The Raptor is dead.

Recommended Videos

SilentHunter7

New member
Nov 21, 2007
1,652
0
0
geldonyetich said:
Don't blame Obama. Blame Bush Jr. deficit spending sending us so far into the pit that we've got to make up that slack somewhere. Fancy new jets are just one of the first thing to get the axe. You want jets so badly? Don't be in a hurry to get your taxes cut next time, seeing how they pay for them.
Oh, I agree. This $8 trillion quagmire we got ourselves into with Iraq fucked us. With all the money we spent on the war, we could build 10,000 F-22's, 20,000 F-35's, and 30,000 Mine resistant APCs, and still have money left over to give everyone free healthcare.
 

Anarchemitis

New member
Dec 23, 2007
9,102
0
0
While the Raptor looks cool, I liked the company Supermarine [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine] better when they were making Racing planes.[/analogy]
 

hippo24

New member
Apr 29, 2008
702
0
0
geldonyetich said:
Don't blame Obama. Blame Bush Jr. deficit spending sending us so far into the pit that we've got to make up that slack somewhere. Fancy new jets are just one of the first thing to get the axe. You want jets so badly? Don't be in a hurry to get your taxes cut next time, seeing how they pay for them.
Ohh I love the blame game...

It gets really fun really fast, especially with something that has as many factors as the economy. I could literally pic anyone to blame, from presidents 20 years ago, to collage students, minorities, health care, military, people with loans, people without loans, the rich, the poor, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Irish. Heck I could even blame you or me.
and guess what, my argument would still be as valid as the next guy.

Because thats whats fun about the blame game, everyone can play it!
 

asinann

New member
Apr 28, 2008
1,602
0
0
wwjdftw said:
obama seems like he is trying to ruin the nation

We cant spend 100 million dollars on THE MOST ADVANCED FIGHTER JET EVER MADE, but we can go right the fuck ahead and spend trillions of dollars trying to "fix" the economy not to mention that 1 B-2 bomber costs something like 1.2-1.3 BILLION dollars to make and we have many many more B-2's than we have F-22s
So it's the president's fault that the Air Force said "we don't want more F-22's, please stop sending them to us."

This jet was made in 7 different states, congress turned the F-22 into a pork barrel project. The F-22 was originally slated for a run of 187 jets, they got 187 jets. Congress wanted to make the Air Force take more of them. The joint chiefs and the president told congress to stop wasting money.

Darkside360 said:
You can keep blaming Bush all you want but in the end, Obama has spent more than any president in history. Maybe we should use more than 7% of the stimulus first.
Except that Obama plans to tax the rich to levels almost as high as they were before Reaganomics took hold of the Republican party (most people know it as the tickle down effect, doesn't work now, never has. The money stays in the hands of the people that had their taxes cut.)
 

SilentHunter7

New member
Nov 21, 2007
1,652
0
0
Anarchemitis said:
While the Raptor looks cool, I liked the company Supermarine [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine] better when they were making Racing planes.[/analogy]
LEAVE THEM OUT OF THIS! They invented the spitfire, and nothing can top that!

...such a great plane...
 

Jenkins

New member
Dec 4, 2007
1,091
0
0
the U.S already has a ton of F-22's already, we dont need more, also, when was the last time we had a legitimate air-air battle? Vietnam??

that money can go for better things >.>
 

SilentHunter7

New member
Nov 21, 2007
1,652
0
0
asinann said:
wwjdftw said:
obama seems like he is trying to ruin the nation

We cant spend 100 million dollars on THE MOST ADVANCED FIGHTER JET EVER MADE, but we can go right the fuck ahead and spend trillions of dollars trying to "fix" the economy not to mention that 1 B-2 bomber costs something like 1.2-1.3 BILLION dollars to make and we have many many more B-2's than we have F-22s
So it's the president's fault that the Air Force said "we don't want more F-22's, please stop sending them to us."

This jet was made in 7 different states, congress turned the F-22 into a pork barrel project. The F-22 was originally slated for a run of 187 jets, they got 187 jets. Congress wanted to make the Air Force take more of them. The joint chiefs and the president told congress to stop wasting money.
Actually, the Air Force is the one that wanted more. They even shuffled their budget around and cut other programs so that they could pay for a few more. Congress and Secretary Gates overruled them.
 

asinann

New member
Apr 28, 2008
1,602
0
0
SilentHunter7 said:
asinann said:
wwjdftw said:
obama seems like he is trying to ruin the nation

We cant spend 100 million dollars on THE MOST ADVANCED FIGHTER JET EVER MADE, but we can go right the fuck ahead and spend trillions of dollars trying to "fix" the economy not to mention that 1 B-2 bomber costs something like 1.2-1.3 BILLION dollars to make and we have many many more B-2's than we have F-22s
So it's the president's fault that the Air Force said "we don't want more F-22's, please stop sending them to us."


This jet was made in 7 different states, congress turned the F-22 into a pork barrel project. The F-22 was originally slated for a run of 187 jets, they got 187 jets. Congress wanted to make the Air Force take more of them. The joint chiefs and the president told congress to stop wasting money.
Actually, the Air Force is the one that wanted more. They even shuffled their budget around and cut other programs so that they could pay for a few more. Congress and Secretary Gates overruled them.
The Air Force wouldn't have had them in their budget in the first place if Congress hadn't budgeted it in for them. The Pentagon and the President said no, Congress said "We're going to put this money in the budget, and since the line-items veto was declared unconstitutional, you have to either make us rewrite the whole thing, or take it as we give it to you."

The individual branches don't get a ton of say on their major weapons programs, those are almost universally pork barrel Congressional babies.

I can almost guarantee that those 7 F-22's show up in an appropriations bill within the next 6 months to try and either garner it Congressional support or kill something.
 

Unreliable

New member
Jul 14, 2009
157
0
0
1) America doenst have the money to play Empire anymore - I dont care whether you are right or left, your broke, and your military empire with hundeds of bases all over the world and retarded idea of full spectrum dominance is responsible for more than half your debt and deficit. The American Empire is finished, and we will likely be heading into a more multipolar world.

2) America has lost the war on terror. What good is a radar-invisible plane when your biggest threat (Terrorists) dont know what radar is?! America has city-vaporizing bombs, but their enemies live in caves. America spends trillions on the latest in technological weapons, but they cant defeat an enemy that uses old AKs, rocks, and little girls that strap bombs to their chests and run on crowded buses. Yes, terrorists dont fight fair, but when America has helicopters and nukes, you cant exactly expect them to line up with their muskets, now can you?

3) This trillion dollar oil raid into Iraq had fiasco written over it from the start (and, yes, we told you so), and now that it has alienated America's closest allies, made it hated around the world, resulted in disaster, ballooned the debt, killed thousands of innocent lives, and otherwise pulverized a developing nation. Most of all, it has been a terrorists wet dream - America has given terrorists more recruits than ever before, with extra motivation, while all your resources are bogged down in an unwinnable quagmire.

4) If war ever broke with Russia or China, the F-22 aint gonna make the difference, because you will be blasting one another with so many nukes that fighter jets will be irrelevant.

In short, America's military is obsolete, bloated, and useless in the age of nukes and terror.
 

Zykon TheLich

Extra Heretical!
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
3,506
850
118
Country
UK
SilentHunter7 said:
That canceling only 7 jets figure is misleading. Congress originally passed funding for 450 F-22s by 2010, with the chance to order more if they wanted to. Then they turned that into a build them as they go plan (Which ironically costs more per jet than if they just went into full production mode). Now they scrapped that in favor of the Joint Strike Fighter program, and extending the service length of our 35 year old fleet of F-15's and 16's
450 in all? So another 260 or so fighters yeah? So...even more money spent on jets you don't need "just in case". The cold war is over dude. Keep your eye on those ex-reds to be sure but I think we'll get fair warning of any building hostilities to arm up.
I guess you have to replace your old fleet, but with something so expensive? I can see the logic in their decision personally. The F22 is overqualified. 500 planes that do the job they are needed for perfectly well and 200 that excell at it or 450 that excell at it. I'm sure it would be great if every US grunt was trained to the level of Delta Force or the SEALS, but it's impractical.
 

Valiance

New member
Jan 14, 2009
3,823
0
0
agreed 100%, OP is right.

F-22's are one of the few things we still have going for us.
 

hippo24

New member
Apr 29, 2008
702
0
0
Jenkins said:
the U.S already has a ton of F-22's already, we dont need more, also, when was the last time we had a legitimate air-air battle? Vietnam??

that money can go for better things >.>
Im actually not too broken up about a few planes being knocked off the assembly line, as long as this isnt a trend. National security is above everything else, it doesnt matter how bad your economy is or how many civil rights issues you have. If you can defend yourself, your still much better off than your counterpart. Being poor and alive beats being rich and dead.

However, I dont think the cancellation of a few planes is upsetting that balance. We still have air superiority over every nation, and as long as that stays the way it is, well be fine.

Im all for practicing restraint with any and all government run program, military or not, and as long as Obama takes that same restraint when approaching economic problems as he does military, then its no big deal. But if this is a clear trend of stunting our military protection exclusivly, and continues to flippantly waste money in other areas...well then we might have a problem.

Also as for the air battles questions. You know why weve never had any substantial air battles...because of the air superiority we have through advanced planes like the f-22. Air superiorty suppresses all other nations, and makes noramlly "substantial" conflicts, unsubstantial.
 

Spore

New member
Jul 15, 2009
46
0
0
let's do some maths then, really simple maths, because I suck at them

your beloved F-22 has a KDR of 244 - (2) hypothetically 0 if it wasn't for the awacs screwing up summat like that wasn't it? but let's keep realistic and keep it at 244-2 you've got 187 F-22... 244/2=122 122*187=22814 CRIKEY! tha's a decentsize airforce gone right there... but oh no! I forgot about the F-15... the F-15 has a KDR of 104-0 so hypothetically it can kill everything without a single loss... but for the sake of reality lets make it 104-2. the USAF currently operates 630 F-15's wich makes a total kill count of: 104/2=52 52*630=32760+22814=55574 planes gone...

do you really need more planes?

EDIT: and isn't the real danger coming from "terrorism"
 

Chiefmon

New member
Dec 26, 2008
875
0
0
hippo24 said:
Chiefmon said:
Why don't we just spend less money on giant fighter jets, and more on world peace?
How do I buy world peace?
Id really like to know.
Please ohh dear one
Ohh enlighten one
Help us poor souls who deemed things like war and foreghin policy as just elaborate games we play for fun.

Unless that statement was sarcastic...
Fund research on pure energy, ending oil and other material disputes, use the energy to create a new era in recycling, ending the need for conflicts over raw materials.Then, use our pure energy to enable intergalactic travel. Then when the various alien races let their guard down, we STRIKE! I never said anything about "Intergalactic Peace"! (Cue evil maniacal laughter)
 

Woem

New member
May 28, 2009
2,878
0
0
Chiefmon said:
Why don't we just spend less money on giant fighter jets, and more on world peace?
As far as I understand the idea is to enforce world peace with those giant fighter jets...

Exactly.
 

Legion

Were it so easy
Oct 2, 2008
7,190
0
0
wwjdftw said:
AND yes, I am biased against him, his policies are not that horrible, but he tries to hide things, he has been caught in blatant lies and he is trying to force things on people who don't want them forced on them. I don't like him. period.
Relax, Bush isn't President any more so you have nothing to worry about.
 

hippo24

New member
Apr 29, 2008
702
0
0
Chiefmon said:
Fund research on pure energy, ending oil and other material disputes, use the energy to create a new era in recycling, ending the need for conflicts over raw materials.Then, use our pure energy to enable intergalactic travel. Then when the various alien races let their guard down, we STRIKE! I never said anything about "Intergalactic Peace"! (Cue evil maniacal laughter)
Well you have my vote!
 

Chiefmon

New member
Dec 26, 2008
875
0
0
hippo24 said:
Chiefmon said:
Fund research on pure energy, ending oil and other material disputes, use the energy to create a new era in recycling, ending the need for conflicts over raw materials.Then, use our pure energy to enable intergalactic travel. Then when the various alien races let their guard down, we STRIKE! I never said anything about "Intergalactic Peace"! (Cue evil maniacal laughter)
Well you have my vote!
Thank you.
I always try to Help you poor souls who deemed things like war and foreign policy as just elaborate games we play for fun.