US accepts jet from Qatar for use as Air Force One
The United States has accepted a 747 jetliner as a gift from Qatar and the air force has been asked to find a way to rapidly upgrade it for use as a new Air Force One, the Pentagon says.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth accepted the $US400 million ($A621 million) Boeing-made jet for use as US President Donald Trump's official plane, the Pentagon said.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the Defense Department "will work to ensure proper security measures and functional-mission requirements are considered".
He added that the plane was accepted "in accordance with all federal rules and regulations".
Legal experts have questioned the scope of laws relating to gifts from foreign governments that aim to thwart corruption and improper influence.
Democrats have also sought to block the handover.
Qatar has dismissed concerns about the aircraft deal.
Trump has also shrugged off ethical concerns, saying it would be "stupid" not to accept the jet.
He has defended it as a way to save tax dollars.
"Why should our military, and therefore our taxpayers, be forced to pay hundreds of millions of dollars when they can get it for FREE," Trump posted on his social media site.
Retrofitting the luxury plane offered by Qatar's royal family will require significant security upgrades, communications improvements to prevent spies from listening in and the ability to fend off incoming missiles, experts say.
That could cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
The precise costs were not known but could be significant given the cost for Boeing's current effort to build two new Air Force One planes is more than $US5 billion.
The Air Force One program has faced chronic delays over the last decade, with the delivery of two new 747-8s slated for 2027, three years behind the previous schedule.
Boeing in 2018 received a $US3.9 billion contract to build the two planes for use as Air Force One although costs have since risen.
Boeing has also posted $US2.4 billion in charges from the project.
with AP
The United States has accepted a 747 jetliner as a gift from Qatar and the air force has been asked to find a way to rapidly upgrade it for use as a new Air Force One, the Pentagon says.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth accepted the $US400 million ($A621 million) Boeing-made jet for use as US President Donald Trump's official plane, the Pentagon said.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the Defense Department "will work to ensure proper security measures and functional-mission requirements are considered".
He added that the plane was accepted "in accordance with all federal rules and regulations".
Legal experts have questioned the scope of laws relating to gifts from foreign governments that aim to thwart corruption and improper influence.
Democrats have also sought to block the handover.
Qatar has dismissed concerns about the aircraft deal.
Trump has also shrugged off ethical concerns, saying it would be "stupid" not to accept the jet.
He has defended it as a way to save tax dollars.
"Why should our military, and therefore our taxpayers, be forced to pay hundreds of millions of dollars when they can get it for FREE," Trump posted on his social media site.
Retrofitting the luxury plane offered by Qatar's royal family will require significant security upgrades, communications improvements to prevent spies from listening in and the ability to fend off incoming missiles, experts say.
That could cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
The precise costs were not known but could be significant given the cost for Boeing's current effort to build two new Air Force One planes is more than $US5 billion.
The Air Force One program has faced chronic delays over the last decade, with the delivery of two new 747-8s slated for 2027, three years behind the previous schedule.
Boeing in 2018 received a $US3.9 billion contract to build the two planes for use as Air Force One although costs have since risen.
Boeing has also posted $US2.4 billion in charges from the project.
with AP
The United States has accepted a 747 jetliner as a gift from Qatar and the air force has been asked to find a way to rapidly upgrade it for use as a new Air Force One, the Pentagon says.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth accepted the $US400 million ($A621 million) Boeing-made jet for use as US President Donald Trump's official plane, the Pentagon said.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the Defense Department "will work to ensure proper security measures and functional-mission requirements are considered".
He added that the plane was accepted "in accordance with all federal rules and regulations".
Legal experts have questioned the scope of laws relating to gifts from foreign governments that aim to thwart corruption and improper influence.
Democrats have also sought to block the handover.
Qatar has dismissed concerns about the aircraft deal.
Trump has also shrugged off ethical concerns, saying it would be "stupid" not to accept the jet.
He has defended it as a way to save tax dollars.
"Why should our military, and therefore our taxpayers, be forced to pay hundreds of millions of dollars when they can get it for FREE," Trump posted on his social media site.
Retrofitting the luxury plane offered by Qatar's royal family will require significant security upgrades, communications improvements to prevent spies from listening in and the ability to fend off incoming missiles, experts say.
That could cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
The precise costs were not known but could be significant given the cost for Boeing's current effort to build two new Air Force One planes is more than $US5 billion.
The Air Force One program has faced chronic delays over the last decade, with the delivery of two new 747-8s slated for 2027, three years behind the previous schedule.
Boeing in 2018 received a $US3.9 billion contract to build the two planes for use as Air Force One although costs have since risen.
Boeing has also posted $US2.4 billion in charges from the project.
with AP
The United States has accepted a 747 jetliner as a gift from Qatar and the air force has been asked to find a way to rapidly upgrade it for use as a new Air Force One, the Pentagon says.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth accepted the $US400 million ($A621 million) Boeing-made jet for use as US President Donald Trump's official plane, the Pentagon said.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the Defense Department "will work to ensure proper security measures and functional-mission requirements are considered".
He added that the plane was accepted "in accordance with all federal rules and regulations".
Legal experts have questioned the scope of laws relating to gifts from foreign governments that aim to thwart corruption and improper influence.
Democrats have also sought to block the handover.
Qatar has dismissed concerns about the aircraft deal.
Trump has also shrugged off ethical concerns, saying it would be "stupid" not to accept the jet.
He has defended it as a way to save tax dollars.
"Why should our military, and therefore our taxpayers, be forced to pay hundreds of millions of dollars when they can get it for FREE," Trump posted on his social media site.
Retrofitting the luxury plane offered by Qatar's royal family will require significant security upgrades, communications improvements to prevent spies from listening in and the ability to fend off incoming missiles, experts say.
That could cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
The precise costs were not known but could be significant given the cost for Boeing's current effort to build two new Air Force One planes is more than $US5 billion.
The Air Force One program has faced chronic delays over the last decade, with the delivery of two new 747-8s slated for 2027, three years behind the previous schedule.
Boeing in 2018 received a $US3.9 billion contract to build the two planes for use as Air Force One although costs have since risen.
Boeing has also posted $US2.4 billion in charges from the project.
with AP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
West Australian
36 minutes ago
- West Australian
Katina Curtis: Australia out of the loop and off the agenda for US action
Anthony Albanese was at pains to emphasise that the US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend were a unilateral action. He said it five times in less than 10 minutes during a short press conference on Monday to address the escalation in the conflict. Did Australia get a heads-up on the attacks? Were any of our military involved? Were joint facilities such as the Pine Gap intelligence and surveillance base involved? 'This was a unilateral action by the United States,' the Prime Minister repeated. These were reasonable questions given the precedents. Australia provided support for US strikes on Houthi facilities in Yemen last October, which the ABC reported included offering air-to-air refuelling for the B-2 stealth bombers, the same ones used this time. In 2018, the Americans gave Australia advance notice when a US-led force that included the UK and France bombed targets in Syria aimed at ending the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons. British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has confirmed he knew about the attack on Iran ahead of Sunday's strike, although the UK was not involved. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot revealed his country, which brought the Iranians in for peace talks at the end of last week, was similarly not involved with either the strikes or their planning. While neither Albanese nor Foreign Minister Penny Wong directly said that we had no idea what was coming, they sure gave that impression. This latest escalation in the already messy Middle East conflict doesn't directly bear on the US-Australia alliance. But it doesn't give much confidence that any of the tensions already there are easing. Albanese hasn't spoken to Donald Trump since the US President abandoned the G7 summit halfway through proceedings last week ( reportedly after getting a cable from the Iranians threatening to activate sleeper cells within America), cancelling their first scheduled face-to-face talks. With the Middle East dominating Trump's agenda, as this column noted last week before the meeting snafu, despite Australia's main character energy when it comes to how important we are to the US, the reality is we are down the list of priorities. Way down below a UFC bout and 'the most magnificent (flag) poles' installed at the White House, if Trump's social media posts are anything to go by. Australian officials are trying to line up a replacement meeting date with Trump sooner rather than later. The 'later' option looks like being in late September, when Albanese intends to travel to New York for the UN's annual general assembly leaders' week. Something sooner is more difficult given he's got to fit in four weeks of Parliament, Jim Chalmers' productivity round table, the Pacific Islands Forum and a likely trip to China before then — plus the general grind of domestic governing when he's pledged to prioritise delivering election promises. Albanese and his team are chafing at the tea-leaf reading over his interactions — or lack of — with Trump. But the President places high value on making one-on-one connections. After all, a phone call doesn't make good television. His first-term national security adviser, HR McMaster, describes Trump as a 'conversational learner' who loves to charm people when they meet in the flesh. Albanese is more similar on this front than he would like to think; he frequently speaks about the value of being able to make personal connections with other leaders to promoting Australia's interests. Australians don't trust Trump, according to the latest Lowy poll results, but they recognise we need the US alliance for our national security. Trump's consistent message to all of America's friends is that they should be prepared to look after their own backyards. The defence strategic review the Albanese Government commissioned makes a very similar point. For Australia, that's not the Middle East — not that any request to join in there has come, at this stage. 'We aren't a central player in this conflict, that's just a fact,' Albanese said on Monday. Australians generally agree with him. The Lowy poll also showed about twice as many people saw conflict between the US and China over Taiwan as a critical threat to Australia, compared with conflict in the Middle East. But a key complaint from the White House is that Australia isn't sufficiently backing its words about looking after the Indo-Pacific with cold, hard cash. And while Trump is preoccupied with the Middle East, Australia won't be climbing up his to-do list.
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
ASX200 falls on latest Israel-Iran tensions
The Australian sharemarket slipped to a three-week low on Monday, despite Commonwealth Bank reaching a new record high, on the back of fears an Iranian response to the US bombing could see the price of crude oil skyrocket. On a volatile day of trading, the benchmark ASX200 fell 30.6 points or 0.36 per cent to 8,474.9 on Monday – its lowest point since June 3 – although it rallied from down nearly 1 per cent during the afternoon's trading. The broader All Ordinaries also slumped, down 35.50 points or 0.41 per cent to close the session at 8,688. The Aussie dollar also fell on the news out of Iran and is now buying US64.18c. On an overall volatile day, eight of the 11 sectors finished in the red, with financials and the energy sector leading the way. IG market analyst Tony Sycamore said the sell-off was in line with US futures on well-founded fears after the US conducted strikes with B-2 Stealth Bombers on three Iranian nuclear sites over the weekend. 'The US insists the strikes were aimed at halting Iran's nuclear ambitions, not regime change, but Trump's rhetoric suggests openness to further action, Mr Sycamore said. 'You would have been forgiven for thinking we would have a really volatile session on Monday. 'Whether it's just caution or because we have seen nothing from Iran just yet to shake things up further … we are in a hold until we know more.' One of the bright spots on the ASX was the financial sector, with Commonwealth Bank hitting a fresh record high of $184.41, before closing up 1 per cent to $184.35. Mr Sycamore said Commonwealth Bank remains a 'juggernaut that steamrollers people.' 'I don't know where it stops and when it stops but it's the best of the banks and that is the sector where people want to be,' he said. Overall, it was a mixed day for the major banks, with Westpac closing up 0.63 per cent to $33.42. National Australia Bank slipped on the bell, down 0.08 per cent to $38.88 and ANZ dropped 0.63 per cent to $28.21. Energy stocks, which initially bounced on the opening bell, trimmed their earlier gains in line with the oil price but still closed the day in the green. Takeover target Santos closed 1 per cent higher to $7.78 while Woodside Energy traded flat and Ampol gained 0.47 per cent to $5.86. Iron ore miners continued their weakness with market heavyweight BHP slumping 1.57 per cent to $35.64, Rio Tinto dropping 0.33 per cent to $101.83 and Fortescue Metals sliding 1.02 per cent to $14.54. In company news, shares in Australia's largest airline Qantas fell 1.85 per cent to $10.08 on the back of higher oil prices. Discounted retailer The Reject Shop announced shareholders had overwhelmingly voted in favour of a $259m takeover by Canadian discount retailer Dollarama at a meeting on Monday. Homewares and furniture retailer Adairs plunged 20.5 per cent to $2.05 after telling the market that full-year earnings would come in below last year's.
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Trump's ego is bruised so joining war is no surprise
It's not too surprising that President Trump should go to war with Israel against Iran (' Trump joins war on Iran ', June 23). His ego has been bruised by the TACO nickname, his low approval ratings and the lacklustre military parade, and he has been angered by the protests. He will claim more powers as a wartime president and, sadly, his sagging poll numbers will probably get a lift. Victoria Harrington, Thirroul A nuclear-armed nation's leader illegally attacks another nation's nuclear facilities in case they might get nuclear weapons, in breach of international law and without recourse to his government. I guess we can kiss goodbye to the rules-based order. Does this get us out of AUKUS? Simon Chance, Richmond Hill It's time for Australia to break defence ties with the US. America has been the greatest threat to world peace certainly since the Vietnam War, and that danger is strongly exacerbated by Donald Trump's bombing in the Middle East. Creating wars does not lead to peace, just untold misery and devastation for many innocent victims. Time to break ties, hold the US accountable and not be complicit in its war crimes. Anne Shay, Ballina What happens when not all the invitees turn up for your birthday party? You first sulk, but redeem your image by making yourself the centre of attention the next day in the school playground. You might achieve this by throwing some big firecrackers into neighbouring properties. Then again, if you have the toys of the privileged, you might convey them in a B-2. Donald Hawes, Peel The US president announced his war crimes on social media. We have learned nothing from the illegal invasion of Iraq based on a tissue of lies because no one suffered the consequences of their actions, and now we have a repeat with lies about the imminent production of nuclear weapons. This time Australia must not get involved in US and Israeli aggression in the Middle East. Graeme Finn, Campsie Trump's repeated diplomatic and trade failures and the popular use of TACO to name him (implying weakness) seems to have so riled him that he has now gone to the most extraordinary lengths to show the world how strong he really is. For Trump, strength only ever involves complete defeat of another by punishment, damage and humiliation, never strength through powerful deeds involving goodness, co-ordination or superb diplomacy. So much of the attack by Trump on Iran seems fuelled by personal as well as political considerations. Toni Lorentzen, Fennell Bay Given that Trump's July 14 military parade was a bit of a flop, with squeaky tanks, hand-held drones, ambling troops and the ever-present crowd size problem, little more than a week later I guess he had to up the ante. To a man nursing a slightly bruised ego, Iran presented the opportunity for Trump to show the world that the US military really does know how to bomb stuff. Sadly, the consequences of Trump's impulse will be unforeseen consequences that will do more than just assuage one man's gargantuan ego. Marie Del Monte, Ashfield Once Israel and Iran have depleted their missile stocks, perhaps the Herald can inform readers about who will sell them the replacements required to facilitate ongoing destruction? I imagine the suppliers' shareholders will greet this uptick in sales as positive news. I fail to share their optimism. Neil Browne, Gymea TWIT: Trump's War Invites Terror. Les Shearman, Darlington Widespread fall-out The humanitarian disaster caused by the bombing of Iran may have long-term consequences for innocent generations to come (' Radiation dangers from the three nuclear sites struck by the US ', June 23). By bombarding nuclear facilities 'the release of radioactive material into the atmosphere may contaminate the waters of the Gulf and trigger the evacuation of people hundreds of kilometres from the site'. Trump tore up the previous non-proliferation treaties that Iran had signed, and now he demands negotiations with Iran while bombing it. The bombastic attitude of Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump appears to show they have no consideration for long-term harm to both the environment or human life. I fear for the future as it appears that this devastation will be the legacy of both these men. Christina Foo, Wahroonga Netanyahu's trap In Michael Koziol's question, I choose the latter (' Masterstroke or mistake? Trump defies his base ', June 23). Trump has blundered into a trap set by Netanyahu; a black hole his presidential predecessors dodged. Bibi has for years exaggerated Iran's nuclear threat. He claimed to know more than inspectors and intelligence services. More than the International Atomic Energy Agency. But his guesstimations have never been proved. In lumbers Trump, and the world is once again at war based on ignorance. Mark Paskal, Austinmer Rodger Shanahan says Iran has little choice but to keep its focus on attacking Israel. Were it to target US military bases or commercial shipping, the repercussions for Tehran — and tragically, for the already subjugated Iranian people — could be catastrophic. He says 'the regime's ultimate aim is survival'. While that may be true, a close second must surely be the oft-repeated ambition to wipe Israel off the map. This aim, coupled with Iran's long-standing role in sponsoring terrorism through regional proxies, is why the religious hardliners in Tehran must never be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. Our foreign minister should now join the US, Germany, Britain and other allies in standing with Israel, and in hoping for long-overdue regime change in Iran. John Kempler, Rose Bay Even more sickening than Donald Trump's deception about when or if he would bomb Iran is the triumphalism in his boasting about the 'success' of this military madness. The situation is reminiscent of George W Bush's 'weapons of mass destruction' and 'mission accomplished' lies, and we know the consequences of that situation. The orange lunatic in the White House continues to drag our world to the brink of catastrophe. Rob Phillips, North Epping Scary, really, how quickly Donald Trump went from TACO (Trump Always Chickens Out) to WACO (Wants Armageddon Coming On). Barry Ffrench, Cronulla Iran is usually cast as the villain, especially by the US. One needs to look further back in history to find how, in the 1950s, a democratic government in Iran was brought down by British and US governments greedy to control the region's oil resources. They eventually installed the shah, who complied with their wishes. Colin Simpson, Menai Is this deja vu all over again? Remember the outcome of the 1953 coup d'état in Iran, led by the US. Natalie Mabbitt, Randwick What happens if North Korea 'lends' a few nuclear weapons to Iran for use? Tony Saunders, Hunters Hill Coalition of the wilful The Coalition has agreed with the US bombing of Iran (' Trump joins the war with Iran with the plan that was 'never to be used ‴ , June 23), an attack which seems to have no legal or ethical basis. That seems to be in line with their support for the war on Iraq, and, before that, Vietnam. Steve Bright, North Avoca Tax reform needs consensus The debate for the next three years has been set by the treasurer (' Chalmers sets Labor a new standard ', June 23). Tax reform is important, and necessary for achieving other things. But consensus is all about what those other things are. The treasurer also said that he didn't like using the term 'wake-up call', but the book Abundance, by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, had been a wake-up call. Why? Because 'abundance' is all about growing the pie and not just redistributing the pie. 'Abundance' sees urban failure as a result of regulatory treacle, rather than lack of money. But 'abundance' also sees that all progress depends on technology, and regulatory treacle also applies to innovation, both in pure science and in the speed of implementation. Finally, 'abundance' understands that areas remain where the failure is the opposite – for example, lack of regulation to properly protect our remaining environment, especially, but not only, because of climate change. That's the reason for lack of consensus, and is the area that markets can't, and won't, fix. Concentrating on tax reform needs consensus on what to use the money for, and the things that 'free markets' will never bring about. Noel Thompson, Riverview The proposed changes to the threshold and the rate of tax are matters subject to rational debate. The lack of indexation can be fixed in due course. What is unconscionable is the proposition to tax unrealised capital gains. A superannuation fund will be faced with this tax on 'paper profits' each year, and then when the underlying asset is eventually sold and results in an 'actual profit' it will be taxed again using the usual CGT rules. How is that fair? The claim that the changes affect only relatively few people shows sheer laziness in devising a system that is defensible. John Burman, Port Macquarie People are up in arms over the suggestion that unrealised (that is, not converted to equivalent cash at the time) capital gains should be taxed. The gains are not income, just value on paper, writes one, arguing it would not be fair to tax wealth gains that may not persist. Let's be honest: there would be nothing unfair about the tax, provided later capital losses on the asset were later deductible. Let's recognise, too, that land-based assets generally increase in value at or above the rate of inflation. Not taxing unrealised wealth gains means that others in society (notably including the less-well-to-do) are required to subsidise the asset owner by allowing the owner to retain the full growing value of the asset and to earn further gain on that tax-unpaid value. That is distinctly unfair and unjustifiable. Ross Drynan, Lindfield As part of his proposed changes to the taxing of superannuation, Jim Chalmers would have predicted the uproar he would create from the more wealthy in the community by his proposing to tax unrealised capital gains. It is likely he will forgo that aspect of it to get the main thrust of the legislation through. If successful, I hope he will then move on to rectifying the housing taxation anomalies in negative gearing and capital gains. Peter Nash, Fairlight Many correspondents are bellyaching about a proposed tax on super funds that hold assets, including real property, that have increased in value. The opposition to the proposed super fund tax changes have been led by a vocal chorus that never says that they just don't want to pay more tax. Oh no, God forbid; that would look so selfish. Instead, the criticism is directed to the mechanism, i.e. taxing an unrealised gain. But since its current incarnation in 1956, the mechanism for calculating land tax in NSW has operated in the same way; it hits the increase in the value of land. So why is it that since 1956 we have not seen the spectacle of land tax payers thrashing around in the dust, rending their garments and howling to the heavens? The answer appears to be that there are a lot more taxpayers with interests in super funds, and despite its humble origins, the super business has long ago morphed into the investment business and no one wants to have a haircut. The search for the Golden Boomerang, Lasseter's Reef and the Perpetual Motion Machine are as nothing compared with the search for tax reform without adversely affecting someone's wallet, but they all share one thing in common: they are all wishful fantasies. If Jim Chalmers is fair dinkum, quite a few who are currently doing quite well will have to take a bite of the you-know-what. Joe Weller, solicitor, Mittagong Ways out west When I saw the headline (' Next generation goes west ', June 23) I thought Sydneysiders were moving west of Penrith. I was wrong and now know the moves are to western Sydney. There is opportunity west of Mountains to work and buy affordable real estate. However, more decentralisation of government departments and business to move out of Sydney would provide more jobs, and opportunities to buy real estate. The good coffee shops are already here. Robyn Lewis, Raglan Grinding halt Perhaps the project managers should have made the call before they deployed the tunnelling machines (″ Planning failure stymies Metro dig ″, June 23)? Allan Gibson, Cherrybrook Perhaps Sydney Metro could employ a few rabbits to show the geotechnical boffins a trick or two on how to dig a hole? Bradley Wynne, Croydon Oops. As soon as possible, make a U-turn. Greg Baker, Fitzroy Falls Emus don't go backwards Dear Mr Watts, just so you know, there is more to being an emu than having beady eyes and long legs (Letters, June 23). For starters, you must be able to run at speeds up to 50km/h. You also need to be able to swallow large pebbles to aid your digestion. Further, since you are male, after mating it's your duty to protect and incubate up to 15 eggs for 56 days without food or water while your mate goes on the hunt for another partner. After those eggs hatch, it's your responsibility to take care of your chicks for the next 18 months or so. So think carefully, Mr Watts, for once you are an emu, there is no going backwards. Mary Carde, Parrearra (Qld)
