Reply With Quote
Who appointed this pinko?
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1
WASHINGTON (AP) - Defense Secretary Robert Gates is proposing deep cuts to some big weapons programs such as the F-22 fighter jet as the Pentagon takes a hard look at how it spends money.
Gates announced a broad range of cuts Monday to weapons spending, saying he plans to cut programs ranging from a new helicopter for the president to ending production of the $140 billion F-22 fighter jet. The Army's modernization program would be scaled back, while a new satellite system and a search-and-rescue helicopter would be cut.
Outlining a $534 billion budget for 2009 that will slash funds for major weapons programs, Gates said Monday his moves amount to an "unorthodox approach" that would shift spending goals to concentrate on "wars we are in today and scenarios for the years ahead."
At a news conference to outline his budget, Gates says he closely consulted with President Barack Obama and top military leaders, but limited outside advice "because of the scope and significance of the changes."
It is about time.
Who appointed this pinko?
Gates is just cutting corporate welfare/socialism.
The monstrous, obscene, often useless and still-born defense budget has needed cutting for many years.
I doubt Gates will succeed, since so much of the defense budget is really a smoke-screen for earmarks and pork that Congress s need to get re-elected.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 04-06-2009 at 03:22 PM.
Why doesn't Gates support our troops?
did he cancel Bush's 2000 strong trained monkey unit??
, I hope there is a line-by-line report of what is exactly being cut so I know wtf I am going to do in 3 months time.
says who?
Grunt type typing detected.
The F22 to me just seems like a its tomorrows plane for yesterday's wars. Its sexy as but really, who do we need it for?
....let's cut our nuclear arsenal to less than a 1500....I mean, do we really need more than that? Kinda scary that a pinko sub was able to pull up next to a battleship flotilla guarding a carrier, and well, the loss of control of 6 nuclear weapons for a few hours headed for Iraq...
...on the bright side, we have manage to finally supply Israel with a radar evading system that kinda works...
humm bailout companies with my money so now we can be less protective
damm he is so smart
Well, we need SOME kind of new airplane to put in video games. Come on now, think of the gamers.
Not to mention Michael Bay movies. You gotta admit, a F-22 Starscream is way more badass than than the old F-15 Starscream from the cartoon.
I don't have a problem with scaling back new developments, but you don't stop an ongoing designed an approved project in the middle of a recession while you are bailing out those who don't produce.
About time for what? That we put even more blue caller workers out of work?
One reason we are the strongest nation is we have kept the best military. I know we disagree here, but I think it's bad for our future to stop producing this amazing jet.
And Ironman.
F-35 is plenty bad-ass enough; and +- 1/3 the price.
Well, it's nice to have a 'tomorrows' plane in case somebody else that ISN'T a terrorist tries to attack us.
I forgot about Ironman...and Die Hard 4...
It's the Hollywood-Military Industrial Complex. Even Ike didn't see that one comin'.
Another point to bring up is that the F-35s are cheaper in part because some of the R&D for the F-22 went into that as well, IIRC. Also, I'm not sure if the F-35 can perform all of the counter-electronics capabilities that the F-22 can. (Haven't researched that yet.)
This may be true, and consider this if that is fact.
The R&D that makes the F-22 what it is would be part of their cost. If you reduce the production number, they end up costing more each, or the cost of the F-35 would end up costing more.
Absolutely correct. You have to keep in mind that the acquisition of a new weapon system takes the better part of two decades and these aircraft fly anywhere from 20 to 50 years.
In 20 to 50 years it's hard to tell who the enemy will be or what type of "war" they'll wage.
How about a replacement plane for the F-15 fleet that has been flying since the late '70s?
The F-35 is being sold to dozens of countries in multiple configurations. Granted, the US is likely to hold back some advanced avionics technology...but with the F/A-22 you gain a distinct air superiority advantage.
Oh and the cost....the F-35 program has been running into all kinds of cost overrun issues. It's no longer 1/3 of the cost of a full-rate production F/A-22.
Having posted all that...what the Air Force really needs is a new close air support (CAS)airplane, or to make more A-10s. I know the ground troops will always need CAS!
And the notion that an F-35 can replace what an A-10 does is ludicrous.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
