Don’t Be Surprised the U.S. is Shipping F-16s to Mohammed Morsi’s Egypt as Scheduled

Oh look:

Four F-16 fighter jets left the U.S. this morning [yesterday], bound for Egypt as part of a foreign aid package critics say should have been scrapped when the nation elected a president who has called President Obama a liar and urged that hatred of Jews be instilled in children. 

A source who works on the naval air base in Fort Worth, Texas, confirmed the departure of the state-of-the-art fighter planes to FoxNews.com. Sixteen F-16s and 200 Abrams tanks are to be given to the Egyptian government before the end of the year under a foreign aid deal signed in 2010 with then-Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, a longtime U.S. ally.

Egypt has been receiving about $1.3 billion a year in military aid since 1979, and more than $50 billion in U.S. dollars since 1975. Here’s how the aid was described during renewal in 2004 by the Christian Science Monitor:

The money is seen as bolstering Egypt's stability, support for US policies in the region, US access to the Suez Canal, and peace with Israel. But some critics question the aid's effectiveness in spurring economic and democratic development in the Arab world's most populous country - a higher US priority after Sept. 11, 2001.

"Aid offers an easy way out for Egypt to avoid reform," says Edward Walker, the US ambassador to Egypt from 1994 to 1998. "They use the money to support antiquated programs and to resist reforms."

The Mubarak regime resisted reforms to the very end, even getting Congress to structure aid in a way that would avoid Congressional oversight, finally collapsing in a popular uprising centered in Cairo’s Tahrir Square.

Eventually, Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood was elected president and rammed through a new constitution perceived as Islamist and also thoroughly statist. How far has Egypt come since the end of the regime on which the U.S. spent billions to coax into reform? Egypt’s chief prosecutor last month ordered an investigation into whether leaders of the opposition committed treason by inciting supporters to overthrow Morsi. The Muslim Brotherhood ought to know about plots to overthrow the government, such alleged plots were the stated driving force of many of the crackdowns the Muslim Brothers faced when they were in the opposition for more than half a century. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss, and maybe even worse.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Why are we doing this?

  • iggy||

    We're still giving 1.6 billion dollars in foreign aid to Pakistan every year, even though people in Pakistan's army unquestionably knew that Bin Laden was hiding in the country.

    Why we're doing it doesn't really matter. Since when has American foreign policy been rational?

  • Pro Libertate||

    I used to be able to piece together some sort of hackneyed logic about our foreign policy, but it seems quite random these days.

  • JW||

    Because the Senator from General Dynamics deemed it necessary to our national interests.

  • Drake||

    It usually made some sense during the Cold War. Since then, I haven't understood what the hell these people were thinking.

  • ||

    Because our government is corrupt as shit?

  • Pro Libertate||

    I guess. Is this just a money thing?

  • ||

    My guess is that it's a sop to Lockheed or whoever makes the F-16 (and whoever makes the tanks), because why the fuck would you sell them new ones otherwise?

  • LTC(ret) John||

    "whoever makes the tanks"

    I think FMC (the private company) refurbs older model into "export" shape and ships them off - we sold a bunch of these to the Iraqis after their Defense Minister got to play around in one and, I swear, came out of the tank sporting wood.

  • Brett L||

    Probably at the thought of how many people he could run over in a mad dash to the airfield when things went south.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    When all you had before were T-55s and T-72s, an M-1 is Heaven to a tanker. He was probably thinking about the awesome parades that would march by, saluting him.

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's all so complicated. Like figuring out a mob organization from the outside.

  • ||

    Like?

  • Pro Libertate||

    Very like. So like that it's hard to tell the difference. Likety like.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I meant that I guessed that could be the reason. I agree wholeheartedly that the government is as corrupt as shit.

  • ThatSkepticGuy||

    "Why are we doing this?"

    Because, as with everything else it's done from stimuli to NDAA to F&F, the Obama admin will not, can not and must not admit it made a mistake.

    That chestnut about insanity being the infinite repetition of the same course of action, each time expecting a new result? That's progressivism to the letter.

  • kinnath||

    Just a different version of the money hole.

  • Enough About Palin||

    You know who else had a money hole?

  • ||

    Tom Hanks?

  • ||

    ...and this subthread is done. How often do you get to reference a shitty Tom Hanks/Shelley Long movie?

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Um...first time evah?

  • Jesus H. Christ||

    Parts of it were pretty funny. The bit with the turkey, and with the bathtub? The diva contractor with the car stereo playing "My Way"? Funny stuff.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Heidi Fleiss?

  • Stormy Dragon||

    Because we're required to under the terms of the Camp David Accords. We could of course demand it be renegotiated, but then it would be hard for the warboners to wring their hands about the MB making the same demand.

  • deified||

    Keeping Boeing happy is a US governmental priority of unsurpassed importance.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    "Hillary Clinton has called for increased US military and political intervention in north Africa, and warned of a long, difficult but necessary struggle against a "spreading jihadist threat" in the region."

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl.....ist-threat

    Because we need like to have the opposition armed, even if it's with obsolete technology. What do you have against the pretty fireworks?

  • Almanian.||

    Hey, a man's gotta feed his family, aaight?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    A deal is a deal. We paid good money for those fighters and by gum Egypt is going to get what the American taxpayer paid for.

    Let's hope these are the four-cylinder models.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    "rammed through a new constitution perceived as Islamist and also thoroughly statist."

    Perceived?

    Article 2 - “Principles of Islamic Sharia” now includes all the rules of jurisprudence and credible sources that are accepted in Sunni doctrines, amongst other things.

    [via Open Democracy]

  • John||

    I was just about to post that. The reason staff make me laugh. They really are a bunch of neurotic beltway liberals sometimes.

    "We can't say it is Islamic. That is racist!!"

  • Hyperion||

    But, Arab Spring! Democracy won!

    I think they should have whatever system they want, and it's none of our business. I just wish the liberal media, especially CNN, would just STFU about this Arab Spring bullshit.

  • Ed||

    It is an Islamic constitution. The Sharia references are similar to those in Afghanistan, Iraq and Saudi Arabia's constitutions. The Taliban didn't have a constitution. That's Islamist.

  • John||

    Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan are Islamist too.

  • Ed||

    One's more Islamist than the other. Neither's Islamist enough for Al Qaeda.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    article 4, which states that the opinion of Al-Azhar (one of the Islamic world’s most venerable institutions) must be obtained on all matters relating to Sharia.

    [same source]

  • LTC(ret) John||

    You know who trained at Al-Azhar....?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • John||

    These things are not a threat. The moment we cut off maintenance they will become expensive lawn darts. What this is, is welfare to Lockheed Martin.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Ding ding ding.

    Correct - defense contractor welfare.

  • Rasilio||

    Lawn Darts

    Heh was that on purpose or an accident?

    Believe it or not that is an unofficial nickname given to them thanks to their penchant for crashing into populated after ingesting a bird into that huge ass air intake at low altitudes combined with the needle like pitot tube sticking out of the nose.

  • Brett L||

    I know in HS my good friend's brother who flew F-15s referred to the -16s as lawn darts.

  • John||

    On purpose.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    The ILANG proved this by "Jarting" a pair of them back in the day.

  • tarran||

    The moment we cut off maintenance they will become expensive lawn darts.

    Kind of like the Iranian F-14A's?

  • sarcasmic||

    *ding*

  • Rasilio||

    A source who works on the naval air base in Fort Worth, Texas, confirmed the departure of the state-of-the-art fighter planes to FoxNews.com.

    The F-16 hasn't really been state of the art for more than a Decade and we never include our latest and greatest RADAR and ECM suites to foreign countries so I really have no problem SELLING them to anyone with the cash. However I do have a problem with GIVING them to anyone, even countries we know will be reliable friends like Japan.

  • JeremyR||

    They are state of the art in the sense that they actually work.

    What do we have more high tech than them? The Raptor? That's plagued with problems.

    The F35 is just junk.

  • Rasilio||

    The F-18 comes to mind.

    There are also several other countries who have fielded aircraft which are superior to the F-16 and fill the Same role.

    Hell in a lot of ways the F-20 which was designed by Northrup back in the 80's but never actually purchased was superior to the F-16

  • 16th amendment||

    I wonder what spin MSNBC will put on this.

  • Hyperion||

    Spin? It will never be mentioned.

  • Enough About Palin||

    A Spin of Omission.

  • Hyperion||

    +1

    I like it. I need to use that one.

  • 16th amendment||

    Yes, that is a type of spin as well. But I just found an article http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/50551822#.UQBEMvJWIsI that at the end of it links to foxnews.com for the full story :). But of course the website reports all stories. I'm gonna check out tonight to see if any of the prime time hosts report it.

  • NoVAHockey||

    "Obama Laments Sale of Bush War Machine"

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Say, how did you get tomorrow's NYT already?!

  • Hyperion||

    a president who has called President Obama a liar

    And? He is a liar.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Yes, that's rather to his credit, isn't it? Score one for the Egyptians.

    I still think they should hold the pyramids hostage.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Don't you usually take something of value as hostages?

  • Pro Libertate||

    What, you don't like historical artifacts?

  • Hyperion||

    Maybe they will publicly flog Zahi Hawass for being an infidel. That will be worth the price of admission.

  • Brett L||

    I thought they were already doing this. Or is that just the Sphinx? My tour guide when I went was an Egyptian woman who had divorced a devout Saudi and moved home. She had a low opinion of Islamists in Egypt, past and present.

  • Hyperion||

    Really, it's just that the Egyptians are pissed because libertarian aliens built the pyramids.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    That report turned out to be a hoax.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Hoax or not yet pulled the trigger?

    Think Bamiyan Buddahs or Sufi tombs in Timbuktu.

  • ||

    Drop it! Or I swear I'll blow this nigger's head all over this town!

    Oh, lo'dy, lo'd, he's desp'it! Do what he sayyyy, do what he sayyyy!

  • JW||

    The Shareef actually likes this.

  • ||

    Rockin' the Casbah
    Rock the Casbah

  • LTC(ret) John||

    Now they will be able to drop their bombs between the minarets, down the Casbah way.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Go down, Moses,
    Way down to Egypt Land
    Sell them those F-16s
    So that payments to the military contractors can stimulate the economy

    (did I think I would say something stupid like "let my people go"?)

  • sasob||

    So basically we now are arming the Muslim Brotherhood? Swell. Hey, I know - maybe we could sell Al Quaeda a few atom bombs or bio weapons.

  • Sevo||

    Shipping fighters there, and since the French can't seem to afford the gas, why we'll give 'em a lift to Mali, too:
    "American planes transported French troops and equipment to Mali,..."
    Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/world/ar.....z2IpoxpNLp
    I guess they just stood by the runway and stuck out their thumbs.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Egyptians protest the occupation and vow to liberate the oppressed.

    No, not the West Bank, silly! The 500-year old occupation of Spain by the Catholics.

    Once Muslims take something by force of arms, it is theirs for all eternity, don't you know.

  • Lyle||

    Doesn't it make you a little bit happy to know that a percentage of your taxes is going toward bomb building and what not to make sure they never occupy Spain again?

    Yeah, I know. Hi-five!

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I'd prefer the Spaniards to do their own fighting. Perhaps they might recover the spirit of El Cid.

  • Lyle||

    I would hope so too, but we are their NATO allies I believe and would be obligated to help them.

  • Calidissident||

    Does it make me happy to know that the federal government robs me to supposedly protect Spain from a nonexistent threat? No, it actually pisses me off royally

  • Lyle||

    Nonexistent? Not in Algeria or Mali. And that's pretty dang close to Spain. Look at a map man.

    Liberty!

  • Lyle||

    Does anyone know if trade stopped between France and the United States while Robespierre was in charge during the French Revolution? What about Napoleon? Didn't we trade him land for weapons (okay, money to buy weapons)?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    That's a good question.

    The answer is yes. The U.S. continued trade with France under Robespierre. The British Navy would intercept American merchant ships in French waters, which would led to the negotiation of the Jay Treaty in 1794, which in turn pissed off the French, which led to the XYZ Affair and then the Quasi-War of 1798-1800.

  • Lyle||

    Haha. What side would Reason have been on I wonder?

    The XYZ Affair, I think, is about as close the U.S. ever came to fighting a war against France... and maybe the French in Mexico.

  • Drake||

    The undeclared naval war between the U.S. and France was during the Thermidorian regime (after Robespierre lost his head). Napoleon ended it shortly after he took over.

  • The Bearded Hobbit||

    a higher US priority after Sept. 11, 2001

    Wait, how many of those 19 assholes were Egyptian, again?

    ... Hobbit

  • ThatSkepticGuy||

    All the ones that weren't from Iraq.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement