That's what the title was for!

they're a bit guy if you ask me.

It's a nice thing to hear for us Europeans. And also for Americans although less than if it had been boeing I suppose, but I think Americans should also appreciate this joint US-European cooperation.

Anyway I'll be interested to see the actual considerations for chosing the bid over Boeing's

I've never hated Bush or the United States. Where did you get that idea from?

as I understand it the northrup/eads refuelling plane is superior, but Boeing was the traditional contractor for US air force and had therefor expected to remain so

of course since with these types of projects the contractors are obliged to put a lot of the money back into the patron government's economy Boeings 'all american' standing is not that big of an argument

Boeing was just going to continue to make the 767 airframe, exclusively for the USAF because it's obsolete in the commercial market.  It would carry less fuel than the A333.

Interesting backstory, apparently there was a corrupt deal in the Pentagon where an Air Force general accepted a no-bid contract to lease the obsolete planes from Boeing for a lot of money, and then she retired, and went to work for...Boeing.  For a lot more money than she made at the Pentagon.   Sen. John McCain called foul on that deal and it was torn up.  That's why the USA went shopping.

I think it is a bum deal for the USA.  Apparently we will be buying French parts and then assembling them within the United States, for $40 billion.   A better deal would be for us to pay whatever it takes, even $120 billion, to buy the design rights from EADS and then produce it within the USA.  That would cost more, but create more manufacturing jobs within the USA, and the main point is it would prevent the French from crippling a US war by withholding exports of our planes over the years to come...a tactic WE use all the time.

If Starbucks doesn't get full delivery of its German expresso steamers, we won't lose a war.

If the USAF doesn't get its tankers fast enough, we might.

That's why I'd like a different outlook towards globalization in military contracts.