I say that we protect our workers int he US, defense contracts should be kept home grown and not awared out of country. With the economic downturn, we need to look after US companies, employees and the our own economy before anyone elses. I know that the UK will complain, but hey..who gives cares

Mark Paton, Fairfield, USA

A contract is a contract not something to be tossed around by lobbyists and presidential candidates. The best plane was chosen fairly and, Shane of NC, US jobs were part of the UK deal.

You cannot be the world's policeman (politically) and an isolationist (US trade policy) at the same time.

Tony Campbell, Northampton, UK

Taxpayers money being used to bail out another underperforming, fat, lazy, private corporation. So much for 'free' market capitalism!! Privatise the profits and socalise the losses. Typical!

Ronan, Dublin, Ireland

What country hasn't used political influence to protect domestic jobs? It happens all the time. If the US wants to build its own military hardware, why should that be an issue? This is American taxpayer money after all. Seems to me it was stupid to bid the contract in the first place.

J. Cade, Knoxville, USA

Good for you america I wish the UK would have the back bone to look after the people of the England, All we get is a goverment who tell us big fibs, and increases taxes but they can't run an effective goverment, come on Gordon start looking after us, and stop increasing taxes by stealth

Stephen Haigh, Bourne, England

Look how the US emerged from WWII. Industry intact, dollar, reserve currency. Moving towards world domination. Of course US Authority sold the US public a very different, altruistic version which most believe to this day. Reality was rather different. Blown it now by shooting themselves in the foot.

Andrew Milner, Karuizawa, Japan

I used to attend the Farnborough airshow in the 60s when Britain was a world leader and innovator.remember the Short SC1 ? Someone in Government changed all that and we then bought from the US.
Time for ALL countries to invest in themselves and buy local,Yanks included and boost our own economies

Michael W, Telford, UK

Not a surprise to me! Anyone working for US defense contracts needs to have security clearance and is a US citizen. As for the statement, US military equipment inferior? Last time I checked no country can compare to the US military's latest technological advances,a lot of it the public doesn't know!

Arlene, LA,

Fair enough if the US wants to buy its own product, however inferior, but come on, do not pin the badge of free trade on them, because as anyone who has ever tried to break into the American market with any product will tell you, it aint true.

Martin, Hemel Hempstead,

It's a bad idea to pull back a contract after it's awarded; but, the US needs to address the first problem. Who invited AirBus to the table anyway? I would rather have it sole-sourced than the charade of a competitve bid. For competition, NG needs to source planes from the US. That leaves us with...

Dan, Small New England Town, US

I work for a large cabin corporate aircraft manufacturer in the US and I can tell you we do not win any European Head of State aircraft request for proposals. Airbus wins hands down every time even though our aircraft is the most advantageous in every department including cost. It's politics people!

Howard , Georgia,

Nice to see a country looking after itself instead of being ruled by unelected dictatorship in Europe and an unelected ruler in the UK
Good for you America

paul, notts, uk

Boeing need to realise that they can't always be independant, that they can't ignore their neighbours from over the water. The Airbus A330 is more suited for tanker flying, while the Boeing 767 is older, and smaller.

Richard Hancock, Solihull,

There is very little honor in our Congress, and none in our Administration.

Gene, Gold River, CA, USA

Look at the GAO report. There was imbalanced communication coming from the defense dept. to the two bidders: issues in the NG bid were "helped along" while Boeing was not helped. And, NG was given extra credit for a larger plane when the RFP said no credit would be given for exceeding parameters.

JD, Columbia, MD, USA

Why shouldn't it go to Americans? It is afterall paid for by American tax payer money. It is not America's job to create jobs in the UK that is up to our government in Downing Street. Does the UK really have a leg to stand on after the botched Saudi deal. I think not.

Lauren, London,

So much for the Special Relationship.

C. Alexander Blown, Rockcliffe Park, Canada

Let's not forget that the British Goverment exerted enormous political pressure to help EDS/Airbus win this contract in the first place. The Boeing 767 actually met the target criteria better than the A330. The Airforce higher-ups did'nt want a large tanker. Thats why Boeing did'nt propose the 777.

Sidney Johns, Palm Beach Gardens, USA

If Boeing get the contract, I hope that plane will be fit for purpose. It reminds me of the Gulf War, at the last minute the US Army realised that Chemical Warfare protective suits just didn't work and as a result British factories were running 24/7 to provide the kit but they were American suits!

Graham Wharton, St. Albans, Herts, uk

Paul Goddard, Epsom, England: My father never asked for, nor did he get anything "special" in return - except, maybe, for a unmarked grave somewhere in Europe. I'd say he gave something pretty special, wouldn't you?
Y'all should read why this re-bid is taking place instead of making up stories.

Gail, Maryville, USA

There is no reason why a country shouldn,t support it,s own industry, especially with regards to arnaments, you never know who might be your enemy in the future and it would be awkard if they were your major arms supplier. Britain has ample choices of weapöns at home without alwaws buying abroad.

David, Helsinki, Finland

Neil Muphey, WickW ...et al

Actually BAE systems (a UK company) are a significant stakeholder in F-35, so the UK will directly benefit from this purchase (In fact, we will benefit more than if we went with a Eurofighter carrier variant - strange but ture)

Andy, worthing, uk

This contract was under investigation before the economic downturn. It caused a shake up within the Pentagon and another reason for Rumfield's dismissal.

Now withe the economy and presidential election I beleive that politics has entered. Let them rebid and if Airbus wins then so be it.

Tom, Leeper, U.S.A.

Strange that no-one here was at all concerned over the lack of ANY competitive bids in The Halliburton Irag contracts - but of course, that was an American company. This whole thing smacks of the same protectionism and pandering to voters that went on in the California subway contract a while back.

Bill Atkins, Rehoboth Beach, USA

Britai should cancel its involvement in the F35 program and use britsh and / or european aircratf. A navalised Typhoon and possibly upgraded harriers would more than suffice.

Neil Murphy, cromer,

I don't have a huge problem with this the US military have nearly always brought homegrown product over anyones else's. However i do think that all members of the EU should only buy military product from other EU member both as a similar policy.

Simon, Birmingham, UK

Renaguing on a contract. So the US and Russia are pretty much identical after all: not to be trusted.
Conformation, if any were needed, that the US is no friend of Europe. We should stop supporting the US in its Asian wars and get closer to our Arab friends next door.

C Smith, Norwich, UK

It is more than ironic to hear the Brits lecturing on international trade given the shameful behaviour of their companies and government regarding the Saudi Yamani contract - no UK investigation into fraud? Any action justified to secure UK jobs? And now an OECD investigation? What a joke!

kr, ny, usa

Well if the EU continues to fine MS billions of dollars (let's face it - wouldn't happen if MS was French) they can hardly be surprised if the US retaliates.

StephenB, Warwick,

Why is the UK spending billions for the US fighter JSF?

Chris, Germany,

Something similar happened recently but the other way around. Westlands had bid the EH101 as the new US Presidential helicopter and the contract was (unfairly) awarded to an American company. Westlands appealed and the Americans gave the contract to Westlands. So the US Pres wil fly in a UK helo.

Bry Barnes, Somerset, Uk

Oh Britain don't despair... Free Markets will always win...

America will be delivered an inferior product (yes it lost 4 of the 5 criteria) and probably late. (See the Boeing Japan and Italy tanker fiascos)...

Even the airforce has given Boeing a "little confidence" designation due to its past

Esteban, Brussels,

Who is paying for the US subprime? A lot of the US greed is being paid by Europe...

Nicolas, London,

Lets face it the US has NEVER done ANYTHING for Europe without putting their own interests first?

Sorry to be so frank, but that includes helping out (late) in WWII, and leaving us the bill.

Maybe they are just good salesmen, but they never give without wanting something (special) in return.

Peter GODDARD, Epsom, England, EU

Wow, so many people biting at this.

When this deal is finally concluded i just hope the SFO open an investigation into how this US deal has been brokered, seeing as the US can investigate the deals involving the UK. I would also like to know if "lobbying" is an acceptable term for "backhanders".

Adrian, Liverpool, UK

The rest of the World owns more of corporate America than the US does so . . . . . lets use that influence!

andy, london,

Fair enough if the US wants to buy home grown product, wish we had more of that attitude here. What is wrong is that this should have occurred before the event not after. Assuming Boeing does pick up the spoils I would have thought a legal action for breach would follow.

Rob, Warfield, England

Did anyone seriously think that this contract would be allowed to stand in our favour ? Wrong time wrong place. Political suicide for Obama and Mc Cain if they allowed it. Read, Mark and Learn those naive peasants among you, politicians included, who would seek to disect the BAE/Saudi contract.

Tom Scarff, Phuket, Thailand

"How often do European countries prefer their own inferior military products to the US? Nearly always why else would there be 3 European tanks."

The British, French and German main batte tanks are at least as good if not better than the American M1a2s.

Kieran, St Andrews, U.K.

well done USA your own country comes first GB plc should learn the same lesson.

Cliff Braham, Newtown, Powys

I guess we all know how this new 'competition' will end. Time that Europe shuts the door to this lot, we are a far bigger market than the US and should be able to support our own industry.

Heinz Geyer, London,

Andrew Milner of Japan:

That statement goes against the real facts of the last century. You forget Billions of dollars spent in Europe for reconstruction, hundreds of thousands of american dead, not fighting for their interest, but for others. Find a whetstone if you wish to grind an ax.

chris, phoenix, USA

Lets just stop buying american our selfs then, we will see how they like it, cancel any thing we can and if we do it right we should be able to cost them equally as many jobs in other sectors.

No on else goes to war with them and this is they way they treat us, well they can go on their own then

MR W Jones, Liverpool, England

It is nearly always the same - France, Grmany, USA always buy home made products under political pressure. The UK is the only country which believes in market forces and thereby penalises its own companmies and workers.

G Steele, Rochdale, UK

The rebid was inevitable - "Flight International" has covered in detail the irregularities for which the USAF is responsible - from stating that there was no cerdit to be given to the aircraft carrying more than the stated amount of fuel, then awarding Airbus credit, and numerous others.

Andy Dawson, Crowthorne, Berks, UK

With all this talk of inferior equipment and how great the Boeing tanker is why is it Australia and the UK MoD has chosen the same plane, A330 for their tankers, it proves it is the best choice. Surely giving the best possible equipment to our troops should be the highest priority.

Chris, London, UK

First of all this was a bid between two US. Companies Boeing and Northrop Grumman and its partner Airbus, Not as some people are stating it, Boeing versus a load of foreigners, The UK. and the EU.buy Trillions of dollars worth of products from Boeing and other US corporations. Trillions.

Peter, Vancouver. BC., Canada

This is the same thing that happened to Boeing the first time we concluded this contract. It's nothing new-Governments are fickle. I'm not sure why this surprises anyone. The two aircraft both meet the USAF target requirements, so a choice has to be made based on other criteria, like sourcing.

Matt, Chicago, IL, USA

Boeing has also built FB tankers before (The KC-135 and KC-10), unlike EADS.
Now that the USAF has thoroughly shafted both companies, the third run-through should be fair. I'm sure the best plane will win this time (though that's not as clear-cut as the article makes it sound).

Matt, Chicago, IL, USA

I empathize with the sentiment of betrayal here. What an incredible sham for Sec. Gates to strike down a contract that would have been of such great benefit to all parties. This was purely a matter of Boeing's lobbying efforts, with nothing sufficiently out of order to warrant going back on our word

Edgar Faulkner, Seattle, WA, USA

Actually, Louise, the declining dollar would be a good reason to buy domestic. We'd get more 'inferior product' than if we went with a foreign source.

Matt, Chicago, IL, USA

The fact of the matter is that this is not all that simple. Let's face it both the Europeans and those of us in the US like to have it our way. I do not know which tanker would be better, but then lets look at the Tornado vs the F15's or F-16's and ask which is a better platform. Blame on both side

Jeffrey l. Gorman, Harker Heights, TX, USA

And will we cancel our commitment to purchase American goods?
No didn't think so.

jim, manchester, lancashire

To Shane, USA

Because - as stated in the article - Airbus beat the standards set by Boeing at every level. You'll be buying inferior goods, with your rapidly declining US dollar... that's why

louise, brighton, east sussex

What a lot of US responses - mostly trying to justify the unjustifiable. Maybe trying to maintain some kind of special relationship?
'Irregularities in the bidding process' in a US tender, where an outsider won? How could there be such irregularities? Were it the US v UK in the Middle East, maybe.

Padraig, Perth, Australia

Amazing how economic jingoism (on both sides of the Atlantic) flourishes in the face of fact. The US Air Force screwed up, now everyone, including the customer, will get a fair go at it.

Michael, Mill Valley, USA

The UK are always buying US firepower, arguably because it's better, but not always; apparently the russians make a handy fighter plane. The US probably promised this contract to the EU (esp. Britain) for its support in these wars. The UK has every right to feel reneged upon.

Alastair, Sydney, Australia

In fairness to the Americans, if Boeing land the contract the order might stand a chance of being delivered on time.

Matt, Bangkok, Thailand

There were errors in the bid evaluatuions according to government auditors so the contract is to be re-bid and the bids evaluated consistently.

Therefore NG/EADS could still be the winner, just have to wait and see.

Stan(expat), USA, USA

Sorry - it's not about Americans supporting the world, or giving donations to us poor old Europeans, it's about quid pro quo. If you're going to be protectionist, we'll stop buying US products. Then we'll both be up the creek. It's not patriotic - it's just dumb!

Jon Morrison, Oxford,

Dave of Florida, the US has a massive trade surplus when it comes to arms shipments. The question now for all countries is why buy US weapons, when it is clear that the US is adopting a protectionist versus open tendering. And yes, advanced European weaponry does exist. Quid pro quo.

James, London, England

The fact is the A330 is the better aircraft. his is typical US - think of ourselves and to hell with anyone else. Perhaps now we will realise they are not our friends - allies perhaps! But in the end it ifsAmerica first and to hell with the rest of the world. Well economics doesnt work like that!

Richard, Plymouth, UK

I like America and Americans very much, but let's face it, the "special relationship" ain't worth jack - it's everyone for themselves. We should return the compliment by buying British or European wherever the equipment is of an equivalent standard.

Homer, London,

You are only able to whine because of the U.S. in W.W.ll. Franc subsidise Airbus $4bn.
Illegal on U.S. defence contracts. Boeing followed the bid criteria, Airbus did not. You may be happy losing your textile,automobile,shipbuilding, aircraft,steel industries plus others.Boeing build the best.

Les Mellows, London, Canada

The Yanks can have all of Iraq and Afghanistan to go with the tankers

They wanted the war for oil, now they can supply the tankers to keep their bombers in the air and we Brits can watch them just like 90% of EU governments have been doing since 2003.

Ordered by the war hero G W Bush.

Ken.H, Kenton,

The USA looks after its self first, I can not blame them, for them it is the right thing to do.

jim, stoke on trent, England

JSF is to be built by lockheed MArtin, Northrop Grumman and BAE, Boeing lost the contest. So boeing won't be biding but BAE will be.
How often do European countries prefer their own inferior military products to the US? Nearly always why else would there be 3 European tanks

Reece, Melb, Aust

This kind of isolationalist behavior is only going to get worse under a Leftist, Union dominated Congress and White House. Europe has been awash in anti-Bush derangement for 7 years now; feverishly dreaming of someone like Barack Obama to claim the presidency. Well, be carefull what you wish for!

Mike, Milwaukee, USA

The one thing that strikes me is the US patriotic buy american policy with US tax payers money. My question is when will the EU provide the same protections for our tax payers money to promote our local economies? we should have no military product unless more than 60% is manufactured in europe!

keith, EX-Pat in Seattle, British

Why is it that Americans are expected to support the World? I think it's about time that American Politicians started looking out for their constituents. It's no more than an Enlishmen would demand of their Government.

Dave Gordon, Sarasota, FL., United States of America

Ok - so the EU should slap sanctions on the US to the same value for breach of contract. They don't respect or care about their "friends" - only those who can stand up for themselves. Time for the UK and Europe to prove the US can't just take what they want.

Andrew Carling, Luton,

This is what you Brits sound like right now:

"How dare those Yanks actually invest in their own economy and create American jobs rather than fix our economy for us?"

America is in the midst of a recession. And we should give jobs to you why??

Haile, Cleveland, USA

Let's face it, with the exception of the harrier jump jet and the spitfire, nothing significant has come out of the UK.The yanks build a better kite, look at the fiasco of the nimrod, what did the brits end up with? Boeing AWACS.Why worry, skies protected by real quality airpower.

Colin, Chongqing, China

When the original defence contract was put out for bids, the Atlantic bridge spanned a level ocean. The winning bid was identified as the most technically sound and financially feasible offer. Under these circumstances, in a capitalistic society, the contract should be awarded to the winning bid. I

Leo Collins, Dayton, Ohio, U. S. A.

"...the politicians have wrapped themselves in the flag and backed Boeing..."

If John Wall thinks that by denigrating Americans he can somehow win this contract (paid for by the American tax-payer), then he is kidding himself. You act as if we owe you something? How condescending and snobbish!

JJ, columbus, USA

Oh, English, gimme a break. The GAO report was never even mentioned in the article or screaming headline. Judging by these responses from English/Canadians, it's obvious that EADS should have never been allowed to compete for this plane in the first place. Build your own tankers, we'll build ours.

David Reiff, Kansas City, USA

European airlines should Boycott Boeing to protect European jobs.England and the Netherlands are open economies but I think is time we copied the French and resorted to to covert protectionism.There is nothing made in the US that cannot be made in Europe.

r j palmer, marriott, uk

The US has no interests but its own. You can learn this the easy way or the hard way. When the chips are down, they'll let you down. Keep this in mind, Israel.

Andrew Milner, Karuizawa, Japan

Why is anyone surprised?

Ken.H, Kenton,

Please...someone from Britain or the Continent...explain to me why the U.S. Air Force...funded by U.S. tax payer dollars...taken out of our paychecks every payday...should NOT buy American planes and provide Americans with those jobs! (?)

Shane, Raleigh, NC, USA

Knee-jerk reactions always occur when people try to simplify complex events. A fair appraisal requires examining the history. The USAF gave DoD "buyers" the specs, & Boeing "won" Bid 1. Airbus lobbyists complained, & unknown to Boeing, new specs issued. Airbus won the "secret" 2nd Bid-now rejected

Bob Evans, Anaheim, California

With friends like Americans you do not need Enemies, the UK has been taken for a ride by the US for far too long.

mike merriott, yeovil, uk

Looks like the Americans have more in common with the Zimbabweans than they thought-. When the end result isn't to their liking, they just change the rules to get the result they want.

C. George, Birmingham, England

Typical and expected to be honest.

And we helped save the US from the Iraqi threat of "Weapons of Mass destruction" as well - Ha Ha !

Expect more of the same .

Peter, Aldershot, UK

Too bad expectations were raised so high but anyone who really believed the French (of all people) would get this plum contract in a presidential election year should not handle sharp objects.
I personally think Bush engineered an inside job as a reward to Sarkozy. cest la vie

JL Ronish, seattle , usa

Will the UK allow Boeing to bid for the RAF's next fighter? or will it be awarded to BAE without competition as usual?

Ron, Honolulu, USA

This is bad for British jobs,


As the only way around it is to to say to the American.

'We will build it in America giving Americans jobs'


There does not seem to be another solution. or is it now a lost case.... surly there is compensation for renegading on the contract

Nicholas Iles, Oswestry, Shropshire

Oh stop taking this so personally. If the shoe were on the other foot the U.K would be doing the same thing. We need those jobs too, and since our taxpayer dollars are paying for this, some of that money should go back to American workers.

Chill out.

Sam, Colorado Springs, USA

Boeing wants a fair evaluation. Air Force' operational personnel defined their need and top officials changed these needs and allowed a larger plane compete. The US Air Force needs many tankers to fulfill their world-wide commitments. The heavier NGA entry is too large for many fields. Fairness

David Simmes, Winchester, Virginia, USA

Don't worry ... Boeing cannot overcome the deficiencies of their 767 tanker bid without a new aeroplane. 777 won't work (too big) and 787 is too new.

The killer test is full payload from a 7000ft runway. A330 does it and 767 does not.

Or else the sky is a light shade of pink!.

Pedro, Stratford,

Just another in a long line of defence deals with the U.S, in which they have conducted themselves woefully.

Joint fighter deal: U.K gave VTOL technology to their U.S partners on the proviso that they reciprocated? Not only did they not honour that, but also tried to retain operational sovereignty.

Paul , Vancouver, Canada

It beggars belief to try and claim that as the UK/US Special Relationship exists, that therefore the US government must spend US tax Dollars on Airbus.

As it stands, British Aerospace firms have a level of access to US markets that Toulouse can only dream of.

Bring on a truly fair round two

Eric, St John, US Virgin Islands

In 1992, Clinton's mantra was: "It's about the economy stupid", and he won. In 2008, "It's about the economy stupid", and holding American jobs. Any other year, and the deal still might have "Flown".

Not this year, no way.

jim, framingham, USA

Druyun did not give Airbus secrets to Boeing. The original deal was a sole source leasing deal.

A330 fueler can not pass fuel to all aircraft required in the RFP. Nor did it fully respond to all elements of the original RFP. By process the bid should never have been accepted.

Mark MacPherson, Seattle, USA

If they can just tear it up, it was never a contract in the first place.

Carolyn, Ontario, Canada

Well with the US in economic difficulties, you would hardly expect them to hand out lucrative contracts to foreigners on a plate. Cant say I blame them when you look at ourselves and what has happened in manufacturing and utilities over here, nations still have to look after themselves .

Ian, Bristol, UK

What did EADS expect.There was no way the US presidential candidates,"The Uber Patriots and the Lobbyists for Boeing,the Pentagon and the US in general were going to allow EADS/Northrop to keep the contract fairly won.
In America its called "HARDBALL" and one should ever forget it.

Ed Corbett, bridgend, wales

It was obviously too good to be true. The US are all for the free market whilst always protecting their own interests.

CHARLIE, LONDON, United Kingdom

Check out http://www.americasnewtanker.com/ Admittedly it's a Northrop Grumman website, but it makes some interesting points.

Diane, Mobile, USA

This would be the special relationship we jumped into Iraq to protect?

Perhaps now would be a good time for the UK to reconsider its decision to replace Trident with another US product?

richard, horley,

An interesting comment from a very well informed contributor.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27129&s=rcmp


It's not all about politics, there is taxpayers money, and warfighters who's lives will depend on these aircraft.

Ken Taylor, abbotsford, Canada

Our supposed great friends the Americans, YET AGAIN, stab us on the back !. Why on earth are our Politicians so easily flattered and misled by the US President into doing his dirt work ,like Iraq and Afghanistan, and next no doubt it will be Iran. We have enemies who are better to us than the USA

John, Woking, Surrey

How utterly bizarre. A country that dares to support its own industry... What is the world coming to?

DickW, Aberdeenshire, Scotland

Now we see how "really special" our relationship is. I hope that the next time America asks for help our PM tells them where to go - by themselves.

Bill Peter, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

So is anyone surprised that America reverts to buy American? When are we going to learn not to be poodles, bodybags don't buy contracts, only cash and Congress.

Stephen, London, England