3 ms·
There was a time when an Ally used to mean something—to be clear, it still does for the most part, despite the US Administration's shift away from its allies to
by libertine 2y ago
There was a time when an Ally used to mean something—to be clear, it still does for the most part, despite the US Administration's shift away from its allies toward Russia.
An "Alliance" used to be built on core principles, trust, and alignment, it's not just a fancy word.
So the question is, why would an Ally of yours need to spend resources to reverse engineer technology you're willing to exchange with him, and vice versa?
Looking back, maybe it's not such a bad idea when an Ally shows signs of shifting to an adversarial position against you.
- aerostable_slug 2y agoOr because Israel has sold technology to China before against the US's wishes. Lockheed and its contractors have no interest in betting their intellectual property, nor the US in betting our national security advantage, to the whims of the current administration of whomever buys our F-35s. Therefore the avionics are constructed with robust anti-tampering/RE mechanisms. You can have them, but you can't make more or sell the secret sauce.
- libertine 2y agoLeaks and property theft happen, both internally and on the outside - even the anecdotes of the War Thunder leaks are a good example of it. With that said, it looks like what's happening is that Europe, Canada, and probably more to come, have no interest in betting their National Security on the whims of one guy pulling the rug on them, as Trump did to Ukraine to appease Putin. The problem here isn't IP theft - it's about reliability.