advanced our outer space capabilities.

Now, the KC-30 is by the numbers a slightly better plane over the KC-67. But frankly I am shocked that you, Libsmasher would raise this as an issue, all things considered.

As for the F-15 and C-17, that is old tech, and has been in the process of being phased out for the last 10 years in the case of the F-15 and the C-17 has a very very good chance of seeing service in the civilian cargo arena. Keep in mind that both UPS and FEDEX both cancelled thier A380 orders and are in some limbo as to what to do next. Watch for this.
Boeing is not hurting for orders. The 787 is exceeding expectations for sales.

So what is your motivation in this?

 

I think that the overriding concern is that the Military get the best equipment. Thus the descision to award the contract to Northrop/EADS which remember was backed not only by the US Government but by the guys that are going to use it and fly it. The mission capability of the aircraft was much better than the 767 not only in terms of fuel it can carry and range but also in passengers and the reliability, unfortunately the 767 was just not up to the EADS/Northrop aircraft......it just plain beat Boeing hands down - tough luck.

In economic terms I would suggest that you will have a better spread of employment opportunities coming from the EADS/Northrop deal, as I understand it they will have a higher percentage of locally manufactuered components over Boeing - don't forget that Boeing source from overseas as well! Anyway about 58% of the aircraft will be US built with additional parts from the Airbus A330 commercial airliner programme which are built mainly in France, Germany, Britain and Spain being brought over for final assembly in the U.S. - the tanker will be assembled in Mobile, Alabama, and estimated employment being around 25,000 workers at about 230 U.S. companies.

It's unlikely that Boeing will make the anywhere near the same level of redundancies at their plants as a result of not being awarded the contract therefore you will still get a net gain in US jobs.

...he works for EADS but did'nt get the memo

​

Nice plane

 

No, I am talking about how Boeing lost a giant contract.

Whoa - the above is the most incoherent paragraph I'VE seen in a long time.

No - I mean to tell you I like it when one of the most racist corporations in america loses a contract.

Did I raise anything about the technical specs of planes? Nooooooooo.

They're hurting for ONE $40 billion contract. And again, you think I'm talking about aircraft technology - not. Focus man, focus.

 

Yeah - couldn't be better - some people get jobs, and the punks who run Boeing and their shareholders lose a lot of profits! Absolutely great!

 

if its a better deal for a better tanker, and does not put security at risk, go for it. I am sick of contracts to build military equipment going to some local area to help a congressman out. COntracts to build 6 new destoryers when the navy never asked for them in such.

that said i want to know know what makes Boeing so much more anti white then other companies?

 

There are better persons than me to ask right on this forum how the mind of a white anti-white racist works.

Here's my guess:

After losing some bogus discrimination cases, they reasoned thusly:

"We can't keep dealing with these discrimination cases - they are costly and a distraction. Here's what we do - we screw over the white guys by giving the blacks everything they want - undeserved high salaries, promotions, etc etc etc. Now what are the white guys going to do? What do they EVER do? Burn down cities? AHHHHH HA HA HA HA HA!! If there is one thing crystal clear in this society, the one thing you can get away with night and day is screw over white guys - nobody ever complains, least of all them. They are society's jail house punks. Of course, that isn't gonna affect us white guys up here at the top! HEE HEE HAR HAR!! Everyone on the board agreed? Good. Now - let's do lunch, and it's gotta be quick - I have a golf date at 2pm."

 

If I just put my finger over the name... why yes it does in fact sound conservative!

 

Libs,
You are making some pretty heavy claims against Boeing...have any proof of this?

 

Hi Masher - Is this your beef or are you talking about somat else?

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/347081_boeing12.html

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1999/news_release_990930b.html

 

Wait a second...I thought the KC-135 Stratotanker was being replaced by the KC-10 Extender?

 

Not exactly. The KC-10 is based on the DC-10 of course. Of which they are long out of prodcution and expensive to maintain. The KC-10 was more or less a bandaid to get the USAF to this point, and the KC-10 was not a purpose built tanker. So what apparently is now called the KC-45, whereas I had known it as the KC-30 because the new tanker is based on the Airbus
A330 airframe. It now a much more versatile and capable airframe for the job than the existing and very aged fleet. The KC-135s are between 50-35 years old, use old inefficient enginges, and dont have the capacity or versatility that a modern airframe provides.

The losing Boeing design was based on the 767 airframe.

 

No, Einstein:

anti-white RACIST

 

Here are some good links to read the whole history. Read CAREFULLY so you don't come back with dumb misinterpretations:

http://www.adversity.net/c33_boeing.htm

http://www.adversity.net/Terms_Definitions/TERMS/Supplier_Diversity.htm

Here's a list of the corporations filing at the USSC amicus briefs against Barbara Grutter, who was denied admission to the University of Michigan law school because of their anti-white racist admissions policy. Boeing is on the list. It was this case Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger (re U of M's undergraduate anti-white racist policy) that brought back "affirmative action", frankenstein-like, from the deathbed, when legal analysts I read before the decision had a consensus that this would be the death knell for this harmful policy. Instead, thanks to the vote of retiring Sandra Day O'Connor, the policy of anti-white racist discrimination is back with full force, with corporations picking up the word "diversity" from that case as the euphemism du jour for anti-white policies. Note that Boeing went from fighting the illegitimate discrimination cases to "embracing diversity", a particularly offensive phase used by the race hustlers, and unnecessarily standing up for racism in a case in which it wasn't involved. Look at the list of fortune 500 countries - this is why I say corporate america has become the newest pillar of liberalism.

http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/admissions/legal/gru_amicus-ussc/um/Fortune500-both.pdf (See page 2)