• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Threatens to Veto His Own Defense Bill Over F-22 Funding

Scorpion89 said:
man you have no idea about the Defense Industry at all you do understand that for ever 1 Job they have they create 4 to 6 un-related Jobs, I suggest you go and re-read my above post on what Company would be effected and how broad the Defense industry is.
Click to expand...

So then we should just waste as much money as possible on the DoD, right? Who cares if we actually NEED the things we're buying for military effectiveness? After all, the purpose of the military is to be a charity for the manufacturing sector, not to defend our country. Right? :2wave:

Scorpion89 said:
As for the banks mmm wonder how all of those Defense Related Credit Unions would do huh or you do under stand that Wall Street was build on the back of the Defense Industry and its off shots.
Click to expand...

As I already told you, my reasons for supporting a bank bailout have absolutely nothing to do with the success or failure of individual banks or employees. They are not relevant to the subject at hand; if you want to discuss the bank bailouts, you can create a separate thread.
 
Kandahar said:
I do? What are you talking about? What part of "I do not support an auto bailout" did you not understand? I don't think I can be more clear than that. :confused:
Click to expand...

Brain fart. My bad. Edited it. Sorry.:3oops:
 
Kandahar said:
Makes sense to me. It's not popular to say it, but the military is one of the most wasteful parts of our government. If Obama can shave over a billion dollars off of the deficit by forgoing a needless expense, kudos to him.
Click to expand...
Don't even ****ing go there okay. Go play "hijack a thread" some ****ing-where else. You know I'm getting tired of people like you coming in and ****ing up a thread with that bull**** about defense spending.
 
American said:
Don't even ****ing go there okay. Go play "hijack a thread" some ****ing-where else. You know I'm getting tired of people like you coming in and ****ing up a thread with that bull**** about defense spending.
Click to expand...

Dude, you know the government gets raped on what they buy in defense. Boeing makes a freaking killing and they are moving much of their engineering development to fomer Soviet bloc states in order to get cheaper engineers and increase their profit margin, while putting Americans out of work. So do not defend DoD like it is Mother Theresa.
 
Kandahar said:
So you're in favor of wasting taxpayer money just to keep people on the government payroll?



It sounds like military experts are saying that this is obsolete and the F-35 is better. The pilots can be retrained for the new aircraft.
Click to expand...
The F-22 is obsolete??? Would you like to explain that? Stop the trolling about keeping people on govt payroll. That is NOT where the money is going, if you knew anything about the govt. The two fighter serve different roles.
 
Last edited:
tlmorg02 said:
Just like in maufacturing, pilots will be replaced with drones before long, and all this controversy will be mute. Sorry Scorpion.
Click to expand...

No they won't you do undertsand that drone are good for some stuff but if you need to get down and dirty you need the person in the seat. The USAF found that out the hard way when they decide to Decon the SR71 and then were oh **** we need hard intel that neither the Sats or UAV could get. Hence brought the SR out of mothballs and used them till a new genration of Recon stuff could go on line.
 
tlmorg02 said:
Dude, you know the government gets raped on what they buy in defense. Boeing makes a freaking killing and they are moving much of their engineering development to fomer Soviet bloc states in order to get cheaper engineers and increase their profit margin, while putting Americans out of work. So do not defend DoD like it is Mother Theresa.
Click to expand...

It's because most defense contractors are union.
 
tlmorg02 said:
Dude, you know the government gets raped on what they buy in defense. Boeing makes a freaking killing and they are moving much of their engineering development to fomer Soviet bloc states in order to get cheaper engineers and increase their profit margin, while putting Americans out of work. So do not defend DoD like it is Mother Theresa.
Click to expand...

Actually that not true Boeing Defense has not sent anything to any Form Warsaw Block Nations yes they have spent money in Poland with Irska and in Romania with Avia but they are using the home grown work force.
 
tlmorg02 said:
Dude, you know the government gets raped on what they buy in defense. Boeing makes a freaking killing and they are moving much of their engineering development to fomer Soviet bloc states in order to get cheaper engineers and increase their profit margin, while putting Americans out of work. So do not defend DoD like it is Mother Theresa.
Click to expand...
Not in my experience with them.
 
American said:
Don't even ****ing go there okay. Go play "hijack a thread" some ****ing-where else. You know I'm getting tired of people like you coming in and ****ing up a thread with that bull**** about defense spending.
Click to expand...

Uhh
Isn't this thread ABOUT waste in defense spending? You know, the topic of the thread is a major defense appropriations bill...and specifically an item in that bill that has been deemed wasteful by some? :confused:

How exactly am I off-topic? And while you think of an answer to that, I suggest you remove the sand from your vagina and maybe take a Xanax or two.
 
American said:
The F-22 is obsolete??? Would you like to explain that? Stop the trolling about keeping people on govt payroll. That is NOT where the money is going, if you knew anything about the govt. The two fighter serve different roles.
Click to expand...

Gates, Mullen, Levin, and McCain (all experts on defense matters) have all concluded that no more F-22s are needed. So far I haven't heard any comparable defense experts speak up on the other side of this issue...just one senator whose state manufactures them.
 
It appears Obama's cuts are much more worse than we feared! Everyone panic, he is cutting the most vital program in our national defense. Can we say impeach NOW?

[ame="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/obama_axes_pentagon_plan_to_build?utm_source=videoembed"]Obama Axes Pentagon Plan To Build Billion Dollar Tank In Shape Of Dragon | The Onion - America's Finest News Source[/ame]
 
Kandahar said:
Gates, Mullen, Levin, and McCain (all experts on defense matters) have all concluded that no more F-22s are needed. So far I haven't heard any comparable defense experts speak up on the other side of this issue...just one senator whose state manufactures them.
Click to expand...

Hmm really I guess you didn't read what I post about both Sen.Levin and McCain then huh I said they wouldn't like to see all of the 300+ Builded both are on record as saying they would like to see the number cap at 200 which the USAF ask for in 2007.

Sect.Gate the second worst Sect of Defense we have ever had for the life of me I don't understand why Mr. Bush nominated him. With in the halls of the Pentagon he has brought the moral down to a all time low. He needs to go plain and simple. As for Joint Chief Mullen I can't really say what I feel since this is an open forum and he is my boss.
 
Although the f-22 is theoretically gives the Airforce a big technological advantage, its absurd cost is a major drawback. Honestly, at this juncture there are no good options. The f-22 has absurd unit costs, but it exists works and we have already paid for development costs. The f-35 has more reasonable costs, but isn't a deployable plaform, and could possibly end up nearly as expensive and less capable. Even choosing nothing wont help as the we need to replace worn-out airframes regardless of the procurement choice. Fact is, this whole system was screwed up years ago, and there is little that can fix it now. What really needs to happen is that we need to start to do cost-benefit analysis of military hardware. Currently, we pick whatever brings the most jobs to the senators home state and the most profits to the defense contractor.
 
Scorpion89 said:
Hmm really I guess you didn't read what I post about both Sen.Levin and McCain then huh I said they wouldn't like to see all of the 300+ Builded both are on record as saying they would like to see the number cap at 200 which the USAF ask for in 2007.
Click to expand...

Well, more recently they've both said that they don't think we need anymore than the 187 we're already slated to get.

Scorpion89 said:
Sect.Gate the second worst Sect of Defense we have ever had for the life of me I don't understand why Mr. Bush nominated him. With in the halls of the Pentagon he has brought the moral down to a all time low. He needs to go plain and simple. As for Joint Chief Mullen I can't really say what I feel since this is an open forum and he is my boss.
Click to expand...

What did Gates ever do that was so horrible? I agree with you about McNamara, but Gates? The second worst ever? He wasn't even the worst SecDef in the previous administration.
 
rathi said:
Although the f-22 is theoretically gives the Airforce a big technological advantage, its absurd cost is a major drawback. Honestly, at this juncture there are no good options. The f-22 has absurd unit costs, but it exists works and we have already paid for development costs. The f-35 has more reasonable costs, but isn't a deployable plaform, and could possibly end up nearly as expensive and less capable. Even choosing nothing wont help as the we need to replace worn-out airframes regardless of the procurement choice. Fact is, this whole system was screwed up years ago, and there is little that can fix it now. What really needs to happen is that we need to start to do cost-benefit analysis of military hardware. Currently, we pick whatever brings the most jobs to the senators home state and the most profits to the defense contractor.
Click to expand...

I disagree with you rathi- The F-22 isn't as high as everyone claims hell their was an brief about this not to many days ag that the Ag sent out. The 350 Million Cost is a Balloon cost that all Aircraft get do you know how much a Block 55 F-16 is or a F-18F Block 35 it's about the same as a F-22 minus the avionics the cost of the F-22 is it's Avionics plain and simple.

As for the F-35 it's junk plain and simple it should have never left the drawing board the thing is going to cost us far more then it is worth. Hell they can't even get the navy Reqs correct. The two navy Prototyped that were going to be used for Carrier Quals can't even pass the most basic hard landing drops. I got to watch one break its Main Left Gear last Wend at NAS Pax River.

As for you last comment not true the problem is this we have slashed are military Budget so much that we no wonly have a few Contractors in very few States.

question with out googling cam you name all the US Military Aircraft Compnay that are currently building aircraft and then name all the companys from 40 Years ago.
 
I disagree with you rathi- The F-22 isn't as high as everyone claims hell their was an brief about this not to many days ag that the Ag sent out. The 350 Million Cost is a Balloon cost that all Aircraft get do you know how much a Block 55 F-16 is or a F-18F Block 35 it's about the same as a F-22 minus the avionics the cost of the F-22 is it's Avionics plain and simple.
Click to expand...


True, but you are assuming that the f-22 is the only plane with a inflated price tag. Avionics are the most expensive because they are the easier to get away with absurd price gouging. Notice how computers have been getting cheaper and more powerful over the years, but avionics get more expensive. The f-22 is simply a more stark example of an already existing problem.

As for the F-35 it's junk plain and simple it should have never left the drawing board the thing is going to cost us far more then it is worth. Hell they can't even get the navy Reqs correct. The two navy Prototyped that were going to be used for Carrier Quals can't even pass the most basic hard landing drops. I got to watch one break its Main Left Gear last Wend at NAS Pax River.
Click to expand...

I agree that so far the f-35 is not a great aircraft, but we have limited options. Even if we buy the f-22, its a pure fighter and isn't suited for ground attack. We have to replace our f-16s and f-18s with something. The best bet might be foreign planes like eurofighters or su-35s, but that is impossible for political reasons.

As for you last comment not true the problem is this we have slashed are military Budget so much that we no wonly have a few Contractors in very few States.

question with out googling cam you name all the US Military Aircraft Compnay that are currently building aircraft and then name all the companys from 40 Years ago.
Click to expand...

Military contractors merge like crazy. Boeing bought Mcdonald Douglas, Northrop merged with Grumman, Lockheed &Martin and the entire concept of General Dynamics.Furthermore, the standardization of designs has simply eliminated the need for many different times of aircraft. Finally, corruption has made competition so difficult that anyone who didn't have political contacts went out of business.
 
While I dont know to much about aircraft inparticular there is for sure something wrong with the way we dicide which equipment the millitary gets. If you need a few examples here are a few. The ACU the armys uniform that came out a some years back. It tears like nobodys buisness and the first time it gets somewhat dirty it never comes clean again. And they are not that cheap. Everyone who has had to wear one hates it. But somehow this is the uniform that won the contract after the army did testing on several new types of uniforms. Another example the Berretta M9 it is more expensive than many other handguns yet is less reliable than many cheaper guns but somehow this is the one that was selected. Either the people in charge of what we get have no idea what they are doing or there is some real unethical work going on here.
 
Last edited:
Scorpion89 said:
Obama Threatens to Veto His Own Defense Bill Over F-22 Funding - Political News - FOXNews.com

It's not every day that a president threatens to veto his own defense spending bill.

But that's the rare position President Obama finds himself taking after senators made an 11th hour addition of $1.75 billion to buy seven F-22 fighter jets whose price tag has ballooned to about $350 million apiece.

The fifth generation fighter jet has been overtaken by the newer F-35, critics argue, and Obama wants to keep with the recommendation of former President George W. Bush and cap the purchase at 187 jets.

The president's not alone in opposing the change. He's also got the Democratic chairman of the Senate Armed Service Committee, Sen. Carl Levin, and his former GOP rival Sen. John McCain -- a war hero himself -- on his side.

But with jobs on the line, other senators are putting up a fight for the F-22.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., whose state would lose at least 2,000 jobs should the cap be imposed, pushed for the seven extra F-22's to be built.

"While the administration is emphasizing winning current conflicts, its stance regarding the F-22 does not adequately account for other kinds of threats," Chambliss said.

But the F-22 requires 30 hours of maintenance for every hour of flying time and costs the taxpayer about $44,000 an hour to fly, according to confidential Pentagon test results.

First Off their should be no Cap on the F-22 this 350 Million Price tag is a bogus claim and has been all along. As for the Pentagon Report I call some real BS on this. I know for a fact that the numbers the USAF stated and what actually is in the field are far and wide try maybe 11.5 hours for every 2 hours of flight. But hey if the USAF wants to start throwing these number around then I say great lets release what the numbers are for the F-16 Block 45-65 and the F-15E Block 50 or the B-1B and B-52. Or better yet how about what the time is for 89th Airlift Wing which provide 24/7 SAM to the White House and Congress.

As for the F-35 please that junk box want even be in active squadrons for at least 5 more years and into the Fleet for at least 6.
Click to expand...

Man I grew up near where they build those jets.
It's my home county.

Saxby is pandering for votes because he came close to loosing last year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom