Re: military weapons, was: [OT] Bell Canada - service vs. abuse

On Fri, 23 May 2025 02:08:57 -0000 (UTC), danny burstein
<dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

In <100okul$3oppn$1@dont-email.me> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> writes:
>
[snip]
>

I think you fail to see the obvious answer. If your country were truly
to move away from the F-35 then there's no reason to keep them. Just
sell them to another country that is using the fighters. I'm sure
there will be many willing buyers.

>

Weapons sales tend to come with a "you can't sell this stuff to anyone else"
clause in the contract. We only want those things going to certain countries.

That may be but my idea isn't that you put it up for general auction,
but that it gets sold to a nation that already has them. Also if
Canada or some other country has decided not to get weapons from the
USA in the future then worrying about some "not for resale" option in
the original contract isn't going to be a concern.

Certainly true, but if Lower Slobovia decides to
transfer some of their US sourced tanks to Freedonia,
what can the US do (within reason...) to stop them?
>
Yes, the US can refuse to sell any more tanks, and
can end replacement parts/repairs, but that's not
going to physically stop the handover today...