USAF to scrap AGM-129 stealth cruise missile

Seattlepi.com ^ | March 7, 2007 | ROBERT BURNS

[sukhoi-30mki]

[Redcitizen]

Could we just use them and get our money's worth?

[EagleUSA]

Araujo indicated that the retirement was part of a "balanced force reduction" being carried out to reduce the number of U.S. strategic nuclear weapons to between 1,700 and 2,200 by Dec. 31, 2012, as required under a U.S.-Russia arms reduction deal signed in Moscow in May 2002.
----
So now we are pandering to Ivan, who is aiding and abetting every enemy we have?? And we choose our "top stealth CM" to scrap?? Hello Washington?? Be advised Ivan is NOT OUR FRIEND.

[Crazieman]

Maybe the guy keeping them active fell out of a window.

[Pukin Dog]

He noticed that funds for the program were cut in the Air Force budget request for 2008, and that no money is budgeted for it beyond 2008; when he inquired, the Air Force acknowledged the retirement decision.

Sadly, the media which covers the military is probably the dumbest of all. They would suggest that you continue to pay for something after you have bought all you intend to buy.

Under their logic, I guess I should be paying for beer long ago flushed?

[TommyDale]

"Could we just use them and get our money's worth?"

Exactly! Stick a small tactical nuke warhead and send them into Iran.

[Kenton]

Let's just modify the "stealth" part so that they can be really sneaky until they get to within a mile of their target, at which super-Boze speakers open up with "Ride of the Valkeries"...

[July 4th]

I don't expect we'll see these available at the next government auction.

[null and void]

Can the be fitted with conventional explosives warheads and used up somewhere?

Where is an exercise left to the reader...

[null and void]

I like the way you think. (Although the Viking Kitties' theme song would work, too)....

[Redcitizen]

That is something I can whole heartedly agree with.

I would put a big happy face on one of them.

[bmwcyle]

Russia builds up as we build down.

[expatpat]

I hope they know what they're doing.....

[magellan]

My guess is this is purely cost-driven. However, with the active consideration of lower-yield, penetrating nuclear weapons, something like the ACM might be somewhat obsolete.

Also, the only aircraft which can carry the ACM is the B-52, and there are serious considerations to finally retire the BUFF fleet.

[Jonathan]

Someone will remember this madness when the Russians and Chinese blow our decadent nation out of its slumber.

But that will be too late.

Absolute insanity.

We need:

1. New, mobile, more powerful ICBM's
2. A whole new fleet of bombers. Some on 24 hour alert.
3. A couple of Looking Glass and TACAMO's on duty at all times.
4. A new fleet of Stealth SSBN's.
5. Hardened and survivable orbital satellites.
6. Several new types of nuclear warheads.
7. A testing program to make sure that they work.
8. 5000 MORE stealth cruise missles.
9. Layered ABM defences for the homeland.
10. About 200,000 prison cells to hold the treasonous Democrats/socialists/liberals who would protest 1-9 above until they are executed for treason.
11. Some leaders who love our country more than their future consulting/speaking/business fees/bribes/payola.

This is the begining of the final act of the United States.

Enjoy it!

[The KG9 Kid]

Is this because a far cheaper JDAM or SLAM can do the same job?

[Pukin Dog]

I'm sorry, I should have just said the obvious, which is that we very likely have something else even better, and no longer need to invest in the older program.

Articles like this are how the media express their anger over not being kept in the loop on new weapons. They hope to get briefed on why this news is really no news at all.

[zarf]

I don't expect we'll see these available at the next government auction.

Don't I have a second amendment right to own one if I can afford it?

[sukhoi-30mki]

Probably because those weapons are cheaper & more versatile with launch from multiple platforms.

[null and void]

*sigh* Yeah. 100% right on!