Liberal think tanks? They must be very progressive, it would be the first group of liberals i have ever witnessed, that wanted to reduced government spending. I believe the point being made was that we should not be spending money a p.o.s. because it will get people killed thanks to its insufficient performance of its "claimed" capabilities, and other needed programs will be impact, because we do not fully understanding/appreciating the true expense of this epic failure. In closing, it says spend your money on something that works and don't throw your cash down the toilet on a machine that is decade behind schedule, not preforming as sold and 200% of the initial budget, That sounds more conservative to me..... One more thing... wouldn't a liberal argue that you would need more government (more spending of tax dollars) to prevent this kind of corruption.... Whatever bro!
Liberal Progressive democrats gave the US the highly touted F2A Brewster Buffalo. Nicknamed by the US Marines at Midway as the "Flying Coffin" it's lack of ability made it seem tied to the Zekes by a string while the IJN pilots shot them to doll rags.
LIBERALS AND LIBERTARIANS BOTH AGREE. defense spending is obscene and if you believe in a limited US govt then defense needs to be cut.
i want us to do it smart but make no mistake, there is a TON of waste in defense. so much that you could buy every weapon on the wish list and got rid of overhead and it would be paid for.
the Marine Corps has four divisions counting the reserve but almost 100 generals? for a 180,000 force! really?
Go to Brave New Films ( http://www.bravenewfilms.org/meet_us) tand take a look at the source of this material. Look at their CV's or go to their youtube site. This is a far, far leftist group. Their site has an anti- McDonalds piece, and attacks on the Koch Brothers and Wal-Mart. Follow this link to "discover the network" (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1288) and you will find who and what the source of the material is. It is the kind of stuff that Pacific Radio pushes.
This is a good plane, but at what cost? I like the F-35, I think the variant option is a good idea, it's also a very good selling point to our allies. I really would like to know how well it would stack up in aerial combat against an equal foe. Especially, since the Chinese have a copy of it, and are probably not to far behind in there final version as well.
Maybe we should just solely continue with the STOVL variant, replace the Harrier at least, and buy less planes, just fill the USMC needs. We have put a ton of money and R&D into this plane, let's at least use some or most of it. I think the Navy would prefer a double engine jet to replace the F-18 Hornet down the road anyway, or more X-47B drones.
The USAF has the F-22 for the long haul, what they need is a replacement for the A-10, a definite requirement in today's modern battlefield, especially for troops on the ground. Obviously, trying to fill so many roles, one would think that it would save money in the long haul, but I think we just got screwed on that by the defense contractors, again.
There has to be serious accountability, and that will only happen if the higher ups speak out and say "You're putting lives at risk, no." Last I checked, they still can get the IHADSS to work properly on the F-35, wtf -really?! Some really tough choices ahead.
The Center for American Progress. Almost every liberal leaning, anti-defense think tank is on this thing.
ReplyDeleteyep.
DeleteThey would be fine if the entire military was demobilized.
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THEIR POLITICAL LEANINGS MATTER IF THEY'RE RIGHT?????
DeletePerhaps, but what about the truth ? Different objective, same way..
ReplyDeleteLiberal think tanks? They must be very progressive, it would be the first group of liberals i have ever witnessed, that wanted to reduced government spending. I believe the point being made was that we should not be spending money a p.o.s. because it will get people killed thanks to its insufficient performance of its "claimed" capabilities, and other needed programs will be impact, because we do not fully understanding/appreciating the true expense of this epic failure. In closing, it says spend your money on something that works and don't throw your cash down the toilet on a machine that is decade behind schedule, not preforming as sold and 200% of the initial budget, That sounds more conservative to me..... One more thing... wouldn't a liberal argue that you would need more government (more spending of tax dollars) to prevent this kind of corruption.... Whatever bro!
ReplyDeleteLiberal Progressive democrats gave the US the highly touted F2A Brewster Buffalo.
DeleteNicknamed by the US Marines at Midway as the "Flying Coffin" it's lack of ability made it seem tied to the Zekes by a string while the IJN pilots shot them to doll rags.
Solomon, the ONLY thing Liberals ever want to cut is the military.
DeleteThey see it is an outdated relic, full of masculine men who are 1 beer away from a rape frenzy.
LIBERALS AND LIBERTARIANS BOTH AGREE. defense spending is obscene and if you believe in a limited US govt then defense needs to be cut.
Deletei want us to do it smart but make no mistake, there is a TON of waste in defense. so much that you could buy every weapon on the wish list and got rid of overhead and it would be paid for.
the Marine Corps has four divisions counting the reserve but almost 100 generals? for a 180,000 force! really?
Or, accepted to support their Cloward–Piven strategy?
ReplyDeleteThey mix some F-22 pic with F-35 pics in this vid.
ReplyDeleteWith that level of editing-ineptitude I was waiting for MiG or Sukhoi in there somewhere....
Deletehehehe, that would be great.
DeleteI guess they hate all arms programs equally.
Mig, Sukhoi, and Lockheed officials comment on J-20.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1101&MainCatID=11&id=20140206000084
Taiwanese would love to get their hands on the F-35 after the CAPES defunding, but don't bet on it.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.defensenews.com/article/20140202/DEFREG02/302020016/Unfunded-F-16-Upgrades-Put-Jet-s-Combat-Value-Doubt
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2014/02/05/2003582769
Go to Brave New Films ( http://www.bravenewfilms.org/meet_us) tand take a look at the source of this material. Look at their CV's or go to their youtube site. This is a far, far leftist group. Their site has an anti- McDonalds piece, and attacks on the Koch Brothers and Wal-Mart. Follow this link to "discover the network" (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1288) and you will find who and what the source of the material is. It is the kind of stuff that Pacific Radio pushes.
ReplyDeleteThis is a good plane, but at what cost? I like the F-35, I think the variant option is a good idea, it's also a very good selling point to our allies. I really would like to know how well it would stack up in aerial combat against an equal foe. Especially, since the Chinese have a copy of it, and are probably not to far behind in there final version as well.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we should just solely continue with the STOVL variant, replace the Harrier at least, and buy less planes, just fill the USMC needs. We have put a ton of money and R&D into this plane, let's at least use some or most of it. I think the Navy would prefer a double engine jet to replace the F-18 Hornet down the road anyway, or more X-47B drones.
The USAF has the F-22 for the long haul, what they need is a replacement for the A-10, a definite requirement in today's modern battlefield, especially for troops on the ground. Obviously, trying to fill so many roles, one would think that it would save money in the long haul, but I think we just got screwed on that by the defense contractors, again.
There has to be serious accountability, and that will only happen if the higher ups speak out and say "You're putting lives at risk, no." Last I checked, they still can get the IHADSS to work properly on the F-35, wtf -really?! Some really tough choices ahead.