SENATE BILL: Atlasia-Israel Defense and Security Cooperation Treaty (VS)

[Sbane]

Aye

[AndrewTX]

Nay

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Motion to Table the Atlasia-Israel Defense and Security Cooperation Treaty:

Aye (2): Seatown and Wormyguy
Nay (4): AndrewPA, Ben, Clarence, and Scott
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (4): ILV, NC Yankee, sbane and TJ in Cleve

With 2/3rds of those voting having voted not in the affirmative, the bill has not been tabled and debate shall resume.

[Donerail]

Frankly, given that shortly after Atlasia sold Israel a load of F-16s, the Chinese Air Force started flying a new plane... (as acknowledged by an Atlasian military report: "United States technology has been acquired through Israel in the form of the Lavi [Israeli domestic variant of the F-16] fighter and possibly SAM technology").

Taking this one section at a time...

Senator, while that is a fascinating document from 1997 and I thank you for bringing it to the attention of the body, there are a couple of issues I have with its factual accuracy (not the accuracy of the document itself, but of your notations). The Lavi, or Young Lion, developed by Israeli Aircraft Industries in the mid to late 1980s, is not the Israeli name for the F-16 Fighting Falcon (which the Israelis call Sufa, or Storm), but rather an indigenous multi-billion-dollar project, which, while innovative and groundbreaking, was cancelled due to a variety of factors (budget issues and Atlasian reluctance to fund a competitor to the F-16 on the global market being chief among them). There are currently two Lavis left in the world, one of which is at an Israeli airbase in Tel Aviv and the other in an Israeli military museum. After the cancellation of the project (ignoring South Africa's interest in the Lavi), according to some sources, China was in possession of a Lavi during Chengdu Aircraft's development of the J-10 Vigorous Dragon. However, the DoEA has not found sufficient evidence to prove these allegations; in addition, the J-10's designer Song Wencong (宋文骢), in an interview, denied any relation of the J-10 to the Lavi program, saying instead it was based on Chengdu's cancelled J-9 program. It also bears some resemblance to the MiG Ye-8. While the Lavi has a similar wing configuration and flight control system to the J-10, the Israeli government denies transferring Lavi technology to the Chinese, and testimony by Russian aerospace engineers to the contrary, we have not been able to verify any link between China's J-10 and the Lavi project.

[tpfkaw]

While the SoEA's Wikipedia research is admirable, it doesn't make him an expert on military aircraft.  It is a frequent marketing tactic for local manufacturers of foreign weaponry to claim theirs is "different," when in fact it is largely or entirely the same.  The Lavi is clearly F-16-based, with a delta instead of conventional wing and some Israeli avionics (using Atlasian technology).  Similarly, the other "unique" plane produced by Israeli Aircraft Industries, the Kfir, is a copy of the French Mirage V.  Whatever the case, China has produced a near-exact copy (with slight, mainly cosmetic modifications) of the F-16 in the J-10, as I demonstrated earlier, and our own Navy is confident enough to call out Israel as the culprit by name in an official, declassified report (which implies complete certitude given the potential diplomatic issues involved in such an accusation).

Images for reference

F-16:



Lavi:

[Donerail]

Since the Senator seems to so like his images, here is the IAI Lavi (first image) compared to other jets of the period (including the F-16 and J-10, 2nd and 3rd images respectively). The fifth is a Yugoslav Novi Avion, the sixth a Dassault Rafael, the seventh a Saab Viggen, and the eighth an Eurofighter Typhoon. Tossed in a Kfir last so you could get a look at that too. As you can see, the aircraft of this time did tend to have common design features, sometimes including a delta wing, sometimes including canards, etc.

[tpfkaw]

I'm not really seeing the gentleman's point; his diagrams indicate that the F-16/Lavi/J-10 are all very similar in design (obviously), while the others are substantially different (also, obvious).

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

We're getting off topic...

[Donerail]

I'm not really seeing the gentleman's point; his diagrams indicate that the F-16/Lavi/J-10 are all very similar in design (obviously), while the others are substantially different (also, obvious).

My point is that they are all different but all have common design features; while the F-16, Lavi, and J-10 are very similar in design, so are the others. They're all about the same amount of difference from each other.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Is that all?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I'd like to see a final vote.

[CLARENCE 2015!]

As would I... I believe it's clear that Senators will be voting on this legislation based upon their opinions of Israel coming into this bill- that goes for me too

I plan to vote Aye to support the nation I believe to be one of our most important allies

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators this bill is now at final vote, please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

AYE

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Nay.

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Aye

[Sbane]

Nay

[tmthforu94]

Should there be a tie, I'd like to make my intentions known that I would vote in favor of the treaty.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

I support this as a supporter of Israel. But with a caveat that this treaty must have in it a clause that that says that the sovreginity of either Israel or Atlasia can not be compromised by the other in the fulfilling of said treaty

[AndrewTX]

Aye

[ilikeverin]

Nope

[TJ in Oregon]

Aye, but I definitely had to think a little bit about this one...

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Aye

I support this as a supporter of Israel. But with a caveat that this treaty must have in it a clause that that says that the sovreginity of either Israel or Atlasia can not be compromised by the other in the fulfilling of said treaty

Such would had to have been offered as an amendment before the final vote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote is 5-3 currently.

Seatown and Wormyguy have yet to vote.

[Torie]

Aye, but I definitely had to think a little bit about this one...

Were you clear in your mine just why it is necessary now to move from a de facto to a de jure alliance with Israel? Just what does that accomplish specifically on the ground in the Mideast?