Slashdot Mirror


F-16 Engines Stolen From Israeli Air Base

Hugh Pickens writes "Defense Tech reports that several F-16 engines weighing 3,700 pounds each have been stolen from a base in a central part of the country. Israeli officials played down the loss, saying the engines were old or retired and likely stolen for scrap. U.S. security and aviation experts contacted were not so dismissive of the missing engines and said that some countries would see value in having them and taking them apart. 'They're still more modern than anything in the Iranian air force inventory, and they would even be helpful to China in their jet engine development,' says Richard Aboulafia, noting that modern technology engine design remains 'a black art' and that competitors would love the opportunity to study them. This is not the first time jet engines have gone missing. In June 2011, Israel reported the loss of eight F-15 and F-16 fighter engines from a base at Tel Nof near Jerusalem when investigators found the engines had been taken away on large trucks, prompting speculation that the thieves had help from inside the base. In 2009, two F-5 engines were stolen from an airbase in Malaysia, tracked to Argentina and ultimately located in Uruguay."

346 comments

  1. www.FoxNews.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Read it. Learn it. Live it.
    This website will provide you with all the facts and tools you need to solidly refute any socialist debaters who argue we should all be provided government entitlements and destroy wealth by stealing it and handing it out to the underclass. Educate yourself, and those around you. Our way of life depends on it.

    1. Re:www.FoxNews.com by MartinSchou · · Score: 4, Funny

      Are you suggesting that socialists like me are arguing, that we should all be given F-16 engines stolen from Israel?

    2. Re:www.FoxNews.com by ExploHD · · Score: 1, Troll

      Fox News would rather you forget that half-truths are still whole lies

    3. Re:www.FoxNews.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You mean main stream media in general. Fox news is one of the few defending the other position, and it's one of the few that makes money. The others spew lies and half truths, and sway the nation into voting for more debt and government control.

    4. Re:www.FoxNews.com by pitchpipe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Read it. Learn it. Live it. This website will provide you with all the facts and tools you need to solidly refute any socialist debaters who argue we should all be provided government entitlements and destroy wealth by stealing it and handing it out to the underclass. Educate yourself, and those around you. Our way of life depends on it.

      Your post is a perfect example of Poe's law. I cannot tell at all whether you are parodying a fundamentalist, or are actually a fundamentalist. Congratulations!

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
    5. Re:www.FoxNews.com by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Really? Mod this AC down? This is the funniest shit I've read all day. Seriously, read whatever you want, but dismiss half of it as bullshit.

      --
      Chewbacon
      The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    6. Re:www.FoxNews.com by Runaway1956 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Faux Noise leads the way in divisiveness in this country. Some dirtbag who was chased out of Australia somehow managed to purchase news media in both the UK and the US, so that he could brainwash masses of zombies into attacking their fellow countrymen. Rupert Murdoch should be executed, along with his top henchmen here and in the UK. Hang them from the Verrazanos Narrows bridge, and let their bodies rot in the air.

      Let them serve as an example for all the liberals on the OTHER networks who are happy to promote the divisiveness. They are only little better. Maybe we should hang Hearst and the Turners beside Murdoch, just to be sure everyone gets the message.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    7. Re:www.FoxNews.com by Johann+Lau · · Score: 0
    8. Re:www.FoxNews.com by BeanThere · · Score: 4, Interesting

      stealing it and handing it out to the underclass

      Pitting members of the proletariat against one another is a technique known as 'divide and rule', or in this case, 'divide and rule by thieving kleptocrats' .. the basic idea is that if you, say, have two neighbors and you can keep them bickering against one and blaming one another for everything that goes wrong, they won't notice while you rob both their houses (and will blame one another). Well done for playing your part like a good little pawn *pats head*.

      The more phony divisions you sew, the better - e.g. pit old vs young (e.g. tell the older generation they're poor because the younger generation is eating Social Security and tell the younger generation they're poor because the older generation are living high off the hog off their labor ... meanwhile both feel poor because you are robbing them both blind, but they will instead bicker and blame one another ... it helps if you can deliberately construct a convoluted robbery system in which there's just enough of a grain of truth both ways for it to seem plausible, e.g. pyramid-scheme-based retirement funds or government debt).

      The only "divide" in the country should be that between the moral and the immoral, between thieves and honest folk.

    9. Re:www.FoxNews.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Mmmmm, the "conservative" tears are still delicious.

    10. Re:www.FoxNews.com by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The other position." Is that the one when they start talking about a person who's simultaneously a socialist fascist stalinist nazi, empty suit evil manipulative genius, god-hating atheist antichrist with an Angry Black Man for a pastor, who (despite being an empty suit) will surely crush America under social security administration tyranny with an iron fist after duping the entire American legal system into covering up his Kenyan past (despite having held no government position that would remotely give him such power at the time) but (despite being an evil genius) can't speak without a teleprompter, who's surely coming for your guns (And if anyone points out he hasn't made a single move to, it's proof he's planning to)...

      One would think that it's obvious that no one else defends this viewpoint because this viewpoint is manifestly insane, bringing to mind the delusional/hallucinating aspect of psychosis.

    11. Re:www.FoxNews.com by Occams · · Score: 1

      Poe's law only works in the USA where the kooks are so pure.

      --
      Heavy is the head that wears the tinfoil hat.
    12. Re:www.FoxNews.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      god-hating atheist muslim antichrist with an Angry Black Man for a pastor

      FTFY

    13. Re:www.FoxNews.com by pitchpipe · · Score: 1

      I'd bet it applies even more in parts of the Muslim world.

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
  2. Building Supplies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Those new settlements in the West Bank have to be built out of something.

  3. supposedly by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    with gps attached.

  4. Mr. Fusion ... by pollarda · · Score: 5, Funny

    I admit, I have the engines. I hooked them up to my Delorean and the Mr. Fusion I've been keeping in my garage.

    1. Re:Mr. Fusion ... by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 3, Funny
      Just a reminder, der national Sicherheitsstaat has no sense of humor. It also wants to know why you've been experimenting with fusion and stainless steel (armored?) cars. Expect a visit from black SUVs in your near future.

      Sorry I had to inform you of all this. It's my responsibility and my burden. Heavy is the head that wears the tinfoil hat.

    2. Re:Mr. Fusion ... by siddesu · · Score: 1

      You should upgrade. Mr. Lowenr replaced Mr. Fusion a couple years ago. Jet propulsion is now part of the package and it works much better than anything based on chemical fuel.

    3. Re:Mr. Fusion ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is the "Mr. Fusion" better than the Mr. Coffee?

    4. Re:Mr. Fusion ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you hardwire the "flux compacitor" into the Delorean ?

  5. Early Lead by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Israeli government have discounted earlier reports of Iranian involvement, and are now looking for a Mr. Wile E. Coyote.

    1. Re:Early Lead by ryzvonusef · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't they be looking for the Road Runner? Since he is the one who actually owns Acme...

      --
      I am an ACCA student. Got a query on Accountancy/Finance? Maybe I can help!
  6. Thank your imperial overlords by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    The export of military technology to so many different nations, depending on the political wind of the moment, makes this a highly likely occurrence.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  7. Again. by rex.clts · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And this is why we shouldn't be giving the Israelis our military technology.

    1. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Could not agree more.
      They have lots of money and lots of smart people.
      Glad to help when we can but right now we are broke.
      You should be able to get by in the word without our help till we get back on our feet.
      Otherwise, what have you been doing with the 3 billion we send a year?

    2. Re:Again. by aliquis · · Score: 0

      But you should.

      From 10+ km above.

      Over settlements in occupied territory.

    3. Re:Again. by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 2

      Maybe you should look at the map of operators. We've sold them to half the world at this point, and for good reason: the F16 is a quality plane.

    4. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US support to Israel have never been for humanitarian purposes. It's there to secure a strong ally in the middle east. Removing that support might not be a bad idea since it creates a lot of hate towards the US amount the surrounding countries but the US will have to make sure that it doesn't rely on the middle east for oil first.

    5. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this is why we shouldn't be giving the Israelis our military technology.

      Giving? As far as I know the Americans are selling the technology.

    6. Re:Again. by CanadianRealist · · Score: 0

      I looked at the map, saw what was coloured. Thought a bit about possible definitions of "half the world". I was having trouble matching them. Then I noticed that the use of "we've sold" suggests it was written by an American. Couldn't help smiling and thinking "proof that some Americans DO know that there are other parts of the world".

    7. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

      So here's an example of what's wrong with Slashdot nowadays. It's not the comment itself, but its moderation. This comment accuses the OP of hating Jews and at the same time calls Muslims scumbags. And it gets modded insightful. WTF? I think part of the problem is it seems I get more mod points if I spend them all so I think people are encouraged to use mod points randomly just so they can get more. Another possible cause might be if lower UIDs get more mod points. Several have been sold and it seems like they're being used to skew conversations. Anyway, that's my two cents.

    8. Re:Again. by PixetaledPikachu · · Score: 0

      And this is why we shouldn't be giving the Israelis our military technology.

      Giving? As far as I know the Americans are selling the technology.

      ..And giving israel money at the same time. Now do the math.

    9. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      the technologies in the computer u use right now to post ur inane comments, largely come from israel.

    10. Re:Again. by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      Who says it's all one way?

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    11. Re:Again. by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually do the research, most American military aid comes in the form of loan gaurentees. Last time I checked Israel was getting around $10B worth of loan gaurentees so that they could raise the money and spend it on US miltary goods. In other words what the US government do is provide a kind of insurance to the American companies in the case that whoever buys their stuff decides not to pay up. This is the "military industrial complex" that FDR warned you about before you were born.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    12. Re:Again. by BitZtream · · Score: 2

      You do realize they have some better technology than WE DO in those F-16s of theirs ... RIGHT?

      Do you have any idea how much Israeli tech we buy and put in our military equipment? Clearly you don't.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    13. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. Israel hypes its tech because it wants to inspire fear in its enemies. Israel simply doesn't have a large enough population to support developing high tech weapons. That is why it uses US versions. To put this in context:

      Israel: 7.9 million people
      North Carolina: 9.7 million people

      Israeli GDP: $237 billion
      US defense budget: $684 billion
      Israeli defense budget: $14.5 billion

      To put it simply, while Israel is a developed country, it doesn't have the critical mass to fund cutting edge defense research. It can make useful tweaks, but it really doesn't develop any extraordinary tech on its own. And considering that Israel developed nuclear weapons, I would say that a large chunk of their defense and research budgets go into maintaining them, leaving less money for advancing conventional weapons.

    14. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i am with U 100 % the Isrealy do not care they want to sell weapons so they become rich

    15. Re:Again. by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      The US support to Israel have never been for humanitarian purposes. It's there to secure a strong ally in the middle east. Removing that support might not be a bad idea since it creates a lot of hate towards the US amount the surrounding countries but the US will have to make sure that it doesn't rely on the middle east for oil first.

      Its to secure votes back in the USA.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    16. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And a lot of other aid is given to Israel by US/EU/individual EU countries directly to Israel and indirectly through UN. Who do you think pays for the occupation? Israel benefits in more than one way by the occupation i.e. land stealing, military support and financial benefits by selling products to EU/US/UN to be delivered to palestinians on their dime.

      It's funny, considering that the occupation is the responsibility of the occupier not the occupied, nor any other third parties. So if anything, Israel is great at selling, eating and keeping the cake.

    17. Re:Again. by WillgasM · · Score: 1

      more likely we'll give them $35B to "beef up security" at these bases.

    18. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a load of crap. P4 was a failure and it was mainly if not mostly developed in Israel. They did the "robust" russian approach to the mm technology of the west and it was a failure. If you track the developments in technology almost everything is just small incremental changes of technology developed elsewhere mostly in west. I guess positive stereotypes is something people like spreading about Israel, even though some of it was invented before the inception of Israel.

      I.e. Israel is the biggest producer of "generics", and only developed less than a handful of medicines. Israelis are great at buying up "pioneering" companies and publish them as israeli success stories. Most of those success stories will not stand scrutiny by anyone taking a closer look at the history.

    19. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Make that President Eisenhower.

    20. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex.

      Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961.

    21. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was Eisenhower that warned against the military industrial complex.

    22. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remind me, why do we want to buy their Iron Dome?

    23. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FDR did not warn about military-industrial complex, D. Eisenhower did.

    24. Re:Again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's primarily developed in the USA

  8. Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/09/engine-china-stealth-fighter/

    A nice plane without engines is useless. Over land through Iran to China

    1. Re:Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If we're so worried about China getting our jet engine tech (and we probably should be), then why is GE allowed to be in a joint Chinese venture to make engines?

      http://www.dailytech.com/GE+Announces+Chinese+Joint+Venture+for+Avionics+on+the+C919/article20681.htm

      China and Iran don't need any fancy undercover operations - we'll happily shoot ourselves in the foot if it's called business.

    2. Re: Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same AC here. That, I did not know. Thanks

    3. Re:Stolen to order by cheesybagel · · Score: 5, Interesting

      China doesn't need to get old F-16 engines from Israel. They already got their hands on some F-16s from Pakistan several years back. This is well known knowledge.

      China has the capability to manufacture relatively modern jet engines. One example is the WS-10A engine they use in their J-15 carrier jet instead of the standard AL-31F engine used in the Su-27. The J-31 uses smaller WS-13 engines, also used in the JF-17 they sell to Pakistan, which is based on the Mig-29 RD-33 engine. They had several production problems namely in FADEC, turbine blade reliability and production capacity but it seems they have solved them. Otherwise they wouldn't be testing airplanes powered with their own engines on their carrier.

    4. Re:Stolen to order by WGFCrafty · · Score: 1

      Because it could be a disinformation campaign, or a goodwill gesture where we tell nothing of value.

    5. Re:Stolen to order by Baloroth · · Score: 1

      You do realize there is a slight bit of difference between military grade avionics, and commercial ones, right? It's kind of a big difference, in fact, like the difference between an F-16 and a 747. Actually, not "like", that is the difference between an F-16 and a 747.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    6. Re:Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually there's very little difference between "military grade" and commercial avionics. I've worked on both.

      As for engines, there's obviously a difference between fighter and airliner engines, but the commercial stuff is every bit as sophisticated as the military. They face many of the same problems, and there's a reason why the same companies make both military and commercial jet engines.

    7. Re:Stolen to order by TheLink · · Score: 2

      I might trust the better commercial ones more than military grade. Most airliners don't have ejection seats for the passengers ;).

      --
    8. Re:Stolen to order by dj245 · · Score: 4, Informative

      If we're so worried about China getting our jet engine tech (and we probably should be), then why is GE allowed to be in a joint Chinese venture to make engines?

      GE has a long history of doing this. They licensed their steam turbines to Toshiba as early as the 1970's (and still maintain a joint venture with them). Then they licensed them to Hitachi. Recently, they have been playing the game with Doosan (Korean multinational).

      I wouldn't worry too much about stealing gas turbine technology though. This is basically a mature technology now with only incremental improvements every couple years. If you wanted to play the gas turbine game, stealing an engine or 5 would help, but it would be cheaper and less risky to just send people to the various conferences on such technologies throughout the year. In this industry, the secret design is important, but the manufacturing capability and production engineering is more important. If you just steal an engine you still have a long way to go.

      If you were starting a gas turbine program from scratch, you would need a big pile of money (500 million would probably do it), some engineers skilled in thermodynamics, separate engineers skilled in materials, production engineers, etc. You can have GE, Siemens, Alstom, and Rolls Royce's engineers defect to you if you want it bad enough (money and benefits talk loudly in this industry). Then you need to locate a supplier of exotic alloys and large forgings (not as difficult as it sounds), buy some 5 axis CNC machines for airfoils and some larger vertical tables and lathes for the rotors and casings. Get yourself some machinists and millwrights and you're in business. This is out of reach of a small or medium size company, but a Fortune 500 company or medium-size government could do it if they wanted it badly enough.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    9. Re:Stolen to order by manu0601 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If we're so worried about China getting our jet engine tech (and we probably should be), then why is GE allowed to be in a joint Chinese venture to make engines?

      Because as Lenin said: "Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them"

    10. Re:Stolen to order by wmac1 · · Score: 0

      So an Slashdot commenter thinks Iran is a neighbor of Israel? Your post should be scored interesting or funny.

    11. Re:Stolen to order by wmac1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      - Iran does not have F-16 or use airplanes that use them.

      - Iran has access to new Russian jet engines (RD-33 and many other types), American engines (TF-30 turbofan, J79 and J85 turbojets etc.) and french Snecma 9R-50. Also according Jane's defense a Venezuelan F-16 was transferred to Iran for research. They already have 2 F16-A engines in hand.

      - Iran produces localized J-85 engines (for their F5 derived Saeghe fighters) and possibly limited number of TF-30 (for their 30 years old but still operational! fleet). They would most probably consider one of those engines for industrial production (as they have 40-45 years of experience with them).

      This is a "partial" list of engines available to Iran :

      Turbojets:
      J85 14kN
      Snecma Atar 42kN
      Tumansky R-195 (su-25) 44kN
      J79 50kN
      AL-21F (su-24) 75kN
      Khatchaturov R-35,R-29 (Mig23,27) 83kN

      Turbofans:
      RD33 50kN
      TF30 65kN

    12. Re:Stolen to order by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 2

      I might trust the better commercial ones more than military grade. Most airliners don't have ejection seats for the passengers ;).

      Most commercial aircraft don't engage in combat.

    13. Re:Stolen to order by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So an Slashdot commenter thinks Iran is a neighbor of Israel? Your post should be scored interesting or funny.

      2. a person or thing that is near another.

      Neighbor is a fairly nebulous term. I suppose it's relative too. For someone living in Jordan, no, they would probably not consider them to be neighbors with each other(Iran and Israel). However someone in Ohio may consider them to be. Just as the same person in Jordan may consider Ohio and Illinois regional neighbors.

    14. Re:Stolen to order by grcumb · · Score: 2

      Most airliners don't have ejection seats for the passengers ;).

      And parents of squalling babies the world over are grateful for this.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    15. Re:Stolen to order by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Yep, instead the passengers die when something goes wrong rather than ejecting.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    16. Re:Stolen to order by Harvey+Manfrenjenson · · Score: 1

      A nice plane without engines is useless. Over land through Iran to China

      How? Through Syria and Iraq? How easy would it be to even get the engines out of Israel without alerting border agents?

    17. Re:Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (And when they are used as weapons, the people steering them don't generally care about anyone's safety.)

    18. Re:Stolen to order by Arancaytar · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Using the definition of "can lob missiles at each other", most nations in the Middle East are each other's neighbours. The really psychotic kind.

    19. Re:Stolen to order by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      High powered computers and incremental engineering allow for highly advanced designs to evolve fairly quickly. Besides the US is losing planes all of the time, and US corporate executives are all to happy to sell fully detailed designs as long as the price is.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    20. Re:Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at the history of F14 engine failures. That's what happens when you place commercial aviation quality engines inside of a military fighter. Their uses and operational environments are completely different. The forces on a military engine are not comparable with a commercial/civil engine in the least.

    21. Re:Stolen to order by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      In the past, commercial jet engines were basically afterburner-less versions of military engines.

      Case in point: Rolls-Royse Olympus (used by military and civilian aircraft, marine propulsion and industrial electricity generator) , Soloviev D-30 (MiG-31, Tu-154M).

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    22. Re:Stolen to order by captainpanic · · Score: 1

      If we're so worried about China getting our jet engine tech (and we probably should be), then why is GE allowed to be in a joint Chinese venture to make engines?

      http://www.dailytech.com/GE+Announces+Chinese+Joint+Venture+for+Avionics+on+the+C919/article20681.htm

      China and Iran don't need any fancy undercover operations - we'll happily shoot ourselves in the foot if it's called business.

      Yeeeeeeeees.... but we make them sign a non disclosure agreement, so then they cannot reveal... oh, wait.

    23. Re:Stolen to order by saider · · Score: 1

      They already have 2 F16-A engines in hand.

      Perhaps that what these engines are intended to be used in. They are not invulnerable and do wear out eventually.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    24. Re:Stolen to order by Bearhouse · · Score: 1

      Wrong - nothing to do with making engines, it's to co-develop avionics...

      I'm sure GE will be happy to sell them engines, but not to share key engine development knowledge.

    25. Re:Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything we have given, lent or sold to Israel has been sold to whomever they can get the most amount of money from. Look at the Jew/Israeli spy Johanathan Pollard who was daily delivering the most secret of secrets to the Israelie Embassy in DC. These mthrfkers would drain the blood from their Mothers and sell it if there was a Buck to be made. With "friends" like that, who the fk needs enemies!

    26. Re:Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry your country isn't important enough for anyone outside it to care where exactly it is on the map!

    27. Re:Stolen to order by JTsyo · · Score: 1

      Name one military plane that has an ejection seat for passengers. Sure with something like the C-130 the passengers can jump out with parachutes but no ejection seats.

    28. Re:Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lenin was also a blowhard.

    29. Re:Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know plenty about GE Aviation.

      There is a huge difference between military and commercial engine designs and the technology going into them. GE has the military stuff locked down tight and its going nowhere, let alone to China. GE is fanatical about not letting information about military design even touch a computer not on a network isolated from the outside.

      Working with China on commercial stuff makes sense, China is a huge upcoming market for commercial aviation. Even if they have a couple of these engines, most of the secrecy is in how you process and manufacture the materials.

    30. Re:Stolen to order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually the joint venture is for avionics (or flight instruments) and not engines.

    31. Re:Stolen to order by couchslug · · Score: 1

      China isn't Communist, and is following Capitalist rules beautifully.

      China isn't "Maoism", it's fucking Foxconn, and that works.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    32. Re:Stolen to order by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      I did not say anything about China, but indeed China retained the worst properties of communism and capitalism. The individual is nothing, but individualism thrive.

  9. I saw this movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did they check for any giant engine shaped trees or bushes that mysteriously appeared in the area? They could be hiding under their noses!

  10. Why are we still supporting these clowns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh right. Israel is our foothold in the middle east and as long as they're universally unpopular, we have a reason to invade their neighbors. I keep forgetting. Well, we might as well give them a few more to make up for their loss.

    1. Re:Why are we still supporting these clowns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      They are not "universally unpopular" they are just unpopular with sick, evil, twisted, freaks like NAZIs, skinheads, and the Muslim Brotherhood (who were allied with Hitler in WWII). Not all Muslims hate Jews (not all Muslims are warped and evil) ... but the truly evil fringe of Islam is the Muslim Brotherhood and they and their associated groups like Hamas and Hezbollah are currently an the ascendancy in the region. The Brotherhood does what every evil leader/government/agitator does... gain support of the local population by pointing at some "other" or "outsider" person/people as the party responsible for all the failings of a society. They tell the Muslim world that all their problems are not because they are have a backward ideology, corrupt leaders, dysfunctional courts, and they severely oppress half of their own population (women and girls) ... oh, no... ALL their problems are because there is a tiny little country with JEWS in it...

    2. Re:Why are we still supporting these clowns? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      The USA's actions are often indefensible, it has nothing to do with Christians.
      The old USSR's actions were often indefensible, it had nothing to do with Athiests.
      Israel's actions are often indefensible, it has nothing to do with Judasim.
      Can you see a pattern now, or do you still want to be part of the problem?

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    3. Re:Why are we still supporting these clowns? by cpghost · · Score: 2

      (...) but the truly evil fringe of Islam is the Muslim Brotherhood and they and their associated groups like Hamas and Hezbollah are currently an the ascendancy in the region.

      So are they in Syria, with friendly help of our "allies" Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and heavily supported by the US and most EU Governments, no less.

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  11. Design or buy off the black market? by buybuydandavis · · Score: 1

    A lot easier and cheaper to do R&D with a working prototype in hand. Big problem for the US. You can always have the best equipment, but you're also always helping your enemies to catch up.

    1. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by icebike · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A lot easier and cheaper to do R&D with a working prototype in hand.

      And it wouldn't be the first time Israel disappeared some foreign manufactured equipment to get it "off the books" only to come up with some derivative internal products later. In fact, they have concentrated on making major components for foreign purchased platforms for years, rather than building new platforms from scratch. Most of their tech is derivative work.

      It seems just as likely, given Israel's apparent lack of concern over these thefts, that they know exactly where these engines are.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by icebike · · Score: 1

      Most of everyone's tech is derivative. But somehow, it's only bad if the Jews do it?

      I never meant to imply it was "bad" in any sense of the word.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    3. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Isaac+Remuant · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about Jews?

      --
      "Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
    4. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by mjwx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A lot easier and cheaper to do R&D with a working prototype in hand. Big problem for the US. You can always have the best equipment, but you're also always helping your enemies to catch up.

      Why is everyone assuming they are stealing this technolgoy to copy it?

      The F15 and F16 engines are now 20 years old. You can buy the same level of technology from Russia or India these days. Even China has better engines based on Russian designs.

      Occams Razor says that these engines are worth more as replacements for older F15/16's that are owned by countries that cant get new engines/spares from the US or cant afford them (Iran is far from the only suspect here).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    5. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by AK+Marc · · Score: 0

      Isn't that implied in Israel bashing? That's what I've always been told.

    6. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Isaac+Remuant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My point is that
      Israel != Jews.
      USA != Christians.
      Saudi Arabia != Muslims.
      [Country] != [Majority Religion]

      You mentioning religion out of the blue when the previous poster said nothing only serves as flamebait.

      --
      "Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
    7. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by AK+Marc · · Score: 0

      I guess in the US, I'm constantly subjected to flamebait. I'd often hear a rant on a talk radio program or from a coworker or something about Israel and the middle east, and it would reference them as Jews derogatorily. And I find it interesting that you refuse a link between Jews and Israel, when Israel was created specifically for the Jews, and is officially a Jewish State. Rarely would someone say something like what the previous poster did without intending it as an insult against Jews.

    8. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Isaac+Remuant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Rarely would someone say something like what the previous poster did without intending it as an insult against Jews.

      Exercise, let's replace Israel with Liberia:

      And it wouldn't be the first time Liberia disappeared some foreign manufactured equipment to get it "off the books" only to come up with some derivative internal products later. In fact, they have concentrated on making major components [globes.co.il] for foreign purchased platforms for years, rather than building new platforms from scratch. Most of their tech is derivative work.

      It seems just as likely, given Liberia's apparent lack of concern over these thefts, that they know exactly where these engines are.

      "Most of everyone's tech is derivative. But somehow, it's only bad if the black people do it?"

      "Rarely would someone say something like what the previous poster did without intending it as an insult against black people."

      "And I find it interesting that you refuse a link between black people and Liberia, when Liberia was created specifically for the black people, and is officially a Black State" (This one is not really true but I hope it helps further prove my point that the linkage it's completely of your own doing. Not every Israeli is Jewish and not every Jew is Israeli.)

      --
      "Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
    9. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes you had the Mirage 5 history with the plans and parts been in the right place at the right time.
      You have the history of the Phalcon advanced airborne early-warning (AEW at 250 miles?) radar system and China.
      Small arms drift off bases around the world every year, getting out with an engine with the surrounding safe transport container/sled structure- not so easy.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    10. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by AK+Marc · · Score: 0
      I get your point, and you are wrong. You are trying to correct me for infering what someone else was implying, yet, notice the person who made the comment has not come back and said what they were thinking, one way or the other (though most who mean it the way I asserted deny it when directly asked).

      "And I find it interesting that you refuse a link between black people and Liberia, when Liberia was created specifically for the black people, and is officially a Black State" (This one is not really true but I hope it helps further prove my point that the linkage it's completely of your own doing. Not every Israeli is Jewish and not every Jew is Israeli.)

      Yeah, like people complain about the crime in "South Central LA" or Compton aren't really meaning "black people". You might wish people weren't mostly racist. But I've met tens of thousands of people, and got a few degrees at Texas A&M where I've seen one person yell to a stranger, "You should be a Prairieview A&M, nigger" (Praireview being the historically black college when A&M was segregated). And that's not considered offensive, given the level of offensive speech that grows from there. Growing up in the south, if I presume everyone a racist bastard, I'm right 105% of the time. I've not lost that reaction, even though I moved out of the racist USA, but when talking with Americans, I still assume the worst, and they don't disappoint me.

    11. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      [Country] != [Majority Religion]

      In the US and some other countries we have separation of church and state. That is not true of all countries. Israel is a Jewish country, it's not just a matter of that being the majority religion. Here's some throne room material to read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel

      By the same token, Iran is a Islamic country (actually the name isn't really "Iran" it's "the Islamic republic of Iran". Here's more throne room material: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran

      So my point? He said "Israel" and Israel = Jews.

    12. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by dbIII · · Score: 0

      We should be able to point out that the current government of Israel is Fascist without anybody accusing us of hating an entire nation or an entire ethnic group.

    13. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel may be a Jewish state, but not all Israelis are Jewish and not all Jews are Israeli. Criticism of Israel is not automatically antisemitism. This is getting so very old.

    14. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Isaac+Remuant · · Score: 1

      I'm well aware certain nations have an official religion but that doesn't mean that every time we say something about the country we're talking about the followers of that religion.

      For example: "Argentina is corrupt and bureaucratic". If I follow your premise
      Argentina = Catholic
      (therefore) Catholics are corrupt and bureaucratic.

      I wasn't trying to say that at all with my sentence. I meant that the Argentinian government functions in an extremely bureaucratic way and has a terribly track record regarding corruption.

      --
      "Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
    15. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      But that doesn't work because Fascist is no longer a description of a government type, but a pejorative of unclear definition. If Fascist still held useful meaning, maybe, but it hasn't since the 1950s.

    16. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, like people complain about the crime in "South Central LA" or Compton aren't really meaning "black people".

      So are you saying that there isn't any crime in these places? Because they're populated by "black people", the crime in these areas can't be addressed, because that would be racist? Just like the fact that because Israel has lots of Jews, Israeli policy is above criticism? Do you really think that this view of things makes any sense at all? Do you apply this kind of "reasoning" to all areas of the world, or just the touchy PC ones?

    17. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? You're just grasping at straws now.

      Definition of fascism

      Whole Wiki article on fascism

    18. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People in the US seem to think that Jew means religion. It's not. Israel is a Jewish nation both in religion and in Ethnicity. Jews are an ethnic group, and someone can be a jewish atheist or a non-ethnic Jew but follow Judaism (in which case he is a Ger). Israel is fairly unique in this sense, especially given the laws that allow any ethnic (notice ethnic, not religious) Jew to become Israeli citizen. Given those circumstances, Israel bashing in most cases is a new age form of Anti Semitism. Excuses that follow re Israel != Jews are usually just a way for the hater to disguise himself. Just the attention that Israel gets on every subject by those quick to criticise its policies tells you that this is not simple rational critique of its policy. Statistically speaking, there must be another motive for those criticising Israel other than its policies. Otherwise our news would be full of news regarding Curd rights and Turkey, The killing of innocent civilians by US drones in Afghanistan in collateral damage (and the consequent calling of every coalition government a fascist one) and the list goes on. People devoting so much energy and time in bashing Israel would rarely concern themselves with devoting even a fraction of that energy in criticising the despoting governments of the world that literally kill by the thousands their own and other people. Where are you all Israel (Jew) haters when Russia lelels Grozny, or invades Georgia? Where are you when China destroys people houses to build roads or does atrocities in Tibet? Where are you when Turkey jails journalists and bombs Curds? Clearly, those conflicts are of no interest to you, after all, there is no potential for Jew bashing.

    19. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One more point - usually the discussion degrades to demanding the stop of US aid to Israel. Forget for a second the benefits (both technological and financial) that the US gets from this cooperation (you think Iron Dome like technologies develop themselves?). Why are you not demanding that US aid to Egypt be stopped? After all, it is equivalent in size to that given to Israel, with much lesser benefits. Again, the motives are but thinly veiled.

    20. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The definition listed dictatorial, and Israel is a democracy without any dictatorial leanings I see.

      That the dictionaries still define it doesn't mean that's what people think of when you say the word.

    21. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I am not saying there isn't any crime there. You are proving my point with your comments, but complaining that you don't like where your logic takes the conclusion 5 steps later. I didn't go there. You did. You agreed with me, then argued with yourself. But at least you feel better, right?

    22. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly certain you don't know what Israel or Jews are.

      You should look up the definition in the dictionary. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/jew

      Jew == Israelite

      AND ALSO

      Jew == Religion

      Though they are not mutually inclusive.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    23. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by BitZtream · · Score: 2

      'Better'?

      F16's have been upgraded you realize, right? They haven't been using the original design in 30 years. There are at least 4 different engines used in the aircraft that I'm aware of, which means probably more.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    24. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      'Better'?

      F16's have been upgraded you realize, right? They haven't been using the original design in 30 years. There are at least 4 different engines used in the aircraft that I'm aware of, which means probably more.

      Yes, better.

      You realise Russia are selling 4.5 generation fighters right?

      If you wanted to build your own domestic engines, you'd be mad to steal an older US design and try to reverse engineer it when it would be cheaper to buy a Russian design under license and Russia will send you experts to get your industry up and running. How do you think India got it's indigenous fighters up so quickly? The cost and delays of reverse engineering make it cost prohibitive compared to the alternative.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    25. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would not be a surprising to find out in 10 years, these engines ended up in some clandestine drones, the Israelis "dont" have.

      Pretty easy way to avoid anyone noticing your secret drone / nuclear cruise missile (...etc) development when no one can see you buying major components on the market. Tracking what the Israelis buy from the US isn't that hard for a state sponsored intelligence agency. If 4 new engines get shipped to Israel, they can assume it was for a reason... stolen engines dont draw as much concern, as the rumor mill is distracting.

    26. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      How did you get that definition when several governments of that type have been elected? There's been plenty of such governments at times and not just Italy, Germany, Greece, Spain etc. Instead of trying to change the words in my mouth why not just consider them at face value?
      Personally I think the current government of Israel is something the founders of that nation would look at in abject horror. Despite that it's still just about as good as it gets at the moment in that part of the world.

    27. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by BeanThere · · Score: 1

      I get your point, and you are wrong

      No he's not wrong. 21% of the Israeli population are Arabs. Are you saying you have proof it was only Jewish people involved in the theft?

    28. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Liberia was the only country for black people, the link would absolutely exist. As it is, you are comparing apples to oranges.

    29. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Isaac+Remuant · · Score: 1

      I might just be guessing but I think that an Israeli Arab or an Israeli atheist would not enjoy being called a Jew because he would probably associate it with the religion. Most used meanings are usually what count when talking about these things.

      I'm not even sure if those talking about Jews around this whole thread tree are speaking about israelis in general. I'm pretty sure they aren't and, if they were, why not use the less ambiguous term, Israeli? Anyway, what about foreigners living in Israel for a long time? What about phrases using the country Israel (like OP did)?

      What, exactly, are they talking about and why does criticism gets suddenly equated with exclusive criticism of Jews (whatever your definition)?

      I have to say one thing about internet conversations. It's lovely that they usually start with a condescending (you don't know what you're talking about or, you're wrong and then they point out something easily googled and discussed in previous posts. Doesn't really make it easy to keep a friendly tone).

      --
      "Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
    30. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure people demand that US stop aiding any country who is murdering civilians (When they are made aware of it). Google Egypt gas cans made in us.

      All of your examples seem to focus on Israel as a sole victim of criticism when it's really not. Russia, China and others have a lot of bashing of their own governments (although no one tries to equate criticism of China's government with some religion or ethnicity). Israel might appear more on the news (world and US) because it's a very relevant ally and placed right in the middle of THE US conflict zone of choice.

      Relevant article regarding anti-semitism and any critique towards Israel's government

    31. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, your reading comprehension skills suck.

    32. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You talk like a fag and your shit's all fucked up.

    33. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never mind the fact that the F16 engine is still being upgraded and replaced. THe P110 and P100 were just upgraded in the last 10 years to newer models on the Blk50/52. And the Blk60, being sold to SA, utilizes some improvements, as well as advances in avionics and radar.

    34. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can choose your religion but not your skin color.

    35. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For example: "Argentina is corrupt and bureaucratic". If I follow your premise [wikipedia.org]
      Argentina = Catholic
      (therefore) Catholics are corrupt and bureaucratic."

      I am Catholic and I fail to see any error in your logic. As long as you are talking about the "Church" and not all the people. 8^)

    36. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So my opinion on what others think when they say "Israel" as a pejorative is incorrect because they can't be bashing Jews when there are some non-Jewish people living in Israel? I don't follow your logic.

    37. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      How did you get that definition when several governments of that type have been elected?

      I looked at the AC's links. He argued that there is a clear definition of Fascist. I pointed out that most people probably wouldn't agree with the definitions he gave, but there isn't a definition source for "contested word, no clear definition".

    38. Re:Design or buy off the black market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How did you get that definition when several governments of that type have been elected?

      I looked at the AC's links. He argued that there is a clear definition of Fascist. I pointed out that most people probably wouldn't agree with the definitions he gave, but there isn't a definition source for "contested word, no clear definition".

      It didn't seem to me like he was arguing "that there is a clear definition of Fascist." You said:

      But that doesn't work because Fascist is no longer a description of a government type, but a pejorative of unclear definition. If Fascist still held useful meaning, maybe, but it hasn't since the 1950s.

      ...and he posted definitions showing that it "still held useful meaning." The was no argument put forth at all beside the definitions. From reading this thread, you have a nasty habit of misunderstanding what people are saying and putting your own (strawman) arguments into their mouths (and then cutting those strawmen down).

  12. Hypocrisy... by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 0, Troll

    If Wikileaks were to have leaked the engine plans online then Slashdot would have cheered in triumph - Information wants to be free!

    However, when the *physical* engines disappear it's the fault of those sneaky Israeli rats who should have never had OUR engines in the first place.

    1. Re:Hypocrisy... by cynyr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think there is a difference between the info wikileaks was leaking (info on past events), and technical data for currently used devices. I would say that if wikileaks were to release plans to the engine in the P51 I wouldn't car at all. It is no longer in use, as it has been replaced by newer tech. I'm willing to bet that there is not a substantial difference between the F16 engine, and the F22/F35 ones.

      I wonder how long it would take to engineer and build a jet engine with the info available on the internet about jet engines and various design issues, for example, keeping the inlet air at below super-sonic speeds while the aircraft is flying at supersonic speeds. There was an article on /. a while back about that, and I believe it included basic solution.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    2. Re:Hypocrisy... by jollespm · · Score: 2

      Would you call the difference between a 486 and a core i7 substantial? There's plenty of information out there about jet engines, and certainly a talented individual could build one. But to build an engine that has 35,000+ lbs thrust and can withstand temperatures of 3500+ F, amongst other things, is not exactly trivial.

    3. Re:Hypocrisy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I absolutely agree that the government has no business giving fighter engines to wikileaks. I will write my congressman immediately and let him know that I oppose all arms sales to any website not based in the US.

    4. Re:Hypocrisy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The F-22/35 engines are very different in "execution" of the materials and the refinement of the design. They are "jet" engines like those in the 16/15/18, but the details make all the difference in the world. Also keep in mind that losing a 20 yr old platform, does not mean you didnt lose modern tech. These engine undergo upgrades and refinement over the life time of the aircraft. Most of the parts on these engines have long been replaced, often with better versions. In many cases a F16 engine might be brand new, made with the most up to date materials, and minor tweaks that have increased reliability and performance ...etc. Sometime solving a materials issue can cost years and hundreds of millions of dollars, and if your handed the completed material, all proven and tested, it is a hell of a lot easier.

    5. Re:Hypocrisy... by cynyr · · Score: 1

      Never said it was trivial, just "do-able" given enough funding, and talented people. Also note, that I agreeing for the most part with the article, and against the GGP, in that the loss of the F16 engine is basically a loss of a F22/F35 engine.

      Nothing I saw reported to have been leaked by wikileaks contained info on on-going, or future-useful info.

      To use a car analogy, at this point leaking the spec's to a horse and buggy would not be upsetting at all, but a '64 mustang would provide a substantial amount of the info needed to build a modern car. An out of date "un-safe" car, but a car none the less.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
  13. Prime suspects by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The prime suspects are the Israelis themselves. They'd love to get into the fighter-aircraft business or even the jet engine business. Seriously, this is Israel, the penultimate security state. You don't get stolen military hardware out of Israel unless the government knows about it.

    1. Re:Prime suspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let me get this straight. They have the engines, and can copy them at will. But they decided to steal the engines from themselves so they can copy them. I see. You, my friend, should cut down on the weed. You and the imbecile that modded you up.

    2. Re:Prime suspects by rtaylor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The military has the engines.

      Private companies (no direct access) may want to manufacture something similar.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    3. Re:Prime suspects by icebike · · Score: 1

      I suspect something along similar lines. The borders are simply not that porous. Cover for large trucks roaming back roads is pretty scarce. I would be surprised if the engines are actually out of the country.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    4. Re:Prime suspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      You're a fucking moron, but that's to be expected from someone with your high /. ID. My guess it that is reality you are a sub-25 burger flipper who "hacks" on his PC in mom's basement between masturbating to underage girls.

    5. Re:Prime suspects by Bomazi · · Score: 4, Informative

      penultimate: that word doesn't mean what you think it does.

    6. Re:Prime suspects by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      Seriously, this is Israel, the penultimate security state.

      The IDF is staffed with conscripts. Almost everybody is between the ages of 18 and 22. Almost all officers are in their early twenties. It is not the most competently run organization in the world, to say the least.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    7. Re:Prime suspects by EnsilZah · · Score: 4, Informative

      You know, Israel actually tried getting into the fighter-aircraft business once.
      And I hear it was a pretty good plane, but in the end the US and Israel came to a mutual agreement that's it would be for the best if Israel didn't export a competitor to the F-16 and Israel continued getting subsidized planed from the US.
      So I doubt Israel would want to get into the fighter-aircraft business now, and anyway, Israel is doing pretty well on the UAV side of things.

    8. Re:Prime suspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the penultimate security state"

      That word ... it does not mean what you think it means.

    9. Re:Prime suspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, this is Israel, the penultimate security state.

      The IDF is staffed with conscripts. Almost everybody is between the ages of 18 and 22. Almost all officers are in their early twenties. It is not the most competently run organization in the world, to say the least.

      And here's the wakeup call for you: except for the conscription part, this is largely the same in the US military. It works.

    10. Re:Prime suspects by dbIII · · Score: 1

      If they fit in a shipping container I'd say just about every border on the planet is porous enough for stuff going out. Coming in is a bit of a different story,

    11. Re:Prime suspects by PPH · · Score: 1

      except for the conscription part,

      That point isn't a trivial one to be overlooked.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    12. Re:Prime suspects by wmac1 · · Score: 1

      Can copy them at will? Can you count a few turbofan jets (or even turbojets) produced in Israel?

    13. Re:Prime suspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is the ultimate security state then?

    14. Re:Prime suspects by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      The military has the engines.

      Private companies (no direct access) may want to manufacture something similar.

      Even if we image that to be true, your thinking is that it is not possible for contractors and various engineers to get access to the military bases, maybe even have an office there, where they could both examine the engines and have access to the personnel trained to maintain them - including disassembly - for a bit of help? Besides, even if they drove there, Israel is not a big country.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    15. Re:Prime suspects by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      They'd love to get into the fighter-aircraft business or even the jet engine business.

      News flash - the Israelis already have their own design for a jet fighter called the Lavi.

      It would be a tough sell in a world market dominated by US, Western European, Russian, and Chinese designs used by their air forces. Ask the Swedes.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    16. Re:Prime suspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they sold it to someone so they could make millions and so the USA can give them more grants for it

    17. Re:Prime suspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with you on this - also they can sell it and get additional funds from the USA
      THis is a dirty country we are talking about
      As soon as Palestine got their state recognized they started building settlements on Palestine lands
      USA should stop all funds to this country
      They are sucking us dry, just like they did in Europe

    18. Re:Prime suspects by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      If the Israeli government wants them back, theyll be searching every cargo container that goes out of the country for them, along with every truck that crosses the border. Like I said Israel is a security state. The government can do whatever it wants, no matter how intrusive, and the people will tolerate it because it's part of their war on terrorism or can be cast that way.

      They'll either find these engines or we'll know they moved them to some Israeli company to be studied, disassembled, copied and perhaps improved upon.

      Imagine how important military hardware is guarded in a country constantly beset by the likes of Hamas and with potential hostiles across every border. There's no way these engines were stolen by any outside group without help from insided the IDF and no way they're getting out of the country without that and help from the government itself.

      And what do you think would happen to somebody in Israel caught going rogue with military weapons of this magnitude if they were caught?

      Seriously, if anybody trusts the Israelis to not do everything in their power to get their hands on military technology they want, consider:

    19. Re:Prime suspects by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      Yes it does. It means next to ultimate. The ultimate security state, IMO, is North Korea.

  14. Uh, so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just get a XXL titanium cartridge at the Jerusalem Staples and 3D print some new ones? Duh?

  15. how about a warning first? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'd like to know if I'm clicking on Wikileaks before I click, asshole. Most of you might not care, but some people do.
    ( yeah yeah... should have looked at the url before clicking... I know )

    1. Re:how about a warning first? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:how about a warning first? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Yes, if you care so much about any random site, you should check the URL. People will not put warnings about every possible problem with every link.

    3. Re:how about a warning first? by pitchpipe · · Score: 1

      I'd like to know if I'm clicking on Wikileaks before I click, asshole.

      Somewhere there is a database where you were just knocked down from True Patriot to just Patriot . Hopefully this doesn't happen too many more times or you're going to find out what an extraordinary rendition of Beethoven's 10 symphony (The Water Boarding) with a salsa flair sounds like.

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
    4. Re:how about a warning first? by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

      I'd agree with you except that it's common to look at the bottom right corner of your firefox window to see what the linked url points to (except these days, when the url can show up in either the bottom right or the bottom left corner depending on if you've got a text-search box open or if a no-script button/bar is open on the bottom... I'd like to see a little consistency on that in FF). But it would be nice if the postings of stories followed the rules of postings of comments after the stories: any urls posted in comments automatically have the base-URL-web site listed in brackets after the link, so that you aren't accidentally clicking on a link without realizing where you're going, e.g. pointing back to /. here
      :>)
      So in that respect, I agree with you. The story ought to have bracketed URL-base-link info immediately following the link. That way the naive and stupid and quick-to-click don't complain about where the link leads.

  16. Yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    They have the engines, and can copy them at will. But they decided to steal the engines from themselves so they can copy them.

    Yes! That is how the World Wide Jewish Conspiracy works! They do something like this that way, they can plausibly deny having stolen the designs. See, if there are accused of stealing the designs and someone points out that they were in possession of the engines all along, they then can say, "But they were stolen so it can't be us!"

    See? You just don't have the reasoning ability to see this clever and crafty Jewish plot! And when I find my lighter, I'll light up another toke and explain how BOTH Bush and Obama are in on this with the help of Fox News!

    They want you to think they are enemies!

    1. Re:Yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well either they stole it or they are incompetent guards...

    2. Re:Yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably one of the more rational posts on /.

  17. id10t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you hover your mouse pointer over the link it will show you the address. I know you are probably new to the internet so I will give you this one for free. The price jumps next time my friend.

    1. Re:id10t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he was saying that when he said "should have looked at the URL before clicking"

      I can't sympathize with the guy somewhat. While he probably should have moused-over, but I too I assume usually that Slashdot articles link to new sources not the actual leaked documents. I guess it doesn't bother me to click on Wikileaks, but I can see why it would bother other people.

    2. Re:id10t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be gentle with him, He is using Windows 8

  18. WikiLeaks link in the summary? by jittles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dear Editors:

    Thank you for putting a WikiLeaks link in the story summary. I know I could have hovered over it with the mouse cursor and seen where it linked to, but I was expecting an actual news story and not WikiLeaks. You do realize that anyone who works in the Defense Industry, military, or other US Government contracting positions could lose their job over clicking that, right? It's not likely that they would be "caught" so to speak, but I thought this was a news aggregator, and would, you know, have links to the news. Thankfully I am no longer in the defense industry, and do not have to worry about losing my job.

    For those of you who are about to freak out on the US Government's rules realize this: When you do work in certain areas you agree to not seek out information that is covered by a "Need to Know." The US Government has specifically said that those who work in sensitive areas are not to visit WikiLeaks, and have warned all employees and contractors. The reason is pretty simple. If you explicitly agree not to do something as a condition of employment, and you do it anyway, then you probably aren't a very trustworthy person. And anyway, I think that a proper news story would have been more informative and read better than a diplomatic cable, or whatever that document was.

    1. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by RocketRabbit · · Score: 2

      You won't lose your job over clicking a Wikileaks link. More than half the traffic to Wikileaks is from .gov or .mil domains anyway.

    2. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by jagapen · · Score: 1, Troll

      And just how does your choice to work for dangerous, anti-American thugs translate into the rest of the world's responsibility to edit itself?

    3. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Should /. censor stories that criticize the Chinese government, too, since that could land a Chinese user in trouble?

      When you do work in certain areas you agree to not seek out information that is covered by a "Need to Know."

      I'm no military, but it was my understanding the idea behind "need to know" was to minimize damage in case of a leak. If the information is public, one should assume anyone who has an interest in that information knows it already.

      The US Government has specifically said that those who work in sensitive areas are not to visit WikiLeaks, and have warned all employees and contractors.

      That is creepily similar to how Scientology tells their cultists not to read certain public websites anyone can access. It isn't the cultist's fault, but it sure is weird for non-fanatics and you shouldn't expect everyone to self-censor only to make your self-imposed restrictions easier to follow.

    4. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      You do realize that anyone who works in the Defense Industry, military, or other US Government contracting positions could lose their job over clicking that, right?

      Actually, they probably didn't. This is not a well known fact, and considering all of the US's enemies already have that information, it is not obvious to people who don't have a clearance that looking at it would be a problem.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    5. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was discussed on slashdot.

    6. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It was a front page story...

      http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/10/01/1143233/state-dept-employee-investigated-for-linking-to-wikileaks

    7. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by PNutts · · Score: 2

      There's probably also a lot of other types of links that can get you fired. It's your responsibility, not the editors.

    8. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And where in the fine print on the Slashdot FAQ does it say "We will not post links that could possibly get X group fired from Y job for clicking on said link."

      I very heartily disagree with you - for all the talk of freedom on this site, this is one that shouldn't be eroded. Again, like so many others have said, your fault for clicking without at LEAST a mouse over.

    9. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by LateArthurDent · · Score: 1

      For those of you who are about to freak out on the US Government's rules realize this: When you do work in certain areas you agree to not seek out information that is covered by a "Need to Know."

      I wasn't about to freak out about the US Government's rules, but I was about to freak out over your complaint on the summary.

      Those rules apply to those of you who have agreed to them as a condition to the work you do. It does not apply to the rest of the population. Considering I would imagine the majority of people frequenting slashdot do not share those restrictions, it makes no sense to sensor the site as you propose.

      There's absolutely nothing wrong with the government requiring that people working in certain sensitive areas do not seek out information they don't have the clearance to read. However, if you have agreed to such a restriction, it is your responsibility to double-check the links you follow. It is not the responsibility of the rest of the world to make this easy for you.

    10. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, you don't lose your job. You immediately report your unauthorized access of classified or otherwise restricted information to your FSO, and the circumstances leading up to that access. Once you've done this, you're in the clear.

      Are you a jarhead?

    11. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by sootman · · Score: 1

      Funny -- usually people bitch at Slashdot for linking to crappy blogs instead of the original source.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    12. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the more common complaints about Slashdot stories is that they often link to a story quoting a story quoting a story that might actually be based on some original evidence, with each step adding its own distortions. In this case, as well as linking to a story, they're also linking to some actual evidence. The editors are doing their jobs for once - and you're complaining about it?

      That aside, I also think it's important that Slashdot links to Wikileaks whenever it's useful, particularly since the US government is attempting to suppress it: it contains information that will otherwise be under-represented in the media, and hence essential for a balanced understanding of an issue.

    13. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      why are you accessing slashdot from a WORK COMPUTER, then, smart guy? if you worry about your job, don't do recreation things (like slashdot) from what you say are sensitive systems!

      (government geniuses, at work. gotta tell them every last thing or they won't figure out much on their own)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    14. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In life, you shouldn't get angry at people for not taking into accont your ecentric needs.

    15. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "The US Government has specifically said that those who work in sensitive areas are not to visit WikiLeaks, and have warned all employees and contractors. The reason is pretty simple. If you explicitly agree not to do something as a condition of employment, and you do it anyway, then you probably aren't a very trustworthy person."

      So the simple reason is that it's a purely arbitrary test to see if you follow nonsensical rules?

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    16. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by jittles · · Score: 1

      This is supposed to be a news site, and I don't see how a WikiLeaks link is news. They normally comment when a link may be sketchy for work. But how many people, when they see a link that say: "two F-5 engines were stolen from an airbase in Malaysia" think they are going to go to anything but a news site? I'm not saying that I couldn't have checked the link, I had said in my OP that I should have checked the link. I just don't think they addressed the link appropriately. I don't believe that WikiLeaks should be considered news by any means, and they implied it was a news story. I also think that, due to the ire raised by WikiLeaks, they ought to at least provide a warning for those who aren't paying attention.

    17. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by jittles · · Score: 1

      Except that it wasn't the original source. The original source was the government of Malaysia, and they had posted news stories about it for a great deal of time following the theft. Even if those diplomatic cables were the original source, WikiLeaks is not. Anyway, my point is that it should have been obvious it was a WikiLeaks link and not disguised as a news story. I know the link was visible, but the linked text implied a news story.

    18. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by jittles · · Score: 1

      I'm not accessing slashdot from a work computer, or a government computer or any hardware that I do not own. I lease the network connection as well. As I said, I no longer do defense contracting. However, DSS (Defense Security Service) made an effort of going around to contractors to tell them that accessing WikiLeaks could be grounds for losing your clearance. It doesn't matter where you look at WikiLeaks, whether it as at work, at home or abroad. People in these positions have promised the government that they would not access classified material that they do not have the clearance and the need to know. There is no distinction between classified information that is at your office, and things that you could potentially access from home. As I said previously, the odds of getting caught are pretty damn slim, but I would hate to see someone lose their job for clicking on a link at Slashdot.

    19. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by jittles · · Score: 1

      No, the reason you get into trouble is simple. You are violating the rules. The reason for the rule is pretty simple, too. You may not understand the full implications of the things you are working on. If you have access to external information, it could be used to create new pieces of information that are classified and that you do not need to know. The more information you know, the easier it is to accidentally let something slip when you should not. So the point is to prevent employees from trying to gather all of the information they possibly can. Not to mention it makes it easier to find spies. You look for the guy who is poking his nose around where it doesn't belong.

    20. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      wikileaks, by definition, is not an original source. It is in fact a stolen, illegal copy of the original source.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    21. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt that. US government employees are forbidden to visit Wikileaks. I would be surprised if it isn't actually blocked at most sites.

    22. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by siddesu · · Score: 1

      Who the fuck cares that you think you may lose your job because you clicked a link? Fuck off, suck it up and spend the time you bitch about your stupidity to actually check links.

    23. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is supposed to be a news site, and I don't see how a WikiLeaks link is news

      You should read it then (wikileaks that is). Some of it is quite interesting.

    24. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by jittles · · Score: 1

      Who the fuck cares that you think you may lose your job because you clicked a link? Fuck off, suck it up and spend the time you bitch about your stupidity to actually check links.

      Reading comprehension fail. I said I don't have to worry about my job, I don't work in the defense industry anymore. I said others may have to worry about their jobs. Yes I should have checked the link. Again reading comprehension fail. I said that I should have checked the link before I clicked it. My point is that Wikileaks is not a news source, and should not be linked to in an article summary, especially without indicating that the site being linked to is WikiLeaks. So before you call me stupid, you may want to work on your reading comprehension.

    25. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry for your country.

    26. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If you explicitly agree not to do something as a condition of employment, and you do it anyway, then you probably aren't a very trustworthy person.

      If you agree to work for a government that cannot handle criticism, and thus cannot stand to have you see what is being said about it, then you probably aren't a very trustworthy person. Same thing I think about someone who works for Halliburton, or Chevron.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    27. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by siddesu · · Score: 1

      Wikileaks is as much a "news source" as any other blog or website that is usually linked to here, idiot.

    28. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by jittles · · Score: 1

      If you explicitly agree not to do something as a condition of employment, and you do it anyway, then you probably aren't a very trustworthy person.

      If you agree to work for a government that cannot handle criticism, and thus cannot stand to have you see what is being said about it, then you probably aren't a very trustworthy person. Same thing I think about someone who works for Halliburton, or Chevron.

      It has nothing to do with criticism, in this circumstance. While I do not believe that the government was fond of the leaked cables, or Julian Assange, there are security implications involved. If you sit through the DSS/FBI counter-intelligence briefings, they explain to you why these rules exist. They are actually quite fascinating presentations, at least the first few times you sit through them. The point in restricting information is that two sources of independent information can cause a third piece of information to be pieced together. In the case of these jobs, you agree to not seek out independent pieces of information that you do not need to know. If you go out of your way looking for independent information that you are restricted from seeing, then you are basically spying. You may be spying out of personal curiosity, but it may appear that you are spying for a reason. They never said you could not read the NYT, or go to any other accredited news source that may be discussing the leaks. They just specifically said do not go to WikiLeaks.

    29. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cry some more. Slashdot shouldn't dumb itself down because your employer is paranoid. I never signed up to obey some stupid US law, so I'll do as I see fit. If that means looking at pictures of the prophet Muhammed, material covered by UK superinjunctions, or links to Wikileaks, I'll do as I damned well like.

      Are you seriously suggesting Slashdot puts up a sign with "Tools of country X, avert your eyes! Your government doesn't want you to know this."?

    30. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      aka: "My master says I'm not allowed to read this information, and I'm too stupid to look at what I'm clicking on, even though it's directly military related, possibly directly associated with the 'forbidden information' my master won't allow me to know"

      And the fact that you don't think Wikileaks is news (the definition of news being "1.Newly received or noteworthy information, esp. about recent or important events."... which pretty much EXACTLY defines Wikileaks... is a bit sad, really. I kinda pity you, but am a little bit sickened that you're actually fighting FOR your position on this.

    31. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      > You do realize that anyone who works in the Defense Industry, military, or other US Government contracting positions could lose their job over clicking that, right?

      You say that like it's a bad thing!

    32. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If you sit through the DSS/FBI counter-intelligence briefings, they explain to you why these rules exist

      And if you believe what they say without question, then you are beyond help, and there is no reason to waste time talking to you.

      The point in restricting information is that two sources of independent information can cause a third piece of information to be pieced together.

      So the point is to keep the enlisted from finding out too much about what our own government is doing? Got it.

      They never said you could not read the NYT, or go to any other accredited news source that may be discussing the leaks. They just specifically said do not go to WikiLeaks.

      IOW, they said you can only get the government-approved version of the news, and you are forbidden to go straight to the source and get the facts. Anyone who agrees to such a restriction is a bad citizen and, again, is Part Of The Problem.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    33. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by jittles · · Score: 1

      If you sit through the DSS/FBI counter-intelligence briefings, they explain to you why these rules exist

      And if you believe what they say without question, then you are beyond help, and there is no reason to waste time talking to you.

      When it comes to the things they say about counterintelligence I do believe them. Why? Because they have been doing it for a long time. What they say also makes sense; its very logical. Of all the things they may want to lie about, I hardly doubt that what they teach on counterintel is a lie. Why would they lie? Don't they, by nature, want to make it more difficult for those who may want to spy on them?

      The point in restricting information is that two sources of independent information can cause a third piece of information to be pieced together.

      So the point is to keep the enlisted from finding out too much about what our own government is doing? Got it.

      No that is not it at all. I have never, and will never serve in the military. I was under the same rules. The reason often has nothing to do with hiding things the government has done, but to hide things they intend to do. Don't get me wrong, I think they hide things they shouldn't have done all the time, but this is often enforced to protect operational security on active operations, ground breaking technology, etc

      They never said you could not read the NYT, or go to any other accredited news source that may be discussing the leaks. They just specifically said do not go to WikiLeaks.

      IOW, they said you can only get the government-approved version of the news, and you are forbidden to go straight to the source and get the facts. Anyone who agrees to such a restriction is a bad citizen and, again, is Part Of The Problem.

      "if you believe what they say without question, then you are beyond help." Those WikiLeaks cables are not guaranteed to be 100% factual, accurate, unbiased, or otherwise useful. You have no idea what kind of ax the person who wrote them has to grind. You have no idea what, if any, are disinformation to validate the security of Government communications. You have no idea about those cables at all. I have no interest in reading them because I think what Manning did was despicable. But even if I had any interest in reading them I would take every word with a grain of salt. I would trust the BBC or NYT at least as much as I trust the original source of the cables themselves. The news was meant for general consumption, and the people who write it theoretically have a reputation to uphold. While the people who wrote the cables have a business reputation to uphold, they may also be writing their reports in order to cast a favorable light on personal policies and interests, or even the policies of their superiors. So read the WikiLeaks stuff all you want, enjoy. I'd rather read the news from a source that is supposed to have their international reputation at stake.

    34. Re:WikiLeaks link in the summary? by dcollins · · Score: 1

      ^ This is one of those uncomfortable cases where I think that's satire, but I'm not totally sure.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
  19. money talks by KernelMuncher · · Score: 1

    I think the most likely explanation is that somebody was paid a big fat bribe to ship the engines to a country who wanted them: China, Russia, Iran, India (?), etc.

    1. Re:money talks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Russia can make their own engines already.

  20. Penultimate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Seriously, this is Israel, the penultimate security state.

    Which state is, therefore, the ultimate security state? Seriously, penultimate doesn't mean "ultimate, except with three extra prefix letters of awesome emphasis!", it means "next to last".

    1. Re:Penultimate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      North Korea

    2. Re:Penultimate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh-oh, we have two contenders for ultimate security state on my sister posts. That means that at best, Israel is the antepenultimate state.

    3. Re:Penultimate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best Korea.

    4. Re:Penultimate... by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      North Korea

      Bingo!

  21. tracking things down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    One of the comments in TFA was interesting. (From memory)

    Mossad can track down a terrorist cell to a specific house and take it out, but the IDF can't locate a couple of jet engines that rolled out of the base on a flatbed truck!?!?!?!?

  22. please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why's that? Because that technology might make it to a country like Iran? ummm... We have given a HUGE amount of high-tech weaponry (including jets) to Egypt over the years and THAT place is now run by the Muslim Brotherhood which has begun cozying-up to some of the worst governments on Earth (including Iran). Israel is not the only country to let this happen... during the cold war, a Japanese firm intentionally transferred American nuclear submarine propeller technology directly to Russia, which resulted in the American taxpayer spending BILLIONS of new dollars to improve our ability to detect the newer quieter Russian subs and to make ours even more quiet.

    So... is it that you oppose helping Egypt and Saudi Arabia and others (anybody who might let our tech slip out to our enemies) as well, OR are you just using this incident to disguise a personal predisposition for Jew-hating?

    Muslims have huge swaths of land and many nations, rich with natural resources. The Jews (who have repeatedly faced threats and actual attempts of genocide) have only one tiny country, and it seems to be on the only middle-eastern soil that's not floating on oil (smile) so it's always interesting to see the warped and evil mindset of the irrational freaks who want to eliminate them. I'm not Jewish... I'm just a rational human who is fascinated by the freakish irrational behavior of Jew haters... it seems like every evil person on Earth hates Jews, even if they've never met one...

    1. Re:please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not Jewish

      But you play an Israeli talking head on the Internets. So I'm guessing Republican?

      It's always hilarious to see Israel fanboys equate 'The United States should not be emptying our treasury on behalf of Israel' into 'ZOMG ANTI-SEMITISM!'

      Israel has nuclear weapons. Israel has a strong military. Israel has a damned good number of engineering and science folks, to boot.

      The fact is, citizens of the US should not be paying Israel's way. That's it. As for the rest - whatever. Personally, I don't give a damn if Israel launches a war of aggression and takes the whole of the Middle East. At least it'd stop our politicians from fucking about with puppet administrations. That's worked out so well for us in Iraq and Iran, after all.

    2. Re:please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why's that? Because that technology might make it to a country like Iran? ummm... We have given a HUGE amount of high-tech weaponry (including jets) to Egypt over the years and THAT place is now run by the Muslim Brotherhood which has begun cozying-up to some of the worst governments on Earth (including Iran). Israel is not the only country to let this happen

      Or maybe he meant what every reasonable person is thinking: "this is why we shouldn't share our military technology. With anyone. Unless they happen to have military technology we don't, and an information trade between allies would be beneficial to us."

    3. Re:please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with this wholeheartedly. Just as there should be no taxation without representation, there should be no representation without taxation.

    4. Re:please clarify by caseih · · Score: 1

      Wow. Where to start with that diatribe. While I agree with much of what you say about what has happened in Egypt, accusing this person of being anti-Semitic is pretty darn close to invoking Godwin's law, and highly disingenuous.

      Israel, the nation-state, definitely has the whole world in a nice spot. We can't criticize what they are doing, and the fact that they are deliberately inciting the Palestinian people with their actions, lest we be accused if being a Jew-hater or an anti-Semite. I greatly admire the Jewish people and what they have built in Haaretz Israel, but I am highly critical of high-level government policies that seem specifically designed to thwart the prospect for peace for whatever reason. Granted Palestinian leadership doesn't seem interested in peace either, but then again most of the moderate leadership potential have been killed, either by the Israeli military or by extremists among their own people, or have been pushed to extremism by the ongoing-policies of settlement building (in land Israel has no intention of ever annexing except piecemeal) and Palestinian house razing. The situation in the Holy Land is a political one, not a religious one. I would urge you to travel there and see first hand how the two peoples interact with each other. Talk to Israelis about their Palestinian neighbors. Talk to Palestinians about their Jewish neighbors, and also about their prospects and hope for the future. I think you'll find that hope and future potential, particularly for the average west bank resident, are in very short supply, and it's easy to see why. I've done this and I have many good friends on both sides of the political divide. I'm aware of how difficult and nuanced the situation really is.

      As for painting the Muslims with a broad brush, well, you've got it fairly wrong. In the middle east, the people and cultures are primarily Arab (Muslim, Christian, and for a very tiny minority, Jewish--yes Jewish Arabs do exist), and many of the things we have such a hard time with aren't really religious in nature, but cultural.

      And as for Arabs being rich in natural resouces, I can tell by that statement you have never visited the region. All of the nations that surround Israel, Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria have practically no oil resources at all. Egypt has natural gas, but nothing like Saudi Arabia. And all of these countries have hardly any water. It's only the gulf Arab states that have oil and wealth. And they are beset by corrupt, despotic regimes that we support in the west. The average Saudi sees nothing of the benefit of the oil revenues that flow like liquid gold in the region.

    5. Re:please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm not Jewish

      But you play an Israeli talking head on the Internets. So I'm guessing Republican?

      i.e. you think all Gentile Democrats hate Jews. I think you're projecting onto others.

    6. Re:please clarify by ohnocitizen · · Score: 1

      This. Maybe we should avoid giving countries weapons and money and saying "good luck with that". If we stuck to diplomacy it would at least be cheaper and less risky.

    7. Re:please clarify by pitchpipe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      OR are you just using this incident to disguise a personal predisposition for Jew-hating?

      We need to stop conflating not wanting the US to be Israel's bitch with Jew-hating. They are not the same thing. Maybe if we (the US) started making our commitment to their security contingent upon them making peace, they might start moving in that direction. Right now they act like they can do whatever they want, and we will still back them no matter what. This is actually the case, and it doesn't make sense.

      BTW, all forms of racism are born of ignorance, so don't think that I'm Jew hating. The world would be a lot worse off if we didn't have them contributing to our collective well being. I just want a rational US policy when it comes to Israel.

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
    8. Re:please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does (huge swaths of land many nations) supposed to imply? While I agree with your post generally, muslims are not "one" ethnicity or culture despite what some claim including islamists.

    9. Re:please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      plz do not blame the muslims for Isreal acts of selling USA tech. KSA do not need to sell or cannot sell because all their jet is under USA control u are an asshole who hate full his heart go clean up man be a human

    10. Re:please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the Japanses did not sell any American tech; they (Toshiba, actually) sold some of (their own) advanced machine tools that the Russians then used to machine quieter blades for their sub screws. The machines were on a restricted "do not export to the Russkies" export list, which is really what caused the hue and cry.

    11. Re:please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why's that? Because that technology might make it to a country like Iran? ummm... We have given a HUGE amount of high-tech weaponry (including jets) to Egypt over the years and THAT place is now run by the Muslim Brotherhood which has begun cozying-up to some of the worst governments on Earth (including Iran). Israel is not the only country to let this happen... during the cold war, a Japanese firm intentionally transferred American nuclear submarine propeller technology directly to Russia, which resulted in the American taxpayer spending BILLIONS of new dollars to improve our ability to detect the newer quieter Russian subs and to make ours even more quiet.

      So... is it that you oppose helping Egypt and Saudi Arabia and others (anybody who might let our tech slip out to our enemies) as well, OR are you just using this incident to disguise a personal predisposition for Jew-hating?

      Muslims have huge swaths of land and many nations, rich with natural resources. The Jews (who have repeatedly faced threats and actual attempts of genocide) have only one tiny country, and it seems to be on the only middle-eastern soil that's not floating on oil (smile) so it's always interesting to see the warped and evil mindset of the irrational freaks who want to eliminate them. I'm not Jewish... I'm just a rational human who is fascinated by the freakish irrational behavior of Jew haters... it seems like every evil person on Earth hates Jews, even if they've never met one...

      We sold Iran a bunch of F-14 Tomcats in the late 70's early80's when the shaw was allied with us ( before he was overthrown by the iotola). As far as the early model 16's and f 15 engines ( not sure why they differentiate them because they use the same engine) there were only two; the pratt and whitney and GE model which were more or less interchangeble depending on few details. All I know is we phased out our A model 16's in the early 90's. They were wore out and outdated then. We make alot of money by selling our old used fighters to foreign countries. But we left out the important stuff. It's not the engines that make the bird. it's the fire control computers and weapon systems that we don't let go of.. it will takeoff fly and shoot old AIM 9's but that's about it. It's still the modern fire conrol systems and intensive recurrent pilot training that make the difference. As far as Isreal they are the only allied country in that region. and personally every Jew I know is no different than the rest of us. Just a different religion.

    12. Re:please clarify by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Right now they act like they can do whatever they want, and we will still back them no matter what. This is actually the case, and it doesn't make sense.

      No, as long as they pursue our agenda in the region, we will back them no matter what. You don't think the western world is benefiting?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's probably Zionist gangsters that are stealing the equipment. Just like the Israeli government steals billions of dollars from the American taxpayer every year. Zionist gangsters and Israeli government, one in the same.

    14. Re:please clarify by caseih · · Score: 1

      Hmm I guess being critical of Israeli policies gets one modded down. Kind of proves my point I guess. Sad, really. Next time instead of blindly modding me down because you disagree with me, try addressing my points.

    15. Re:please clarify by Quila · · Score: 2

      It's kind of hard to move in the direction of peace when the other side has as its main goal the goal destruction of your country. Any time the Jews take one step, the other side wants another and another and another, without themselves giving up anything except a temporary (it's always temporary) halt to attacks on Jewish civilians.

      The Jews living in Israel under their own laws is offensive to most of the Muslims in the area. The country MUST become Muslim, the Jews killed, expelled (as they were from most ther Muslim countries) or subjugated.

    16. Re:please clarify by jackbird · · Score: 1

      We give both Israel and Egypt billions in foreign aid as an incentive to maintain the peace of the Camp David accords. Also, the foreign aid consists of gift certificates to ATK, Lockheed Martin, etc. so the treasury is actually being emptied into the pockets of domestic war profiteers rather than actually sent overseas.

    17. Re:please clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You show a profound lack of understanding of geopolitics. For hundreds of years the middle east was a single, massive, authoritarian state that was an existential threat to Europe, and definitely more powerful than the Western world. Now it's in shambles thanks to Ottoman mismanagement. Many of the various muslim regimes and groups seek to reunite the muslim work into a single caliphate once again. A substantial problem in this goal is Israel, a small state but easily the most powerful militarily, which being in the middle frustrates any attempts at consolidation.

      Or, if you don't to consider long term strategic goals of the US, how about keeping peace there? While there's continuous ongoing conflict in the eastern Meditteranean, the reality is that that conflict is notably low level intensity when compared to the 50's, 60's, and 70's, when Israel was engaged in all-out warfare against it's muslim neighbors. Now you primarily deal with non-state groups launching rockets at Israel, an annoyance but hardly an existential threat. This is due to the fact that we bought off the Egyptian military with about $1.2B in aid every year, and we support the Israeli military through huge aid grants, so the most powerful Arab nation won't attack Israel and the rest (Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon) are too weak to win. So an area that had 20-30 years of high intensity modern all-out warfare has been reduced to low intensity conflict and an annoyance of terrorism. Not a bad deal for about $2.5-$3B/year (total aid to Israel and Egypt), and a lot of that money comes back to the US to defense contractors in the form of weapons supplies. Sounds a lot better than an all out conflict requiring UN Peacekeepers who fail at everything or a US military sending in troops to halt the fighting.

    18. Re:please clarify by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "BTW, all forms of racism are born of ignorance, so don't think that I'm Jew hating."

      Superstition is not Race. It is ideology which one may doff, don, or modify as their fantasy suits them.

      Any doubts? Explain Sammy Davis Jr's conversion to Judaism.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  23. here's what happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they sold them to the Chinese and make it look like "theft". It's a warning, they will sell the rest of our tech to China if we don't toe the line.

  24. How could they be stolen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    There arent black guys or mexicans in israel. /ba-dum-tish

    1. Re:How could they be stolen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cunning Jews stole the Israeli engine to take over the Israeli government. Mark my words, their next Prime Minister will be Jewish.

  25. Is slashdot the problem here? by Isaac+Remuant · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that this reflects a problem on those organizations. Not Slashdot.

    My advice, come up with a wikileaks blocker and use it. Why deprive ANYONE else of a link just because?

    Another thing. If you're at work, why browse slashdot at work? :P If you're at home, why is it that your employers control what you can or can not read in your house? It's public info.

    --
    "Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
    1. Re:Is slashdot the problem here? by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Add Wikileaks to adblock and be done with it if you work for such an organization. Don't ask the rest of the world to censor itself for you.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    2. Re:Is slashdot the problem here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually govt employees and contractors can't click the link at home either. If it's classified then it's classified. And they've agreed not to see or hear classified info that they don't need to know.
      They probably can't read these comments too. Or else u get fired and only the dimwits remain at the job. But if you're bright enough then you've left already. See? That's one big reason the US govt is the way it is..
      True story.

    3. Re:Is slashdot the problem here? by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      With regard to classified information. Anyone with a clearance has the legal obligation to not access or attempt to access classified information for which they do not have a need to know and clearance to access. Legally, all classified information remains classified until it is officially unclassified. Until then, cleared individuals have a legal obligation to not access that information. Even if it is publicly released, it remains classified, and thus, effectively radioactive to anyone with a clearance.

      No one is asking for the site to be blocked, but identifying it as wikileaks would be a very nice thing to do for the people who wish to avoid that site.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
  26. Does not solve the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even if the US used NO oil at all, we'd still be all entangled in the middle east... because we have many allies who are (and will be for many decades) fully dependent upon that oil. We could be sitting happily in the US with our own oil, coal, nuclear, wind, hydro, solar, etc energy and yet our economy could crash because our allies and trading partners crash in response to somebody like Iran choking-off middle east oil. Even if our allies in Europe got off oil from the middle east and instead got it from Russia, they'd leave themselves vulnerable to Russian blackmail and without a readily-available supply of middle east oil as a backup things would still be a mess. Our Asian allies need it. Even China, not an "ally" but certainly a trading partner, is becoming more-dependent upon middle-east oil (one reason they will feel increasingly driven to build-up a blue water navy) and will therefore make Americans worry about the region even if we do not directly use its oil. Quite simply, middle east oil is a vital part of world markets no matter how much or how little the US uses.

    1. Re:Does not solve the problem by Dan667 · · Score: 3, Informative

      don't care. Let them fend for themselves. Maybe if everyone in the middle east has to use the same sticks and stones to kill each other they would think twice.

    2. Re:Does not solve the problem by Swampash · · Score: 3, Funny

      But... but... if the Jews don't hold Jerusalem that means Jebus won't come back! Israel must have the full economic and military support of the USA or Jebus will stay away!

    3. Re:Does not solve the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      (please lie to me and tell me this doesn't constitute official Republican policy)

    4. Re:Does not solve the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't care. Let them fend for themselves. Maybe if everyone in the middle east has to use the same sticks and stones to kill each other they would think twice.

      Supporting one dickhead for decades while they kill off their neighbors and then letting them fall. Yes, nothing can go wrong with that plan.

    5. Re:Does not solve the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My magic underwear told me that Jebus is returning to Missouri.

    6. Re:Does not solve the problem by Hillgiant · · Score: 1

      Perhaps not in so many words, but this is the basis of much of their support.

      --
      -
    7. Re:Does not solve the problem by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      How bad of a crash are you willing to take for that little piece of ego boosting?

      Because if you think that your current way of life comes purely from US and not from extremely lucrative, essentially colonial exploitation of 3rd world, you are going to hit a wall or reality running.

    8. Re:Does not solve the problem by Dan667 · · Score: 1

      your trying to argue that exploitation of third world countries is ok?

    9. Re:Does not solve the problem by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      About as much as you're arguing that everyone will be happy to accept complete economic collapse of their country in the style of pre-WW2 Germany.

    10. Re:Does not solve the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oil is a global resource.

      Imagine for a moment that the US is fully self-sufficient in all its fuel, energy and food needs, with a small surplus for export. Then $SHIT goes down in the Middle East and the world supply of oil outside the USA is cut by two-thirds. Overnight, world oil prices skyrocket.

      Now: do you really imagine that the companies sucking the stuff out of Texas are going to keep selling it to Americans at the pre-crisis price, when they could make five times that amount by shipping it to Europe or Asia?

      Energy independence is a good thing because it means no other country can use that particular hold to threaten you. But it doesn't mean you can ignore the rest of the world.

  27. PW F100 used in both F-15 and F-16 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    F-15 and F-16 use the same engines F100 bult by Pratt & Whitney. So the articles need not make a distinction what aircraft they go in.

    1. Re:PW F100 used in both F-15 and F-16 by Nimey · · Score: 2

      No, some blocks of F-16s use GE F110 engines instead, which are more advanced. The only reason that some C-model F-16s use F100s is because some asshole senator decided it was more important for his district to get money than it was for DoD to save the cost of a second superfluous engine program.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
  28. Tinfoil Oragami by CanadianRealist · · Score: 4, Funny

    Heavy is the head that wears the tinfoil hat.

    Maybe try using a bit less tinfoil next time. The whole roll is definitely too much. If you learn to fold it just right and not wrinkle it you can make a really good hat from a small piece of tinfoil.

    1. Re:Tinfoil Oragami by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instructions here:

      http://www.ehow.com/how_2049858_make-tinfoil-hat.html

    2. Re:Tinfoil Oragami by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do we have a penetration depth formula to calculate the thickness of the hat? How do we know that using the entire roll is effective?

  29. LOL @ Italy by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

    "the lease is up" - color them red.

    Really? You can lease a warplane? I suppose they bought "gap" insurance too.

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  30. Endemic Corruption by MarkvW · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How your American tax dollars are spent by Israel.

    1. Re:Endemic Corruption by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

      Endemic Corruption - How your American tax dollars are spent by Israel.

      Fascinating. And you know this how?

      You're assuming that those jets were not ones the Israelis purchased? Do you have any grounds for that?

      Were these jet engines stolen at an American Air Force base due to "endemic corruption," or the activity of simple thieves?
      HAFB THIEVES CANNOT SET THE VALUE OF 3 STOLEN JET ENGINES, SAYS JUDGE

      Do you have equal concerns about Venezuela and Iran? Or just the Jewish state?

      Do you think Israel is less corrupt, as corrupt, or more corrupt than Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Palestinian Authority, all of whom receive large amounts of US aid?

      Speaking of endemic:
      Rising Anti-Semitism on the Left
      The European Left and Its Trouble With Jews
      The Full-Blown Return of Anti-Semitism in Europe

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  31. War is peace! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Freedom is slavery!
    Ignorance is strength!

  32. Point of information: by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 4, Informative

    Contrary to what you'd think from what politicians say, Israel is not a treaty ally.

    1. Re:Point of information: by deburg · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Anyway, considering all the TLC that US has been treating Israel to, you'd think they (Israel) is from sort of protectorate (like Purta Rico) or favorite trading partner.

      Hence all the conspiracy theories I'd keep hearing about. Seriously, Illuminati? US Senate are all Jews? What the heck have my country mates been drinking?

  33. things that make you go hmmm... by v1 · · Score: 2

    Israeli officials played down the loss, saying the engines were old or retired and likely stolen for scrap.

    hmmm...

    In 2009, two F-5 engines were stolen from an airbase in Malaysia, tracked to Argentina and ultimately located in Uruguay.

    Wow those scrappers sure can go to great lengths to fence their scrap!

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:things that make you go hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      When all the Jews were pulled out of Gaza, including their dead bodies out of the local cemeteries, state-of-the art farming, greenhouses and light industrial complexes were left behind. Within a few weeks they were completely destroyed, torn up for scrap by thieves. Before the separation fence was built, Israel was pretty close to the top in car thefts, mostly for parts and scrap, all driven across the "green line" into the West Bank. The fence and checkpoints slowed that down, as well as putting a stop to the almost daily bombings and murders in the area. I live in a tiny desert community far away from everything, and we just had 10 SUV-type cars stolen in one night a few months ago. A new hotel being built here was held up for over a year because all of the tile and wood was stolen from the site. The entire southern part of the country was offline for several days because several kilometers worth of phone line was pulled down and stolen. Farmers are routinely robbed of vehicles, tools, equipment, animals; one Jewish shepherd just had his entire flock of 400 sheep stolen a few nights ago. Fences don't do any good since they'll steal the fence, too. If you get dogs, they'll either steal or poison the dogs. It's a fact of life here.

    2. Re:things that make you go hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There have been some domestic air vehicle manufacturing in the South America of some time already. I'm not sure how far they have gone at this stage.

  34. Not quite right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's public info.

    Whatever you may think of Wikileaks, clearly this is not public info. It is publicly accessible but it plainly says right on the document: CONFIDENTIAL. For those who are held to an expectation of respect for that classification, just viewing it accidentally is as bad as being entirely incompetent.

    1. Re:Not quite right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Publicly available means the info is now public, regardless of prior classification.

    2. Re:Not quite right by tibman · · Score: 1

      lol, actually it is STILL confidential.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    3. Re:Not quite right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep sucking that long hard cock. Only an idiot or a sycophant would accept that something that has had broad public exposure is somehow "confidential".

    4. Re:Not quite right by tibman · · Score: 1

      It's a title, not a state. Though i'm sure that's the desired state. Asshole : )

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    5. Re:Not quite right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clue x4: The government treats it as a state and attempts to force others to accept that it is in that state, in spite of how fucking ridiculous it is, dumbshit.

    6. Re:Not quite right by tibman · · Score: 1

      Attempts to force it's (paid) employees to accept that state. Even if the rest of the world doesn't. Kind of like how you and your friends say you smell okay but everyone else has another thought on that matter : P

      Whether you agree with me or not. The title is still confidential and gov employees who shouldn't read it, still can not read it. Especially while at work.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
  35. irritating israel is a US friend by Dan667 · · Score: 0, Troll

    the israelis do nothing more than incite violence, create problem, and do everything a friend would not do to the US.

    1. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      when has israel ever incited violence. really are u that dumb.
      israel doesnt need violence, its a productive society and a world leader in innovation, and not stolen rip off innovations steve jobs style.
      it only does wat it has todo , to protect itself.
      its surrounded by enemies that do watever they can in their power to make israel suffer. from political attacks, to physical attacks.
      the only violence israel is ever involved in, is with its neighboring aggressors.
      and even then, they try to minimize casualties, when all the muslims try todo, is to use human shields, that make israel look bad to retards that think they attacking civilians.
      when has israel created problems for the US.
      infact they are alot nicer to the US than the US has been to them.
      the real problem, is the global muslim conspiracy, to undermine western civilization with their medieval nonesense.
      as a whole, muslims are useless ppl. especially in muslim countries, that do nothing for anyone, even themselves.
      they use their resources for evil, rather than help their own ppl.

    2. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Written by someone not used to character sets with upper and lower cases? Like Hebrew?

    3. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      english is my first language.
      i know how to use caps and proper grammer, but why would i put in the effort.
      i have limited time to read and write comments.
      so im not gonna prepare a formal letter, with proper grammer and punctuation, etc.
      i just wanna get my point across with minimal effort

    4. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      ifthat'strueyoushouldsavemoretimebyleavingoutthespaces. obviouslyit'samuchmoreefficientuseofyourprecioustime.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    5. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i would, but at some level, im already used to using spaces.
      so as a matter of convenience, using spaces, is more time/energy efficient for me, and increases clarity for the audience.
      capitalization ruins the balance of convenience/clarity.

      getting back to the original post about char sets. that person is implying that im a hebrew, and thats why i think that way, rather than addressing the point im trying to make, with logic and reason.

    6. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      You know, I do a lot reading of 20th century history, and this comment would not be out of place in Bavaria 1936.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    7. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So? Written by someone who won't address an argument if made by someone who's language is Hebrew.. That makes you a - ..... you guessed it - Racist.

    8. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by no+bloody+nickname · · Score: 1

      Mel Gibson is that you?

    9. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by Dan667 · · Score: 1

      godwin, is that you?

    10. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by Dan667 · · Score: 1

      israel could let Palestine form their own country, but they won't because they want to steal Palestinian Land. The houses israel authorized in occupied Palestine after the UN vote for Palestinian statehood could not have framed the problem that is israel any better.

    11. Re:irritating israel is a US friend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      obviouslyit'samuchmoreefficientuseofyourprecioustime.

      howdareyouwastemytimebymakingmereadapostrophes

  36. Mod me "Obvious" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    USofA

  37. I'll be watching ... by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... next summer's SeaFair hydro races with renewed interest.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  38. This has happened at least once before by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In 2000 there was a US Senate inquiry into how a classified targeting system in tanks was given to Israel, stolen by some criminals there, sold to China, then onsold to Iran. The government in Israel wasn't too happy about that stuff ending up in Iran either (especially since Iran gives away their obsolete rockets to people that keep shooting them at Israel).
    So it's not really about Israel, but instead some crooks that just happen to live there.

    1. Re:This has happened at least once before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      u make me laugh hahahahahah

  39. calling bullshit on the OP. by nimbius · · Score: 1

    'They're still more modern than anything in the Iranian air force inventory, and they would even be helpful to China in their jet engine development

    No, they arent the mig 29 is a newer and arguably better aircraft than the F16 could ever hope to be. and if that isnt 'modern' enough, the SU 30's bolstering the Iranian air force sport avionics alone that make the F16 look like a model T.
    chinas current fleet of J series aircraft are powered by the Saturn AL-31 or domestically produced clones with nothing except the turboblades imported. it has 27,600lbs of thrust, compared to the emaciated 17,600lbs of thrust for the pratt and whitney powering the F16.
    in summation: Israel is bang on, the F16 has been a collectors item for quite some time.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:calling bullshit on the OP. by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      hahah, thats pretty funny.

      The Mig 29 and SU 30s are rather a joke. They are really upgrades from older aircraft rather than new designs.

      F-16s regularly beat the every living shit out of 'newer' aircraft in simulated combat. You seem to think the F-16s that the US and Israel use are from the original models. They aren't. Israel's specifically are using some of the most advanced avionics on the planet.

      The ORIGINAL F16s had 23,500lbs of thrust ..., they were given 29,500 in the 90s, Newer models have 32,500 pounds of thrust.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    2. Re:calling bullshit on the OP. by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      The ORIGINAL F16s had 23,500lbs of thrust ..., they were given 29,500 in the 90s, Newer models have 32,500 pounds of thrust.

      Well, like you said, "they are really upgrades from older aircraft rather than new designs".

      What goes around, comes around.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  40. Great News by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

    yeah lets give more shit to Israel, they are such a great friend - if they aren't stealing our technology outright they are either losing it or selling it off.

    1. Re:Great News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean lets not give the technology to Israel, and lose all the technology we get from them? Cause you know - it is not a one way street...
      Also, US is selling Israel jets cause if it didn't Israel won't scrap its own fighter jet program, and to day would have competed with US for export. Things aren't always as trivial as they seem from your armchair.

    2. Re:Great News by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      Compete with stolen technology? Israel is nothing more than a bunch of thieves who have been spying on the US and our defense industry since day one. Israel can barely keep their economy afloat let alone compete with the US defense industry. One thing that does not separate the Jews from their hated semite arab brothers is being braggarts.

  41. F-14 Tomcat engines aren't modern enough? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'They're still more modern than anything in the Iranian air force inventory'

    Yes, except for the F-14's we GAVE THEM (with engines).

    I think we should put a small gamma-source in each turbine spindle, so we can track them more easily.

  42. How the hell does one lose F-16 engines? by overmoderated · · Score: 1

    Oops, I lost my F-16 engine. I can't remember where I put it.

  43. Remember this is Israel by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    They have a history of funneling our technology to the highest bidder. My only doubt is usually after they do it they tell our politicians to fuck off or AIPAC will visit your opponent's campaign office next election.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  44. This is why by kiriath · · Score: 1

    We can't have nice things!

  45. Religion? by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

    What does religion exactly have to do with jet engines?

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
  46. Jet engines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well if I were the agent in charge the first place I would check would be Jay Leno's garage. He's got every other souped up vehicle ever made, but two jet engines on a 1968 Chevy Impala would be way cool.....

  47. Translation to english. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We had some old engines, being jews we seen we could make a lot of money selling them to Iran the Chinese anyone else with plans for world conquest.

  48. Bling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bling the crackhead is heading to the scrap metal yard to get paid!!!!

  49. Do not believe fairy tales from the "chosen" ones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "chosen" tribe sold those engines to China and are now inventing fairy tales about scrap-metal scavenging arab infiltrating their super-reinforced airbases.

    Said tribe already sold the Lavi fighter jet prototype to China (that after USA paid them with 104 brand new "military aid" F-16I Sufa fighter jets to discontinue the Lavi development. Pentagon was extremely enraged about the Lavi sale that later became the chinese J-10 jet and wanted sanctions, but the Manhattan bankers told them to shut up or watch the USD skydive.)

  50. USA support of isreal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it is isreal selling the tech tp other country as they do not respect their friends. USA keep supporting Isreal and after some time u have to deal with Chaina

  51. F16 engines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Police are on the lookout for a 19 yo kid with a 400 mph hot-rod.

  52. Wild guess by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

    Let me guess : the Mossad will "find" engine parts in Teheran, Gaza stripe & Mevaseret Adumim.
    The obvious answer would be to bomb Iran, to drop white phosphorous bombs and shrapnel bullets against the civilian population of Gaza and create a new settlement in E1.

    Given the record of Mossad, Bibi and Liebermann, it might not be such a crazy idea.
    Problem is, Hamas leaders are just as bonkers.

  53. Simple explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One word......Decepticons!

  54. The IDF have also lost 1500 tank shells by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone has now got a useful collection of material for some serious IEDs

  55. Sounds like Mossad's arms dealing tricks to me by DABANSHEE · · Score: 1

    Remember Israel was even caught out dealer arms to both sides in the Sri Lankan civil war at the same time.

  56. Bus versus Formula One by sjbe · · Score: 1

    If we're so worried about China getting our jet engine tech (and we probably should be), then why is GE allowed to be in a joint Chinese venture to make engines?

    The difference in those technologies is the difference between a bus engine and the engine in a Formula One car. Just because you know how the bus engine works doesn't mean you can build a Formula One engine.

  57. Makes you wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Israelis are paranoid about security, their seucity systems and measures are second to none.

    This makes you suspect some sort of false flag op could be cooking...

  58. Rope and commies by sjbe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because as Lenin said: "Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them"

    And how well did that work out for Lenin do you think? It seems to me that the necks of the capitalist pigs are still quite intact.

    1. Re:Rope and commies by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      Because as Lenin said: "Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them"

      And how well did that work out for Lenin do you think? It seems to me that the necks of the capitalist pigs are still quite intact.

      You confuse the fate of the individuals with the fate of the ideology, sir.

    2. Re:Rope and commies by ibsteve2u · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that the necks of the capitalist pigs are still quite intact.

      lollll...only 'cuz Immelt controls a "corporate person", and that "corporate person" can afford to buy America's politicians in bulk.

      The generals who know damned good and well that they will have to watch their men die because of Immelt's betrayals in the here and now work for those politicians, and so they know their hands - and the hands of the intelligence community - are well and thoroughly tied.

      I.e., capitalism - as re-corrupted since 1980 by the modern American right - is a self-betraying system; it ensures that the hog trough is crowded with both corporate and political leaders - and the PRC plays it well.

      --
      Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
  59. F-16 stolen Engins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are in China being copied to the last nut & bolt and sold back to the US aircraft manufactures for 1/3 the price, so you can say that they are not really outsourcing US jobs.

  60. Military Supply by jasper160 · · Score: 1

    Half of them are thieves, the others are too lazy to care.

    --
    No good deed goes unpunished.
  61. jews... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't hate Jews but dislike them as much as I dislike the Catholic institution for hiding the child sex abuses. I suppose I dislike the zionists who will go at any length to justify their takeover of Palestinians, and call anyone who disagree with them as anti-semitic.

    Do I hang out with Catholics and Jews? Yes. I respect their religious beliefs. I don't respect their institutions and political pull, however.

  62. Fox News by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    Only LOOKS conservative....due to the liberal bias of the rest of the news organizations.

  63. F-16s/GE F110 engines being stolen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Israel won't feel the pain of F-16s/GE F110 engines being stolen after all these were American gifts.

  64. f-15 engines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like official corruption.
    Reminds me of the South Vietnamese govt and the nationalist chinese govt before it.
    Someone needs to go to jail

  65. schpreaken? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ich been dier chrome dinette?

  66. Chinese Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Chinese care not about these old F-16 engines. The Chinese are so far ahead of US engineer building on generation 3 aircraft that it would be the same as you turning in your 2012 Mercedes keys and trade the Mercedes for a 2005 Camry................In case you haven't noticed by now the Chinese have a better 5th generation stealth fighter jet; better than our F-22 and this is fact. They do not need our old F-16 engines however Iran does and this probably who has it.

  67. What a bunch of liars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article should read... Israeli's are lying back stabbers who sold the engines to China

  68. made business for themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They probably sold it to some outsiders to make some more money so they can get additional funding from the USA

  69. Missing Jet Engine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you check out Craigslist???

  70. Fair and balanced by Quila · · Score: 1

    Note, not fair and balanced within itself, it's obviously wildly on the right. But it provides a fair balance for the blatantly far-left media outlet MSNBC and the rest that are generally left-leaning (CBS, etc.).

    But I'd bet you'd just like the airwaves to be filled with the leftist echo chamber, with no challenging viewpoints.

    1. Re:Fair and balanced by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      *sigh*

      Please, re-read my last sentence. Maybe read it twice. How might you construe what I have actually posted as approving of the left's mass media propaganda? I find them to be only slightly less revolting than Faux Noise.

      It often seems that people are intentionally obtuse. This looks like one of those instances.

      The problem is the divisiveness. During the election, the left put out plenty of nonsense indicating that a Republican victory would send us back in time to about the twelfth century. The right positively stated that a Democratic victory would mean the end of the civilized world, the collapse of the United States, and possibly even the end of life as we know it.

      I have problems with both sides of that issue.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    2. Re:Fair and balanced by Quila · · Score: 1

      I have problems with both sides of that issue.

      Yet I hear Faux Noise, but no PMSNBC. It's funny how people are so adamant about the effects of this one news network and rail against it, when there are at least four major US news networks in opposition from far left to slightly left.

    3. Re:Fair and balanced by mk1004 · · Score: 1

      Yes, they must all have been CX debaters: Vote for my side or it all ends in Global Nuclear War.

      --
      I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
  71. Downgraded engines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No big deal. Israeli F-16 don't run the same engines as they do in the US. They run 40+ year old technology. Maybe even older.

  72. See what happens when you don't secure stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mexicans will steel anything

  73. US missiles and avionics are made in Israel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The reason the US is giving away these jets to Israel is so Israel wouldn't manufacture its own planes (it used to and made pretty amazing planes for their time).

  74. F-16 Engine Theft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even as scrap metal they are worth several hundred thousand dollas because of the exotic materials used assuming you know someone with a high capacity electron furnace to melt them down with.

    The air seals and turbine blades are worthless but the compressor, shaft and bearings may still be good, then again who will you sell these to Big Lots?

    All parts are laser marked and uniquely identified. So good luck pawning them.

    No one noticed several semi-truck loads of materials sneaking away?

    I hope they keep their plutonium pits under better guard.

  75. Not the first time this has happened... by bobthesungeek76036 · · Score: 1

    I remember reading a story about a couple of F-16 engines being hi-jacked from Ogden AFB years ago. We expected to see something akin to the Darwin Award story about the dude that hooked up C-130 jetos to his car and plowed into the side of a mountain not soon after...

    --
    Karma: Bad
  76. Engine parts, not engines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One advantage of reading Hebrew (disclaimer, I am an Israeli) is that you get somewhat more complete versions of these stories.
    Here's a summary of one version from Maariv, one of the daily newspapers - http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/420/687.html
    The thieves took 9 metal rings, each 1m in diameter.
    It's not clear whether they were not in fact misplaced within the base.
    Theft of metal in Israel is quite common, especially of scrap metal from army bases, which are sprawling affairs.
    No one took 9 complete engines out of the base. The guards are stupid, but not that stupid.

  77. Now wait a minute by boddhisatva · · Score: 1

    An F-16 engine is about 65% of an F-16 by weight & volume. It's a single engine plane. It's an engine with wings and a chair tied to the top. Can I put on a set of coveralls that say "Al's Jet Engine Repair", drive with in with a 1987 flatbed truck, borrow a forklift from a line mechanic, load 'em and drive away? How stupid is the Israeli military? Not very. How corrupt is the Israeli government? Very. Most Israeli's think so. Is everyone afraid that some higher up was responsible and doesn't want to know? Israel may have it's precarious position compromised by the greed of its own people. Take everyone on duty that night and put their feet in a tub with a chironex fleckeri, commonly known as a sea wasp, a species of box jellyfish. They will tell you everything they know and make up what they don't. Sort out the facts and do the same at the next level. When you get to the top, recover the engines. After you do or if you don't, take the top guys out in the desert and shoot them. Don't bury them. Let it be known that they were shot, not buried and and animals are currently splitting up the bodies based on how big and how mean the animals are. Doing this once should put an end to this bullshit.

  78. The number one mistake is trusting Israel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why anybody would consider them more trustworthy than Iran or China is something of a mystery. Israel has proven itself to be perhaps the most duplicitous outfit ever.

  79. typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    typical Israel selling secrets behind our backs to other contries. Just like the deal they made during the kennedy administration to get a nuclear bomb from China and then Kennedy was killed. Cant trust them.

  80. Stolen Aircraft engines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aw c'mon; there can be no sympathy for professional thieves. Is all of Israel corrupt?

  81. lots of bs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jews always want to make news even though they stole them and put them somewhere and they need a scapegoat and that is Iran ............and and excuse for jews to attack iran...........nothing new.......same shit just after years after years

  82. jet engines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hehehe some retard will probably strap one to his car and try to lauch himself into orbit heheheheheheehheeh dumb kids hahahahahahaha

  83. Stolen F-16 engines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find this one really hard to believe. Having worked int the Arcraft Industry for many years, I know that you cannot hide the engine in your vest pocket. SO! How the hell do you get these engines out withoue being seen? You teleportation them to Iran, ho else could you do it? Those damn Iranians stealling our ideas again, first our drone, no engines, what next our wives?

  84. Ignore deliberate communications breakdowns by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but "most people" don't agree on the meanings of just about anything when it is convenient to do so. Relativism can just go fuck itself - experts know more than non-experts about the subject they have expertise in so there's no need to pretend that the definitions they put forward are "unclear" just because people are don't like it when minor aspects of a different ideology also occur in their own.
    This sort of relativism bullshit has been especially rampant while PR agencies are pretending climate experts do not know any more than non-experts, but it's been around for a while and really is an major inpediment to an informed democratic society (or if the leaders believe this bullshit and ignore their experts, any society).

  85. Horse bolted by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Searching probably won't help now, and they are not going to be doing it with every shipping container from now on to forever.

  86. Not accurate by DoriH · · Score: 1

    It wasn't F-16 engines, it was just specific parts