k5083 wrote:
Really Randy? And do we good guys do the same? Do we think, "Heck, we've only sold that hardware to 40 countries, I'm sure the bad guys haven't managed to acquire any. Let's not bother to develop the next generation yet." Or is it only bad guys who are so complacent?
August
It's all about specific capabilities. If the US acquires a non-export variant of a particular aircraft, it will have different capabilities than an export variant.
So, while a particular adversary may know that US forces have exploited the MiG-23, they may
not know we have exploited a "FLOGGER-F" or one with a particular kind of avionics or weapons. That makes an enormous difference on modern fighters. The airframes aren't nearly as important as the avionics or the integration of those avionics.
Again, knowledge is power.
Plus, we -- the US -- have to protect our sources. If we "rat out" 3rd party nations that give us access to foreign technology, they won't have access to that technology much firther, will they. I'd wager that most of the agreements that result in foreign materiel exploitation have stipulations that closely protect source nations.
By the way, in reference to your statement above...YES. Isn't that the argument that we in the US hear from people railing against the F-22 and F-35?? That we should just buy more F-15s and F-16s and call it good?