[kingu]

All those questions, one already spelled out answer: The drones, under current contracts, will cost the air force half a billion dollars a year just to operate.

Now, if those contracts are modified, that's a whole different picture, but at the moment, the Air Force is playing hardball - the Global Hawks go to the boneyard if they're going to cost half a billion a year to operate.

A rare moment of sanity in Washington.

[MarineBrat]

They’ll do this so that they can then “unload” them to entities that will use them to keep an eye on us dangerous Tea Partiers.

[The Working Man]

I think it all comes down to the Air Force having lost a drone to Electronic countermeasures in Iran. A piloted vehicle would not have been downed in the same way.

Just my theory mind you, but it and the timing of these announcements make sense to me.

[Pollster1]

"Air Force leaders have defended their decision, contending that the $67 million apiece Global Hawk has become too pricey, and that the Cold War era U-2 spy aircraft can still do the job."

Francis Gary Powers approves.

[blueunicorn6]

Here’s the logic......
The Air Force is run by pilots. Drones don’t require pilots. Drones are busting up the pilot union in the Air Force. They must be destroyed.

[philman_36]

Ahhhhhh, now I understand the domestic clamor for drones.
@Police, Border Patrol, other agencies looking to expand drone use at home

It's Hegelian Dialectic.

The Goal - You want the whole US watched yet you know it isn't popular.

LEO's - We need drones to help us do our job.
USAF - We don't need these drones to do our job.
WH - We can put those drones to good use on the border so that taxpayer dollars aren't wasted.
Always couch it so it's always in the best interest of somebody. (it's for the children)

Then on to the next step towards reaching "The Goal" since you've got the ball moving in the direction you want.