The jets are useless. Invasion isn't a possibility. Warfare is always proxy. Our war jets have become a cool thing to see at a football game. They arn't going to be anything in a real war. The parts arn't worth anything either. Most countries in the world are demilitarized. America just doesn't know how to run a country. Nobody wants parts for jets that are not necessary. You can't even fly them below 15000 ft because they are so loud. As i said technological warfare has no place. The only predictable invasion would be from Mexico. Other than that nuclear subs are the prime weapon in warfare. If you don't believe there are foreign sub's with warheads around our country waters. You are quite mistaken. Cause we are doing the same thing.
I'm going on that there is money driving this. As mentioned before there are 8 other countries involved in this deal and they are not going to buy an American plane that the Americans themselves won't back. It's the same situation as when the F-16 came into play but nobody can call that a failed fighter. Invasion is irrelevant, most of their time will likely be spent on carriers. I hold that we should not participate in aggressor wars but the reality of it is we're entering a new geopolitical stage that has been long in the works and essentially in another cold war. Though it's quiet, there is no arms race and people aren't living in fear of the bomb. You said yourself we are fighting proxy wars, the time will come when we will have to take responsibility for the war games we play. Ukraine is on the brink of flames, Gaza is hot, ISIS are tearing apart borders to declare the Islamic Caliphate. The reality of the matter is times are hot, we're doing business and looking out for our own 'security'.
Yes. Looking out for our own security. Support countries that get's a plane crashed into an iconic building. We shouldn't be supporting anyone. When we arn't neutral, that's when we have develop enemies. Think about in World War 1. One small event the assassination of a Hungarian price by a serb. Started a war between almost all of Europe. Just because we have treaty's with the UN doesn't mean they will come to our aid. Cause we never help them. We help the people we think we benefit from. Then when we deal with the shit that comes with it. We target the people who were angered by the decisions we made. The american public is so clueless to political affairs. I would hardly call it a Democracy we are a solid Republic. We vote people to make all our decisions for us. With the exception of a poll every so often , on some unimportant reason. All the important matters don't get addressed in government because the polar seperation between the Liberals and the Conservatives. So basically every decisision we make is biased and ends in disaster for someone.
The F-35 is the military industrial complex at its worst. Stealth technology won't be worth shit in the coming decades the Russians and the Chicoms have upgraded their radar capabilities might as well stick with the tried and true F-16, F-18 and F-15 fighter craft the Rand Institution which is part of the military industrial complex admitted as much when they ran wargames on their supercomputer that showed the F-35 would get its ass kicked by 20-30 year old chineses warplanes;.
The whole "600k home for each homeless person" analogy isn't very well thought out. They would pay property taxes and utilities on a house like that how...?
It has always been a Republic. It was never intended to be a democracy in the first place. Democracy does not protect the minority.
Very constructive. Nothing to say about the topic but a veiled general attack to the people with something to actually say..
The inclusion of some negates the general attack as it is going to be very focused. As for the comments of "some" saying that we should let the North Koreans nuke the military is not something that I would say is a very substantial contribution either. The way I see it is it comes down to two individuals. Machiavelli and Clausewitz. The first regarding his thoughts on the survival of the state depends on the effectiveness of its military, the second in that "war is merely the continuation of policy by other means." If you're going to take a stance on foreign policy then you have to make sure you have the guns to back it up even if that foreign policy is purely, and sadly to the detriment of the nation, reactionary. I agree that the F-35 is a money pit for the military but I hardly think that expanded welfare programs are hardly the response to redirecting military spending. The figures that I was able to come up with put welfare at $1 trillion a year for the United States in 2012 while the defense budget is supposedly set to $756.4 billion in 2015, which comes in after social security at $896 billion. While we do spend a lot of money on defense it is for good reason. You need troops on the ground to combat insurgencies, Galula says as much as a 10 or 20 to 1 ratio to insurgents. Mind you these insurgents still hate every single one of us including our dear friends over at ISIS (not Archer).... Now back to the F-35 issue, the F-35 is supposed to be the premier fighter jet but it still won't be the only fighter. The Chinese are already advancing their weapons programs, if that could not already be seen by their hacking of some of our advanced weapons blueprints a year or two ago. Now we come back to the survival of the state depends on the effectiveness of the military. Yes some project decisions need rethinking but the fact of the matter is that weapons advances are needed and some breed creations such as I don't know GPS, the internet, etc. Before you go on a head hunt against the military think about our dear friend Clausewitz. A country needs a military in order to survive and it needs men and women to fight those wars whether they be offensive or defensive. Because policy drives war consider who you elect into office when you consider the wars that we fight and their outcome. It is erroneous to compare Vietnam to Iraq or Afghanistan because those are wars of different characters set apart by differing historical circumstances. Vietnam was a proxy war. Iraq is subject to a lot of things but it turned out that the guy's who are trying to take it back were already there when we got there and guess what... they still hate us and want to watch us burn. It's ok if you don't like what is going on, run for office if you want to change it, you won't get my vote because you don't understand the complex systems that are involved in the international security system. Hell even I don't fully understand them, but I would rather invest my tax dollars in defense budgets and in my own arms as well other things for my family. I believe in self-sufficiency and that you make your own street paved in gold, someone doesn't hand it to you. If you don't like the military fine, walk up to a Marine in a bar and tell him to go fuck himself, see what happens to your hippy ass, or better yet, do us a favor and go hang out in the new "caliphate" for a little while and tell me how worthless the military is then.
Well, I wasn't expecting that. Solid response despite being a wall of text. I'm not sure why you're directing the contempt towards me considering I've been one of the only that supports the plan. If anything it seems we're on the same page though I'm salty you called me a libshit hippy.
I apologize since that was not my intention and not directed at you more at the below. Because my G.I. Bill pays for me to study some political science and a focus in Military History with respect to Military Theory and Strategic Thought so I actually understand the concepts that I'm talking about and can contribute to helping not make the same mistakes the government and military have made in the past while not asking the government for handouts everywhere. (just so it is clear, I am contractually obligated to receive education benefits for school in return for military service, i,e. I give four years of my life away in return for 2 years of accelerated study for a bachelor's degree and more stress.. because guess what, i wouldn't have been able to afford college, so instead of asking for money, I went and earned some)
How do you feel about the F-35 itself? I've seen some people mention we should have bought half as many F-22. Though, from what I understand the F-35 is more of a 'jack of all trades 'fighter.
I think it is a great concept but the money could have been better spent improving what we already have and other systems that need updated. I seriously think the gun was jumped on the investment. Maybe one working model then increased funding and orders upon approval. Sent from my SM-N900V using Grasscity Forum mobile app