Posted on 07/14/2009 7:43:30 AM PDT by jazusamo
The Senate began debating the 2010 Defense Budget and a key topic was the continued production of the F-22 Raptor advance fighter. The Obama Administration has recommended ending production of the aircraft at the 187 currently planned. The Air Force had wanted at least forty odd more to meet its requirements but submitted the smaller number with their budget. Both the House and Senate Armed Service Committees included money to continue production. Now that the bill is on the Senate Floor some members are offering amendments to remove it.
Obama has actually threatened to veto the budget if it includes this funding which puts him at odds with most of the Democrats and many Republicans in Congress. The major reasons for keeping the production line hot are to meet requirements. Another is that cutting the production will have a serious effect on the economy. This during a major down turn will only exacerbate the problems. The defense budget really shouldn’t be used as a jobs or stimulus program but in this stressful time the argument has resonated with Congressmen and Senators.
The final bill is moving fairly quickly and the fact that both Houses added the money indicates that it will be contained in the final budget. This will make it difficult to veto as there will also probably be enough votes to over turn that. Obama really will have a hard time considering a veto as the budget will contain most of what he wants. The missile defense budget has not been restored and other then the additional C-17 aircraft in the recent supplemental all of the major programs ended by the the new administration have remained out of the bill. It is a ninety percent solution.
The main argument for ending the production is that the advanced fighter is not needed in the current war on terror. The mission of air dominance that it was built for is not one that is being exercised very often. The price is also very high and the money could be used for more conventional weapon systems. The budgetary pressure faced by the Department of Defense is not so much on buying weapons but paying for current operations. Savings from the F-22 will most likely go to the F-35 accelerated production rather then keeping troops in the field. It would be a hard sell to Congress not to use the funds for other procurement programs just from the economic impact alone.
Haven't seen this come up before and don't know if it's true but hope so.
Ping!
And pray that more Raptors would reach to the other fighter squadrons.
The 44th and 67th FS @ Kadena, 390th FS @ Mountain Home and the 493d FS @ Lakenheath are possible candidates for Raptors.
That sounds eerily similar to what Clinton said when he downsized the military after the Berlin Wall fell.
There was no need for so much military, now that the Cold War was ended.
F-22 is the USA first strike option ...
And Colonel Obama doesn’t like that.
That sounds eerily similar to what Clinton said when he downsized the military after the Berlin Wall fell.
There was no need for so much military, now that the Cold War was ended.
Why are democrats so eager to dismantle our military?
I guess I just am not as smart as those who think stimulus is destroying industry, creating mountains of debt, starving the military and regulating free enterprise into extinction while funding ACORN, labor unions and Pelosi's re-election.
If the USA is going to be bankrupt, we might as well go into it well armed.
We need either more F-22s or a sizeable purchase of F-15/4.5s.
When engineers can get the F-22 to land on an aircraft carrier I’ll write my senators to back it; until then I’ll opt for the less expensive F-35. It makes absolutely no sense to me to purchase multibillion a 5th generation fighter that has nothing to fight against...besides the future of air-to-air combat is UAVs.
Yes, it does seem eerily similar to Clinton downsizing our military. Obama and the leftists are eager to dismantle much of our military.
As for McCain saying the F-22 hasn’t been utilized in Iraq and Afghanistan to justify stopping production is insane, it doesn’t take a genius to know they weren’t needed there but the Air Force says it’s needed in larger numbers to carry out their future mission. It seems the Air Force realizes there’s other and larger threats in the future
You got that part right. Where do you think the money is coming from? Try this example. Let's say you make $50,000. The government takes 25% leaving you with $37,500 to spend. Now with the stimulus the government takes another 15% leaving you with $30,000 to spend. Now multipy that times the 50% of the taxpayers that actually pay 95% of the taxes. Tell me how that is going to "stimulate" the economy?
Agreed, the money is better spent on good jobs building national security intead of spending it on leftist social programs but the numbers of F-22’s should be increased more for the protection of our country. China is sitting back and rooting for Obama.
The F-35 will be a carrier fighter and a fighter/bomber which the F-22 is not, neither is an F-35 a dominant air superiority fighter.
Twenty years down the road should China have several thousand fighters and decide to use them we’ll darn sure wish we had the F-22 in numbers.
UAV’s may some day be the fighter in air-to-air combat but no time soon and to field a fleet of them will be extremely expensive as well. We have the F-22 now, we should prop up the numbers and utilize the technology, there’s no other fighter close to it.
Because you're just an irrational Navy fanboy, or what? The Navy pulled out of the program in 1993.
"until then I’ll opt for the less expensive capable F-35."
Fixed that for you.
UAVs -- I still think the public doesn't trust robots to do it right.
The F-15 isn't carrier ready either and saw heavy use in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The problem is you never know when you may need to take out a missile site or two.
The F-22 and F-35 are complementary aircraft.
Well, what they’re saying now is that they’ll save money by cutting the F-22 and use it to build more F-35s.
I doubt it. They’ll more likely use the money for more pork projects or useless “alternative energy” schemes run by their pals.
Yep, I doubt it too.
The thing is even building two F-35’s for one F-22 is not advantageous for us for air superiority. The F-22 can take on vastly superior numbers and win. We need them both.
“The F-22’s big claim to fame is the SAM side not necessarily fighter on fighter.”
What other nations’ fighters are superior to the F-22?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.