Forum Thread

Obama, military hostage

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 24 1 2 Next
  • Independent
    Plymouth, WI
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    President Obama has done nothing his first four years to end the military spending in Afghanistan, don’t even appear he has tried to, in fact, since he became our president, our Air Force is getting new and outrageously expensive F-22 fighters. Has our president been taken hostage by the American war pigs? President Obama is spending money hand over fist, money the majority cannot afford to pay, it is apparent our president has no control over the war pigs, he said he was going to end the war, not spend more, who is really running this country, Obama, or the war pigs holding him hostage?
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Central, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Maybe Dutch can comment on this but, I would imagine that Airplanes are ordered years in advance.
  • Independent
    Plymouth, WI
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    They are ordered years in advance, yet I did see a program when Obama took office in his first term, saying we had 11 F-22's, but because of their cost, we would not be getting more, yet here we are four years later, replacing F-15's with the expensive F-22's. Also, what about our Presidents words to end the war, when is this going to happen?
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    unitedmajority Wrote: They are ordered years in advance, yet I did see a program when Obama took office in his first term, saying we had 11 F-22's, but because of their cost, we would not be getting more, yet here we are four years later, replacing F-15's with the expensive F-22's. Also, what about our Presidents words to end the war, when is this going to happen?
    united majority --

    This is from wikipedia: Lockheed Martin/Boeing F-22 Raptor

    "The high cost of the aircraft, a lack of clear air-to-air combat missions because of delays in the Russian and Chinese fifth-generation fighter programs, a U.S. ban on Raptor exports, and the ongoing development of the planned cheaper and more versatile F-35 resulted in calls to end F-22 production. In April 2009, the U.S. Department of Defense proposed to cease placing new orders, subject to Congressional approval, for a final procurement tally of 187 operational aircraft. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 lacked funding for further F-22 production. The final F-22 rolled off the assembly line on 13 December 2011 during a ceremony at Dobbins Air Reserve Base."

    Dutch and I discussed both the F-22 and F-35 in another thread, the appointment of Hagel.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Yes, like "schmidt" said you mixed the F22 ( which is a vertical take off turbo prop contraption which is a very "delicate" machine because even a slight vibration will shake it apart, versus the F35 which is now being contracted; also a vertical take of "jet" propulsion like the AV8B (a Harrier modified type plane) however the F35 uses the propulsion straight down; the Harrier with nozzles on the side of the airframe. Other subject: I saw on TV, that Panetta is panicking right now about possible cuts in defense spending; he says this will dangerously affect our defense capabilities. I've got news for him; looking at another issue going on related to "gun" control, perhaps we can combine these two. We do not need the armed forces anymore, why? A simple answer: everyone in this country is already armed to the teeth at least 330 million guns around, so who dares to invade us (except some Mexicans crawling accross the border)? Then just give the keys of the ballistic silo's to the NRA and we will be save for ever.
  • Other Party
    Nebraska
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Correct that the F22's are done being built. However, there will still be lots of money spent maintaining and upgrading them for decades to come.

    F35 now THERE is the future of big money airplanes looking forward:

    Planned production:
    Air Force--1763
    Navy and Marines--680
    Britain and 8 partner countries--unspecified

    These numbers are a few months old and may have changed somewhat but the thing to realize is that only a few F35's have been produced so far. These "cheaper" airplanes still cost a whole bunch of maney and the assembly line is just starting to get cranked up, and it will be humming for years to come.
  • Other Party
    Nebraska
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch you are getting your 22's mixed up. The CV22 Osprey is the combination airplane/helicopter tilt rotor (propeller) transport aircraft still in production.

    The F22 is a conventional fighter jet all built and delivered even though the Air Force wanted hundreds more than they got.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    "jamesn" yeah, you got it. Due to my extensive experience in the aircraft field and technical engineering studies, I've got a feeling that this F35 will be a "money" swallowing project. The main reason is simple. If you have a plane which takes of from a runway then you request a power setting computed from weather temps/ wind direction etc may be 80%. However on a vertical take off plane you have (with a full payload) to use full power. Thus the wear and tear on the engine and nozzles is enormous; thus the maintenance costs are huge. Of course if these planes are airport based they can take of in the normal mode, so that does not differ that much more than an F15/16 etc. But do not forget "the but"; they will have for at least 4 years teething problems; which could become costly; the stresses in these planes are enormous because of the flight mode; tight turns, dives, pull ups etc. Also because of the design the fuselage gets hell too,because of engine location etc
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    " jamesn" yes I mixed "22's; excuses. The reason was, I looked at disaster programs,which vertical take-of thing was.
  • Independent
    Plymouth, WI
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I appreciate all the info on the 22 and 35. For sure these planes are a huge cost of majority tax dollars. Still, what about all the tax dollars being spent on troops and supplies to stay at war? It is far past time for President Obama to end the war, and put the troops in the reserves and make them get a real job that doesn't suck the majority's tax dollars dry and into a huge deficit. America can't afford to be at war nor can we afford a huge military that isn't needed until a real war comes along, when and if a real reason for war comes, then get the reserve troops back on the government tit full time, but until then, part time is plenty to pay an unneeded American soldier, unneeded when our government policies say so, for sure it is time to say so I say.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    "united" I think you are right, but look at what drives it; Obama is certainly looking out for his reputation related to "employment"; if all these troops come home at once then the unemployment figures do not look too good. So the more he can stretch it the less impact. I guess the "money" side is less important because the Repub's want to keep this war going because some of the contributers to their party profit from it and they love McCain and his lobby buddies who got grip on this regardless of Obama. (the war lobby)
  • Democrat
    Oregon
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I was a strong Obama supporter but his campaign rhetoric does not match his "war agenda." It looks like what we have now is "constant war."
    This is where the corporations make the big bucks. This creates jobs supposedly - but the deaths and maimings of our soldiers, plus PTSD, suicides, long term care when they arrive back home are all paid for by the 99% of citizens. So the corporations and the military-industrial-complex make the money, citizens pick up the tab and our soldiers and their families and loved ones are damaged beyond repair.
    It is clear who is running this country and Congress is beholding to them to get re-elected. Austerity benefits the rich and that is what has been coming down the pike.
  • Democrat
    Oregon
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I would rather be unemployed than dead or maimed or PTSD'd.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jenika Wrote: I was a strong Obama supporter but his campaign rhetoric does not match his "war agenda." It looks like what we have now is "constant war."
    This is where the corporations make the big bucks. This creates jobs supposedly - but the deaths and maimings of our soldiers, plus PTSD, suicides, long term care when they arrive back home are all paid for by the 99% of citizens. So the corporations and the military-industrial-complex make the money, citizens pick up the tab and our soldiers and their families and loved ones are damaged beyond repair.
    It is clear who is running this country and Congress is beholding to them to get re-elected. Austerity benefits the rich and that is what has been coming down the pike.
    I compliment you; only few people see the real picture; you really can not blame Obama, his powers are also limited; it is the "lobby" system and no term limits for the entrenched senators who keep all of this alive, so when they leave at the age of 95 or older, then their kids can eventually inherit the millions they gained from the industry. Crazy world out there!!
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    We've discussed the costs and problems of the F-22s and F-35s so let me just add a little fuel to the fire. As per the Air Force Times, the F-35 problems seem almost unfixable.

    Aaron Mehta, Air Force Times, March 6, 2013: Pentagon report warns of F-35 visibility risks

    "WASHINGTON — Significant visibility issues could lead to dangerous flight conditions, according to test pilots who have flown the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. That is just one of several issues identified by the Pentagon’s chief weapons tester in a February report, published online (PDF) today by the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight. Other issues include flawed radar, ongoing challenges with the high-tech helmet required to fly the jet, and potential issues with the touch screen control interface.

    It is especially disturbing to read the reviews by test pilots who have flown the plane.

    “The majority of responses cited poor visibility; the ejection seat headrest and the canopy bow were identified as causal factors. ‘High glare shield’ and the HMD cable were also cited as sources of the problem,” reads the report.

    Most worrisome for JSF supporters is this conclusion: “Of these, only the HMD cable has the potential to be readily redesigned.”

    Another common complaint involved the failure of the radar system.

    “The radar performance shortfalls ranged from the radar being completely inoperative on two sorties to failing to display targets on one sortie, inexplicably dropping targets on another sortie, and taking excessive time to develop a track on near co-speed targets on yet another sortie,” according to the report."


    I wonder when or if we will pull the plug on this expensive "big gorilla" that is sucking up our tax dollars. Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the head of the F-35 Joint Program Office, said his biggest concerns with the plane were not technological, but rather sustainment issues. He called the operations and sustainment (O&S) costs “the big gorilla,” stating that if O&S costs aren’t reduced, the plane could “potentially be unaffordable in the future.”

    It seems to me it is unaffordable now.