Any transaction involving critical infrastructure or technologies should be subjected to heightened scrutiny; particularly, where the real parties in interest are foreign governments. If the DoD did make a national security determination, we should know that and the basis for their determination, and if not, why not. If Airbus had tried to enter the US market through the front door by acquiring an interest in Northrop Grumman, the transaction would have been subjected to a CFIUS review.
There are only two countries that have the ability to project force around the world - Russia and the US - and tankers are the key. Why would we want to put that capability in the hands of others.
He added: "It strikes me as absolutely absurd that the US would give an award to Airbus at the same time that the US has a huge trade case against the Europeans for subsidizing Airbus."
Of course a Boeing man will put forward's Boeing's point-of-view, but these are all compelling points to which I invite the response of Airbus fans.
In the meantime, though, the issue will become a factor in the politics of 2008. It seems likely that voters will react to this deal as they did to the ill-fated Dubai ports deal of two year ago. Americans believe in free trade, and they certainly welcome economic growth.
But they have a deep belief in maintaining a vibrant, independent defense sector, of which Boeing has always been a leading participant.
Showdown in Jackson Hole: The Fed Challenged on its Own Turf in Wyoming by Group Likely to Finally Start Dismantling it | Rachel Alexander