Defense jobs: Recession-resistant no more?

The defense industry is a welfare industry. That's why contractors build aircraft parts in as many states as possible, and are always spreading fear. They, and the people that work for them take resources from the American people and turn them into useless objects. A bomb generates nothing, all it can do is blow up. Eisenhower was right, beware the Military Industrial Congressional Complex! They'll spend us into oblivion with corporate welfare.

So Clueless, how do you propose defending the USA without weapons systems and troops trained in their use?

Yes, , our $500 billion "defense" budget and the $40 billion spent on "intelligence" agancies did so very well against 19 guys in hijacked 767s, didn't it?  The threat has changed from nation-states to small groups of criminals and yet our defense industry still continmues to crank out hugely expensive cold war weapons systems, asked to do so by the Pentagon.

Are you insane? The wars of the world won't end, you just won't be able to defend yourself when attacked. Do you even realize that quite a bit of those who earn below the poverty line in the US are active duty military defending jerks like you who don't support them? And even if the defense budget were to decrease our wonderful government would fine yet another place to "waste" it. You are very naive if you think that poverty is the only reason for war!

The national defense budget was actually increased for 2009, just cutting back certain programs deemed wasteful like the F-22 which has been around for years and not seen combat time.

We all must live on a budget including the federal government.

Of course the military is a waste. Let's disband them all together and have NO military. This is what the liberals really want, correct? Make love not war was the liberal motto in the late 60's. But if you disband them, what will all the liberals do? They won't have a military to complain about anymore.

William - Before you go and try to make a point, get a point first. The only thing you are bringing out is that for 8 years, Clinton stripped the miitary and intelligence agencys to the bare core. We were ripe for an attack and it occurred. Looking into my crystal ball, I see the exact same thing happening with this administration.

letsdance - how do you propose we do this? How do you eradicate poverty in the world when you have evil dictators that rule other lands and opress the people living there? Solutions? I mean you make such a blanket statement without even giving a moment's thought to what the real problems are. And if we eliminate our military, how long do you think said dictators will roll into our country to try to kill you?

Maybe, just maybe if we got rid of the real culprits in this country, our problems would be fixed. The real culprits? Hmmm... you ask.. who are the real culprits? Congress! We need a total change of guard in congress. Life long members that are sucking the life out of this country is the real problem. Democrat AND republican members need to be tossed out on their back sides. Everyone is so ready to blame the president but totally overlook the real problem with this country.... It is CONGRESS because they appropriate funds, create the fat and spend your money like it's water! We need fiscally responsible new members. Vote out all incumbents!

Sorry, with all the crap in the world now these are bad decisions besides they provide jobs! and I like loading up ,keep these places going If there making the wrong weapons change it don't cut it restructure get some people in there who know what there talking about fix it vote on it don't just cut if you have no Idea what your talking about there are plenty of things to cut like starting with your salary!BO

You have got to bekidding? Iran and North Korea aren't nation states? Do you know what China did to stimulate its' economy? They substantially increased military spending to there highest levels of GDP for that country. In case you weren't aware, China is allies and does business with North Korea and Iran. Both countries are thumbing their nose at the world by setting off underground nukes and testing ballistic missiles.

What did we do with our stimulus? No one knows because allegedly 8% has been spent and is "on track" for "getting out the door".

The one thing this idiot administration is bound by the constitution to do is defend us. Spending us into "oblivion" was done by your democratic congress and Obama. The deficit has been doubled and our military needs an additional 100,000 personnel. (In line with Obamas campaign pledge and verified By General Ricardo Sanchez yesterday.)

Once again your idiot president has spoken out of both sides of his mouth.

What a travesty he and his administration are.

Iran and North Korea don't know the words to Kumbaya...

The president is not trying to handicap the military. He is very wisely cutting out unnecessary spending. We waste trillions on other countries wars while US citizens are losing homes, jobs, etc. If I ran my household finances the way the Defense Dept runs its finances, I'd be in deep trouble.

Before becoming president, Truman set up the Truman Commission to root out waste in defense spending. He saved taxpayers billions and made our military more effective.

Oh no, Obama and his Treasury Sec. (former tax cheat) have told us the recession is ending!!! How can this be. Obama the smartest president ever to be elected (according to the Democrat party, ACLU and ACORN) can't be wrong. He's a savior walking here on earth! I thought he siad the hard times are over. I'm wondering then why MSNBC's map shown with this story has all the state's in the red!!! Something tells me we've been hood-winked and lied to...again.

We need to end the Neanderthal thinking that war is the solution to conflict resolution. I hope they outlaw war profiteering again. Margret Mead wrote "war is an invention". It was a bad invention at that. Idiots and bully's want might top make right. Stop making war and feed the poor. Turn your swords into plow shares. Butch is advocating for war against Iran and Korea; now there's more stupidity for you. Looking for war before one even starts.

War mongers should be arrested for being a threat to society. When a person advocates for war they should bring in the straight jackets.

I always wondered how Americans allowed the building of enough nuclear bombs to blow up the world seven times over. We got ripped off times six. The problems of the world are created by the war mongers. Can you imagine how wonderful the world would be if they spent the military budget on helping people rather than killing them. Imagine if we had the trillion dollars wasted on the Iraq war alone we could have cured AIDS and fed the world. We could make friends rather than create blowback.

We need to arrest bush et al, stop military spending and end the American quest for Empire. That would do more to end terrorism than all the fighting losers will ever do. War makes war. Love makes love. Empire creates resentment and terror. Always did always will.

Do you really think all this military spending has saved us from misery? Nonsense.

We could cut our military in half and still be twice as large as the next one. What a HUGE pile of pork. Everyone wants the budget to be smaller, not deficit spend, fiscal responsibility, the politicians - particularly from the Right - rant about this constantly. But - when it comes to cutting, they refuse.

The budget should be cut 25% across the board. Every department, every salary, every program. Congressional staffs. Defense included.

Remember what Eisenhower said - look out for the "Military Industrial Complex". He saw their power grabs and fiscal excesses growing rapidly. He was from the military, and knew it well. He was a realist.

Jobs that produce nothing to improve the world are expendable. Hundreds of US miltary sites all over the world are not needed - not when we have nuclear subs and jets that can cover the planet from all angles. We have 1.2 million soldiers - half could come home now, and leave the rest in the "hot spots"

Even those running the military think we need to cut. So why are people fighting them? Because they want to keep what they have - and have everyone else cut. Typical, selfish, myopic.

The defense contractor jobs are "Welfare states"?

Excuse me?  Who do you want to have build those weapons?  China?  Get real you liberal morons.   Socialism kills, 100 million people were killed in the 20th century because of socialist regimes and ONLY 37 million died in all of the wars during the 20th centry.  

Liberals are trying to turn the US into a socialist regime.   Even after Bill CLitnon sold Nuke secrets to China (and somehow a lunatic in NK is selling them to Iran). 

Since liberals pride themselves on "compassion" (lies), but your intentional lies demonstrate your sense of sociopathic entitlement.    Obama needs to step down. 

It is clearly evident that the authors Tom Curry and Jason White don't know certain facts other than this they do have parts of the article correct.

Despite an overall increase in the defense budget

The White House (President) during his meeting with Secretary of Defense Gates, April 2009 stated a 10% Budget Cut to the US Military. And that Secretary of Defense Gates come up with a proposal to Congress as to which US Miltary Programs to cut. The US Congress actually proposed the 10% US Military Budget Cuts (January 2009).

So the Secretary of Defense (President Bush appointee) decided to slap the crap out of Congress by eliminating their "pet projects" (pork) (read as obsolete "Cold War Era", 1950s to 1990s designs) built in those States who's Congressional Representatives are demanding a 10% US Military Budget Cut.

http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1341

As far as the F-22 (fighter, not multi role; like fighter/bomber), that is an obsolete aircraft designed during the Cold War. This is to be replaced by the F-35 (multi capabilities, next generation after the F-22).

President Barack Obama is proposing to scale back or kill some major weapons programs in the year ahead, including the F-22 fighter and the next-generation presidential helicopter.

As you can see from the actual Secretary of Defense Robert Gates speech to Congress, the President did NOT recommend any of the above, this is what Secretary of Defense Robert Gates did.

Finding itself — for now — in the winner’s circle is Elkhart County, Ind., home to a plant that builds Humvees for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This is a wrong assumption as the useless HMMWV is to be replaced by the MRAP Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles; since the HMMWVs no matter how much they are altered will never be by design, IED proof. Note HMMWVs are also an obsolete 1980s design, I know I wrote the Fielding Plans along with the CUCV.

http://www.defenselink.mil/home/features/2007/mrap/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP_(armored_vehicle)

The concept is to replace HMMWV type vehicles with a more robust, survivable vehicle when on patrol "outside the wire."

Congress is set to approve nearly $1 billion for purchases of new Humvees and to refit of Humvees worn down by heavy use.

Most of that is not going to The Mishawaka plant. This money will be going to the US Government Owned Government Operated (GO/GO) Factories and Assembly Plants to completely rebuild (recondition) the worn out US Military Equipment. Eventually, the US Military will divest itself of the HMMWV, and turn them over to the State National Guard Units.

all of our assembly work is done right here,” said Acousticom executive Doug Cochran.

And the parts come from where? The US has turned into a first class bunch of assemblers not manufacturers, as to why the US Government has Nationwide Dispersed Government Owned Government Operated Factories (manufacturing Factories) and Assembly Plants. Since GM, Ford, Chrysler since 1994 NAFTA, Free Trade Agreements, and Ammendments cannot be bought by the US Military "Buy US Only Products, Goods, and Services"; since their parts are made at the fully automated computerized robotic factories at Toluca, Mexico; Machau, China; Shanghai, China.

To all the posters like jp-653910 that believe that the US Military Industrial Congressional Complex is wrong; how about letting us outsource everything like GM, Ford, Chrysler did to Toluca, Mexico, Machau and Shanghai, China. So delete the Law that the US Military must "Buy US Only Products, Goods and Services" then we can buy modern designed weapons; not 1960s designed M16s, not 1980s designed Helicopters, not 1980s designed Armored Vehicles (M1 Abrams, M2 Bradley), not later 1980s designed Aircraft, etc.. The US Military can also save tons (literally) of money by not having to hire US Civilian Contractors (expensive US Labor) only for US Only Services. example: $200,000 per year US Civilian Truck Drivers (probationary first year, then raise to $300,000 per year). See below as to why the US Military cannot do these jobs themselves (President Clinton Reduction In Forces of US Military and rise of US Contractors).

William-743491 due to the previous President Clinton Reduction In Forces the US Military was cut to the bone and lost many of it's capabilities. Logistics, Supply, Transportation, Water Purification, Maintenance, Human Intelligence (HUMINT), Construction (US Army Corps of Engineers, internal and external to the US), Special Warfare (like VIP Protection), etc.. This resulted in the US Military not being able to accomplish H.R. 4655, 1998, Declaration of current War At Iraq and allowed the expensive US Civilian Contractors (Halliburton, KBR, Blackwater (Xe), Triple Canopy, etc. to fill these voids.

letsdance - that was tried prior to World War II and failed to get the US out of the Great Depression, with World War II being the direct cause of the US, Germany, England, and the rest of the World attributing World War II as the cause of the end of the Great Depression. Also ask those US Cities around the previously closed 14 US Military Bases under the President Clinton Reduction In Forces if they have recovered economically yet. The conservative estimate is for ever US Military RIF'ed equal nine US Civilian layoffs.

b-895713 - The president is not trying to handicap the military. He is very wisely cutting out unnecessary spending.

The President did nothing. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was told by the President to cut 10% and to give a list to Congress of those cuts.

Dorfy (aka dorky) - what part of math do you not comprehend. How many Divisions does the US Military have versus the Chinese Armies, North Koreans Armies, Russian Federation Armies, Iran Armies, etc.. The current US Military Budget is equal to 4% of the GNP. The Russian Federation has just increased their budget to 10% of their GNP (as a means to make themselves Recession (actually Depression) Proof).

not when we have nuclear subs and jets that can cover the planet from all angles

This is the identical mentality (mental case) that caused the USSR to lose at Afghanistan, Conventional Warfare versus Guerrilla Warfare (Special Warfare). This is why the US Military is chopping the USAF and USN, under the Blue to Green Program, as Conventional Warfare is a thing of the past (realized during the latter part of the 1990s, as trained in Command and General Staff College and (USA, USAF, USMC, USN) War College).

I have been warning all of you for almost a year now (other newsvine forum topics) as to what will happen when we leave Iraq. Well, this is one of the first indicators. Just wait until you are paying over $8 per gallon of regular gasoline (indicator (proof) of the increase of the Chinese "Sphere of Influence" at the "Middle East").

Maybe with all these cuts I can come home from Afghanistan. It is hard living like a monk, no alcohol, no fraterization with the local women, no Adultery, UCMJ, Sharia Law (we must adhere to and recognize the Local Laws and Law Enforcement), etc..

Since there is much confusion as to the Somalis Pirate thing, First the President did not nor does not tell the On Scene Commander when to fire. This is the OSC job as in the USN SEAL Team Commander. For future reference when you hear "imminent danger" that means the OSC used this to use his own initative (as authorized as a Congressional Appointee, as US Military Officers Commissioning Certificates are from Congress). The President thru the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff "sanctions" the Operation as planned by the Sec Def and JCS. The OSC risks their career if the mission/operation fails. This is how the "Chain of Command" works. Also you can tell who are real "Leaders" and who are "Managers" (paper pushing bueaurcrates) when they compare "Teams" to sports teams and say there is no "i'" in Team. The "i"s that are in the US Military Teams are initative, individuality (strengths and weaknesses), ingenuity (thinking outside the box, and thinking on one's feet), intelligence (tactical, strategic, political), improvising, there are many more. These "i"s separate and make the US Military stronger than any other Military Worldwide; especially, in Special Warfare. Note: In sports teams (note small letters for team), the highest paid player makes or breaks the "team". In the US Military Teams (USA SF, USAF Special Air Operations, USMC Special Operations, USN SEAL Teams) we bring everyone up to the same high level, not down to a lower level (sarcasm, and the US Education System brings everyone down as "equals"). And sports teams go home after they lose, we come home in flag draped metal coffins if we lose.

You want to do something productive with all those Conventional US Military Forces from Iraq (since they have not been trained in Special Warfare for Afghanistan). Put them under US NORTHCOM and seal the northern US Borders, sweep south, and remove all ILLEGAL Immirgrants, then seal the southern US Borders. This would be allowed due to the changes to Laws (US Codes)(since the individual States cannot successfully enforce the Law); like the Insurrection Act, Patriot Acts (resigned by current President, January 2009), March 2009 H.R. 1955 and S.1959. Before you protest. I stated ILLEGAL (Criminals). So unless you condone ILLEGAL (Criminals) don't say squat. By condoning ILLEGAL you also could be arrested under the vagueness of H.R. 1955 and S.1959. Before you cite the 14th Ammendment, it has already been stated (US Supreme Court) that this pertains to former "Slaves" brought to the US "unwillingly", not "anchor babies" (circumventing the US Legal System, aka Fraud against the US, and conspiracy to Commit Fraud against the US (People)).

George Washington was against having a standing army. We've not had to defend the continental US for nearly 200 yrs. The Department of Defense should be renamed the Department of Invading Foreign Countries That Have Stuff We Want

Maybe you can explain WWII for me then...because last time I checked Japan didn't have anything we wanted. I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure that counted as defending ourselves.

Dear Butch,

I did not realize war has been declared with either Iran or North Korea. Have I missed something or are you just making things up to try to validate your opinion. Stop the lies and fear mongering, who do you thnk you are Dick Cheney?

Secondly, eliminating wasteful, outdated defense programs is the smart thing to do, so those funds can be funnelled into worthwhile projects that serve an actual purpose and create more jobs in those sectors.

carmenincali:

"Excuse me? Who do you want to have build those weapons? China? Get real you liberal morons. Socialism kills, 100 million people were killed in the 20th century because of socialist regimes and ONLY 37 million died in all of the wars during the 20th centry."

You really should get your facts straight. Those numbers include Communism, Facism, and all the other dirty things too. Oh, and did you know that the U.S has had socialism projects for 100+ years? Like the VA, disability for veterans and everyone, etc.

One thing I find funny in modern society is the level of narcissim that is seen in everyday life. Especially from the "anti-socialism" group in the state I live in, where I observe it everyday. They cry out about socialism, but at the same time they are the ones who benefit from it on a continous basis. Except that which they take benefits from, which are clearly social programs, don't fall under that catagory for them.

Another thing. Those of you who fuel the liberal vs conservative war are a big part of the problem in this country. If you blindly ally yourself with either liberals or conservatives, democrats or republicans, you are a blind fool. Long gone are the days where people actually think for themselves, now they buy any garbage that is fed to them. Great is the need that political parties face the axe, and people vote as Americans.

It is easy to point the finger, and deny blame. Where as I have decided not to read much in this string of posts due to it being mostly garbage... I will leave my comment. Yes, the military is full of wastefull spending. We do not need huge fleets, huge airforces. Our number of personel is where it should be. Programs should be cut. Programs must be cut. It is good to keep a degree of readyness incase of conflict with another state, but there is the point of being too ready. America is very fortunate to be in the position that it is in the world, geographic that is.

I will also restate what someone mentioned earlier: Congress must be cleaned out. There should be term limits plain and simple. Everyone blames the president for this and that. Which is understandable, he is one man compared to hundreds. However, Congress is long over due. The re-election rate is disgusting.

So once more. Until people leave the parties, leave the titles, and start thinking for themselves, voting in an informed manner, this country will not change. The sheep will continue to be led to the slaughter by the wolves in sheep skins.

Why don't you show where you come up with the ridiculous figure of tens of thousands?

Most likely the same place that people get hundreds of thousands dead in Iraq? People have no sense of size and have a hard time conceptualizing numbers.

That said, why were all these upgrades to the helicopters put into place over the years? Lockhead doesn't just up the price and toss in new options to delay deliveries, the government does it. So why not keep the original design and sell the helo's. Instead, the government gets nothing for all that cash and hard working Americans get laid off. And they will never see any stimulous money because the towns do not have the capital for shovel ready projects.

The whole thing is a joke. Tighten government spending and restrict the cost of military projects. Stick to deadlines, like a real company would, and run the government like you would a business. If I ordered helicopters to a specific standard for 6 billion and had a delivery date of X, I had better get just that. No changing the contract, no uping the specs to get more business for your district, and no authorization for more capital.

As it stands, the government still owes Lockhead for the work done and if it breaks contract then lockhead will collect the remainder someplace else.

from around the block perhaps if you researched the President Clinton Reduction in Forces. You would find out that Allen-968499 was understating the numbers, it was closer to a million US jobs lost.

This is not including the long term effect, like the 14 Cities that still have not recovered economically around those 14 US Military Installations that were closed as part of the RIF.

This is not including all those former US Military that got RIFed. That later used their GI Bill Benefits to get higher educations and put those out of work that were less educated. Currently most in the US Military to remain competitive for promotions have higher educations than the "average". As the CEL (Civilian Education Level) is usually used to determine self improvement (initative) leading to increases in MEL (Military Education Level) by sending those with high CELs to more Military Schools so that the CEL and MEL are at the same level indicating that the Officer's Manager (Personnel Administration Officer) is doing their job properly (Audited).

As indicated in post #1.16, the previous RIFs also resulted in the loss of US Military Capabilities, to the extent that they could not in a timely manner implement, H.R. 4655, the Declaration of current War At Iraq, 1998. It was after 9/11 that Congress approved the appropriation (funds). This did not make up for the lack of funds previously as it takes decades to train Special Operation Forces, Human Intelligence (HUMINT) assets, etc.. It is also a fact that the Conventional US Military Forces provide direct support to Special Operations. example: if the aircraft were not available to deliver the USN SEAL Team and the USS Bainbridge was not available (scrapped), the outcome at Somalia with the Somalia Pirates would have been significantly different.

Pertaining to the drawdown of one USN Carrier Battlegroup, as USN Aircraft Carriers (about average 6000) do not travel alone (Carrier Support Vessels), that is more than 7000 USN Officers, NCOs, and Sailors. This does not include the USN Aircraft Carrier aircraft, support personnel, US Civilians (Aircraft Maintenance), US Civilian Dock workers, US Civilian Shipyard workers, nor the US Civilian support in the place the USN Aircraft Carrier is home ported (stationed) (example: Car Dealerships, Fast Food, Restaurants, Lawyers, Teachers, Local Government, Law Enforcement, Bars, Retail Stores, etc.).

So from around the block one USN Aircraft Carrier Battlegroup is more than tens of thousands of US Citizens UNEMPLOYED.

Ok, lets also bring back the 130,000 Army troops are in Iraq (source Defense Department) and UNEMPLOY them. The low ratio is for each US Military RIF'ed equals nine US Civilian Layoffs.

Lets also cut the State National Guard (a large drain on the Federal Government, not the individual States). Over 700,000 National Guard. No more free education nor discounts.

Lets also chop the crap out of all the US Army Corps of Engineer Projects/Programs, like President Clinton did. All those internal to the US Projects/Programs. Like the dregging of US Streams, Lakes, etc. to prevent floods; Maintenance of Dams and Levees (could not be done due to previous budget cuts, research this yourself (what the US Army Corps of Engineers are responsible for in each State as part of the Defense Budget).

Terrorists are not going to be stopped by a Presidential helicopter, or an F-22. We already spend more than the rest of the world combined! Our current frontline fighter, the F-15 has never been shot down, not in over 100 engagements. In WWII that ratio was 10:1, the F-15 is at 100:1, we don't need the F-22, plain and simple.

Corporate welfare doesn't help the American people. Taxing the hell out of me so that some low skilled worker, who didn't bother getting much of an education can keep building objects with no value to the economy is not smart. We need to cut defense spending in half, at least, and we'd still have the most powerful military ever devised by man.

This makes sense. it's a shame the sheeple can't understand it. Thanks for your logical input. We need more of it.

It isn't in America's best interest to cut defense spending. The times are proving that the strength and capability of our enemy and their allies has reached beyond calcuable measures, leaving US vulnerable and ill-prepared to deal with the various extremes of war's viscous reality. As a deterrent, our military equipment and personnel, being state of the art, are not enough to combat terrorism. It is therefore necessary that we continue to increase the counterforce arsenal, which will serve to protect the people of our country, and our allies.

MrBrakinNews,

The strength and capabilities of our enemies are easily calculable, they are the fly on the ass cheek of the American Elephant. The solution to terrorism isn't a military one, it's a social one. Address the causes, and it will go away. Ignore the cause, and just try to kill them all, and you'll only perpetuate the terror. Of course, only one of those paths enriches the defense industry with corporate welfare...

jp-653910 - Our current frontline fighter, the F-15 has never been shot down, not in over 100 engagements.

GET A CLUE. jp-653910

F-15E "Eagles" were shot down, one on Jan 18 (88-1689) and the other on Jan 19 (88-1692). Note: Our current frontline fighter is the F-18 not the F-15, with the F-15 being turned over to the USAF Air National Guard, and even these being replaced. F-15 being a 1970s design, derrived from the 1960s USSR, MiG-25 "Foxbat". Reference Jane's All the Worlds Aircraft and USAF Documents (tail numbers of F-15s shotdown).

we'd still have the most powerful military ever devised by man.

Also you come over here to Afghanistan and see the difference in using a 1960s designed weapon (M-16, M-4) against a modern ChiCom (Chinese Communist) Weapon of Russian Federation design (2000s) given to the Hamas Fighters by Iran in exchange for them to come to Afghanistan to kill us. Note: they wear black hoods because their is a visual difference between Afghans (Indo Europeans), Iranians (Persian, Shiites), Iraqis (Arabs, Sunnis), Kurdistanis (Indo Europeans), Palestinians (Arabs), etc..

(before I was retrained as Special Warfare Officer) While part of the US INF (Intermediate Nuclear Forces, Europe) we gave up "the most powerful military ever devised by man" after the retrogrades and destruction of all those weapons systems in accordance with SALT (I & II) and START. This along with the President Clinton Reduction In Forces that cut the US Military to the bone made the US Military a second or third rate Military that could not accomplish anything as proved by not being capable of implementing H.R. 4655, 1998. Examples: when the soldiers had to buy their own toilet paper (previously issued) and undergarments (could no longer be issued, and not covered under reduced clothing allowance), saw this first hand as a Commander (I would pay out of my pocket to help my subordinates living below the poverty line and even get them and family members part time jobs). So if you think you are correct you can go to hades, or come here to Afghanistan, same thing (the regular Afghans that we live with and protect are really nice people more worried about not starving to death, flash floods (here in the Northeast), freezing winters, etc.).

Terrorists are not going to attack us because we don't have F-22's or a new presidential helicopter.

It's true that F-15E Strike Eagles have been shot down, but those were downed by ground fire. No F-15 of any kind has ever been downed in air-to-air combat. Furthermore, the F-15Es were designed for air-to-ground combat. However, the F-15A/B/C/D models made for air superiority are getting very old now. Many airframes are older than their pilots. They need a replacement badly. That's what the F-22 is for. Though both the F-22 and F-15A/B/C/D models seem useless right now, they really aren't. We are indeed fighting a different kind of war, but we need to be prepared to fight any kind of war. We were not prepared to fight the conflict we did in Vietnam, so not only we our losses appalling, but we also failed to win it.

"I agree with Butch 100%. We certainly need someone that understands there are still terrorists that will attack America if he cuts the defense like he's proposing. Plus look at all the people that will be losing jobs ,that certainly will not help the economy. He has no idea what he's doing. He talks a good game ,but that's are far as it goes."

I think one misconception that might be common, is that fighting terrorists is completely different from fighting other armies. The U.S military is good at fighting other armies. It is still growing its anti-terrorists legs.

Conflict with other military forces is decreasing, while terrorism is increasing. A budget cut to the military would not mean more attacks on the U.S. If you want to avoid attacks on the U.S, then cut to military spend would not hinder that. The miltary after all is a fighting force.

If you really wanted to defend against terrorism, you have to defend the U.S borders. A long held belief of mine is that Europe is more at threat than we are from terrorist, which is factual. Once in the EU, you do not need a passport to cross borders.

So why not pull back? Why not cut the military spending, not necessarily the number of troops? We have military technology that is decades ahead of everyone else as it is. If terrorism becomes such a big deal, Europe should take an equal share of the fight against it.

You really can never win the fight on terrorism. Combating individuals is much more difficult then nations. You know the face of a nation, you know where it is, an individual can be anywhere.

airplanefreak- the raptor is not the replacement for the Hornet. the F-22 is only a desinated fighter while the F/A-18 is a joint strike fighter.

my bad...the F-22 can be equipped for strike capabilities (as well as electronic warfare) but it's main design is for air-air. as of right now, the F/A-18 is the only one equally capable of carrying air-ground payloads & still maintain full air-air capabilities.

Build brand new f-15s and f-18s, we don't need to reinvent the wheel with every new aircraft. Those aircraft can be built for less than half the cost of an f-22, and are more than effective enough for the job at hand. As far as paying soldiers, I think they ought to make a hell of a lot more money. Cut the size of government in half, including the military, cut out all the pork defense spending, and you can easily afford to pay the soldiers that remain twice as much money, and still save billions.

You might want to recall that the bail out of AIG was under Bush/Cheney.

from around the block - You might want to recall that the bail out of AIG was under Bush/Cheney.

WRONG AGAIN. The below was previously posted almost a year ago.
I have been watching this since the 1990s, wrote papers to my State Government 1993, warning that something like this would happen between 2006-2010. I wanted my State to create an "economic buffer" so that what was going to happen would be of mininal impact. I was told that I was wearing a tin foil hat, conspiracy theorist, etc.. Personally, I saved every last cent that I could, incase I got laid off. With that said.
How to end this mess:

Reinstate the Glass-Steagall Acts (prevent another 1907 Depression and 1929-1939 Great Depression), that were removed by the November 12, 1999, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The removal of the Glass-Steagall Acts reallowed the "gambling" (called Swaps and Derivatives, Insurance) on Wallstreet (attributed as the cause of the 1907 Depression, and triggered the 1929-1939 Great Depression (especially the run on the Banks)). It has been stated that because the Chinese still retain the concepts of the Glass-Steagall Acts their Financial System is still economically sound and allows the Chinese to loan the US money for the Bailouts.

The reinstitution of the Glass-Steagall Acts by repealling the November 12, 1999, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act would make the International Swaps and Derivatives Association Incorporated illegal. See who the members are at isda.org as to why this became the "Global Economic Crisis", 60-100 Trillion USD. The barrier to this is they are a major contributor and constituent of VP Biden. (update: these became the "Bailout Babies") Like the rest of these:

(List from 2005) Delaware: Freddie Mac, Fanny Mae, Bank of America, Wilmington Trust, First USA / Bank One / JPMorgan Chase, AIG, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank, Barclays plc, GM, Chrysler, Wachovia, ExxonMobil, Chevron, ISDA, and those States with Corporations Incorporated at Delaware.

Over 50% of US publicly-traded corporations and 60% of the Fortune 500 companies are incorporated in Delaware;[1] the state's attractiveness as a corporate haven is largely due to its business-friendly corporation law. Franchise taxes on Delaware corporations supply about one-fifth of its state revenue.[2]

1. Delaware Division of Corporations
2. Delaware Fiscal Notebook - State General Fund Revenues by Category

The list is important because in order to obtain Electoral College Votes in time the Bailout had to be passed. These are the locations that specifically benefitted by the first Bailout (700 Billion USD, actually 845 Billion USD):

http://realestate.msn.com/Buying/Article_busweek.aspx?cp-documentid=10856357>1=35000
http://realestate.msn.com/slideshow.aspx?cp-documentid=10857148

To prevent this from happening again. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act must be made manditory and not optional.

To those that contributed $3k, that pays for a campaign office for one day on short term lease. Compared to the near Billions from each on the list above.

Remove/Repeal all 1994 NAFTA, Free Trade Agreements, and Ammendments, this includes stopping all funds to the WTO (World Trade Organization).

And since all of you want to discuss the Wars.
First. Iraq, Declaration of current War At Iraq, "Regime Change", 1998:

Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. The United Nations weapons inspectors have done a truly remarkable job, finding and destroying more of Iraq's arsenal than was destroyed during the entire gulf war. Now, Saddam Hussein wants to stop them from completing their mission. I know I speak for everyone in this chamber, Republicans and Democrats, when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world," and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again. - President Clinton.

Of note: Iraqis nuclear capability ended in 1981, with the Israelis Air Strike, north of Baghdad.
The armed Kurdistanis are not Iraqis, and were the allies of Iran, with Iran promising to reform Kurdistan (northern Iraq, southern Turkery, Syria) if the Kurds fought against the Iraqis during the Iran Iraq Wars. This would be a violation of UN Treaty of Lausanne. To end the Iran Iraq Wars, the Iraqis used chemical weapons against the armed Kurdistanis the weapons came from: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/steel_box.htm

After the Iran Iraq Wars, the Iraqis Parlement decided to Nationalize the Northern and Southern Oil Fields. The US Oil Corporations opposed this. They inturn pressured Kuwait to increase transit prices (load unto supertankers) to make Iraqis Oil non competitive. The Iraqis Parlement authorized the invasion of Kuwait to end this, due to the transfer price being more than the price of the oil, resulting in Iraqis starving. US Military becomes involved in the Liberation of Kuwait. And insitutes the Food for Oil Programs managed by the Kuwaitis. Other countries (Mexico, Canada, Saudia Arabia, Kuwait) start "Oil Laundrying" buying Iraqis oil for $4 per barrel and selling to US for enormous profit (still happening). Iraqis refuse to de Nationalize Oil Fields. Price of Iraqis Oil is making US Oil non competitive, almost bankrupting US Oil (Texas). First Gulf War. Northern and Southern No Fly Zones created, Kurdistanis seize Northern Oil Fields unopposed, Turks move armored Battalions to Iraqis Border to prevent Kurdistanis incursions. South Iraq (Arabs) filled with Fundamentalist Iranians (Persians) thru Basra and take over southern Iraqis Oil Fields and Pipelines, unopposed and protected by US. Northern and Southern Iraqis Oil Fields, Trillions of Barrels, not the Billions in the US, Iran Trillions of Barrels (1/3 World).

The economic impact of withdrawal from Iraq. First, Reduction In Forces, unemployed US Military. Second, Slow down or Closure of those Government Owned Nationwide Dispersed Factories that produce US Military Equipment. Third, Budget cut (update: 10%) resulting in less "Buy US Only Products, Goods, and Services" by the US Military. Fourth, the increase of the Chinese "sphere of influence", especially Oil resources. Fifth, closures of those US Military Installations that support Iraq, under Base Realignment and Closures, BRAC. Sixth, US Contractors using US Citizens to provide logistics, water purification, transportation, VIP Protection, supply, food services, maintenance, human intelligence (HUMINT) that are necessary since the President Clinton RIFs eliminated these capabilities from the US Military (the Billions spent will no longer be coming in from the bottom (trickle up) with these US Civilians that work for US Contractors being laid off. Seventh, more than $8 per gallon of gasoline.

If you are wondering about Hugo Chevez and Venezula, do the research pre 9/11 as to why he is pissed at the US. Never mind. Pre 9/11 the US Oil Corporations were exploiting the Oil, this included "oil dumping" to decrease the supply, this made the exxon valdez look like nothing (similar to what is currently happening at Nicaragua). To stop this and prevent further Oil Corporations from exploit the Venezula Resources, he proposed Nationalization. Immediately, certain people (later traced back to the US) were sent in to instigate a Civil War to overthrow Chevez. After Chevez put down the Civil War he found out about the US instigators (referred to as "jackals"). The Oil was Nationalized and shipments were stopped to the US. This was the source of 2/3s of the Daily US Oil. The US Oil Reserves were at 6 months. Options for US, Northern Arctic Reserve Exploration (denied by Congress), Iraq Northern and Southern Oil Fields, Iran.

Afghanistan. Like mentioned before. After the first WTC (World Trade Center) underground parking lot bombing, the Saudia Arabians captured Osama Bin Laden and asked President Clinton what should be done with him. This was deferred back to the Saudis. Who then let him go since the US did not want to punish him.

Regarding killing (martyr) the sick tired old man. We know that he will be replaced by a more violent stronger younger fundamentalist. We also know the decision making processes of the sick tired old man we do not know his replacements decision making processes.

letsdance - YOU STILL HAVE NO CLUE.

"You might want to recall that the bail out of AIG was under Bush/Cheney. "

He has you there. It surprised me that a Republcian president started the bailouts. Rather socialist is it not? With capitalism, badly run businesses are supposed to fail, it was the party that is supposed to be the bigger supporter of capitalism that decided maybe losing money when you take a risk is not such a great idea.

This country is a capitalist country, until the rich start losing money, then it becomes a socialist. Wallstreet loses money, so the taxpayers take the fall. The auto companies run a bad business, the tax payers take the fall.

Everyone is a hypocrite.

You sir, have no idea about world politics. There is no one laughing at our President. Do you want America to start a war with North Korea right now. Would you like us to go in and bomb Iran?

What is your solution to those problems. Do you think some of the countries in the area that is threatened might need to do something or does it all just fall on the back of our President?

from around the block here you go again with your condescending remarks.

Why is it when you democrats have no arguement you have to put someone down?

When one is held up at gunpoint as myself, I fought back and won because I cut off the head of the snake. You would probably run from a cockroach.

How many times has N. Korea said they are going to stop there production and have proven to be liars.

Since you are a man of the world I would love to know how many times you have had to defend the U.S., where and what you accomplished.

Once in Viet Nam I tried to give a Viet Cong a Peace sign, worked out fairly well only left a small scar, where he shot me.

Alan

When did you serve and what did you accomplish?

Alan do you realize that Bush used the arguement that the Iraq war was to prevent the use or proliferation of WMDs? Do you forget that N. Korea became a nuclear power under Bush? The North Korean situation is simply another example of the failure of the Bush administration.

SmarterThanYouAre what does that have to do with anything? USSR became a power under FDW, so what.

Your argument is like a siv it holds no water.

It seams to make you people feel good when you put someone down.

Jerry glad you made it, a bought lesson will never be forgotten. Keep safe.

starbuck49, with intelligence under Phil Habib. in France with the Vietnam peace talks Pretty good eh!.

The only person I put down was the previous administration while you did the same to the current administration in your first post.

You are the one who brought up Korea and said they were laughing at the weakness of Obama. What Korea is doing now is nothing compared to what they did under Bush. It is your argument that does not hold water.

But clearly you are confused. Instead of constructing a rational response you are preoccupied with looking for insults that don't exist. Your attempt at masking a lack of self confidence is very apparent in your snake and cockroach story.

wow, wonder when everyone is going to realize that N Korea is going to do what ever they like under anyone's watch. Sure, they finished the bomb under Bush, they started it under Clinton and Bush Sr. Countries like N Korea do not just have the idea of a nuke and then test it 6 years later. Clinton tried by giving them reactors, that failed, then he tried food, that failed. Bush continues with the food, that fails. Then talks, they fail. We cut the food, that failed. We imposed more sanctions, that failed. Now under Obama, they test fire ballistic missiles, the UN issues a warning, that fails. Then they set off a nuke, we have stronger warnings, that fails, and then they fire anti ship and long range surface to surface missiles.

Lets face it, N Korea is flexing its muscle and is about to go through a regime change. There was nothing Clinton, Bush, or Obama could have done differently short of killing that little madman Kim and the rest of his family. Since we are getting out of the nation building arena, at least according to Obama, we have nothing left to do with N Korea. They have the bomb an we need to be prepared to act if they ever use it. That is that.

There are smarter people than us who are coming up with no answers on how to get N Korea to go along short of military action. And that option will cost millions of lives.

Bill M NY your point is correct but should we or the UN do something now that could prevent lives from being lost. If Japan was not bombed the estimate is 5 to 6 million more lives would have been lost in conventional war.

SmarterThanYouAre WRONG AGAIN:

Declaration of current War At Iraq, "Regime Change", 1998:

Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. The United Nations weapons inspectors have done a truly remarkable job, finding and destroying more of Iraq's arsenal than was destroyed during the entire gulf war. Now, Saddam Hussein wants to stop them from completing their mission. I know I speak for everyone in this chamber, Republicans and Democrats, when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world," and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again. - President Clinton.

Of note: Iraqis nuclear capability ended in 1981, with the Israelis Air Strike, north of Baghdad.

The armed Kurdistanis are not Iraqis, and were the allies of Iran, with Iran promising to reform Kurdistan (northern Iraq, southern Turkery, Syria) if the Kurds fought against the Iraqis during the Iran Iraq Wars. This would be a violation of UN Treaty of Lausanne. To end the Iran Iraq Wars, the Iraqis used chemical weapons against the armed Kurdistanis the weapons came from: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/steel_box.htm

Why should anyone do anything? Why do we always have to say that a state cannot do something, when we do it?

"The world knows we have a weak President and that's why Korea, Russia, Iran and others are laughing. "

What are any of those countries going to do? North Korea is a fly on the map. Their people are miserable, they are nothing. Russia is dealing with their own economic problems, has a decling population. Iran... Iran has a large population, other than that nothing.

Why do we care if they are laughing? Why do we care what everyone says or thinks? Let them laugh, they'll never do anything. If they do, it won't take much to make them regret it.

Right and Wrong.

Example: the FDR Plans (failures) to get the US out of the Great Depression, with the build up prior to World War II (massive industrialization) and World War II being attributed to the US and other countries getting out of the Great Depression.

You deal with LA (and California) since most in California are saying they approve of ILLEGAL Immirgrants (on other Newvine Forums).

"The problem is much simpler than most would think, the disparity between salaries for the workers at these plants and the average american's wage level.

The few who make the big bucks basically do it on the backs of the masses who toil for less."

True. The average CEO makes 100+ times what the average salary at their company brings in. Most countries a CEO will make 16-22 times what an average person in their company did. That was true in the U.S... until the end of the 70's I beleive, when everything started going downhill.

"Was a assembly person at GM worth $30/hr to turn a screw when the nurse who mends him gets less after a 4-5 year education?

It seems as if we don't value value just more more more. Worth has gone from subjective to irrational which means of course that the inmates are running the asylum."

We live in a narcissitic country. Things will continue to get worse.

Long gone is the ability to appreciate the finer things in life. Long gone is a fairness in the salary levels. Long gone is the good world. Welcome to the world of the future. The few take advantage of the many because the many are contempt and un-willing to stand up for themselves.

Don't you think that is the plan by Gates and the President? Cutting edge technology. People used to be screaming to high heaven about ridiculous military spending like 200.00 for a hammer.

Now it's President Obama who wants us to be responsible in defense contracts so that is the worst thing that could happen, apparently.

You can be responsible with defense contracts, but don't cut vital programs.

Have a good day!

We can be rational too about this one. What constitutes a vital program? New helo's for the POTUS? What is wrong wiht the ones he has? The F-22 when the next gen fighter is being designed and tested? There is not a plane in the world that can beat our f-18's and f-16's. Do we need a better plane to whomp people with?

How about non lethal technology. Do we really need our military equiped with stun lasers instead of M4's? Or space based laser systems? Do we really need satalites that can go pew pew?

What is essential military spending? Rep Murtha thinks any spending in his district is essential. I can tell you that it isn't. Those are all still jobs though.

from around the block - People used to be screaming to high heaven about ridiculous military spending like 200.00 for a hammer.

WRONG AGAIN.

If you look up the description and NSN of the hammer. It was a non sparking hammer used in Ammunition. Get rid of the Law requiring the US Military to "Buy US Only Products, Goods, and Services" and expensive US Labor, then we can get the hammer for cheap from China (inspected to and with higher standards (lower fault tolerance, not seen by human eye, laser calibrated, automated (not allowed in US by US Labor))).

Bill M NY, bet you were not saying that when the USSR had their SS-20s in eastern Europe. If you were even born before those times. With NY and D.C. being the primary targets.

You are ready every day to jump on any piece of news to somehow spin it to President Obama being a socialist.

You are just sad.

Gee whiz, Obama's personal cheerleader is in the house!

And exactly what is not true about that again?

America has been socialist for a long time there buddy.

Yes, the president should be safe - don't you think? But we're not talking about just a helicopter, it's the F-22 and the Airborne Laser program to name a few. And, yes, those would defend our country and our troops. The latter actually from ballistic missiles.

I thouht you left.

Have a good day!

Oh, and just to add some fuel to the fire, the United States has not fought a defensive war since 1776, even 1812 was provoked. We are the only country in the world who has been invading and attacking other countries for the past 50 yrs. non-stop. We are the only real threat to world peace there is. And to top it off, anyone that has been in the armed forces during this time has been used as a pawn to subjugate others to the will of American corporations.

If you don't believe me, read "War Is A Racket", by General Smedley Butler, USMC, the most decorated soldier in American history. When you're done with that, anything by Sgt. Stan Goff, former Delta Force, will do. Defense spending is corporate welfare, and I'm sick of being taxed to subsidize the profits of defense contractors, and the corporations that receive the benefits of our military invasions.

jp you are clueless. pearl harbor ring a bell?

Hawaii wasn't a US state in 1941 when Pearl Harbor was attacked. Semantics, I know...

Germany invaded HOW many countries?

Hussein ib=nvaded what country? (hint) Kuwait

Russia invaded what country?

FLREP - l

and-based ballistic missiles are cold war technology, and protect us against nothing. If you believed Bush, you would put some in the Czech Republic to protect them from Iran???!!! Wasted money, time and resulting only in more aggravation.

Earlier I proposed and acrossthe board 25% cut in all budget spending. I can cut $150 billion out of the defense budget right away. If you won't cut what I think should be cut, what defense cuts would you make? Bush inflated the military budget to record levels, so just returning to where our spending was in the days of Reagan would be fine with me.

Would you agree to that?

If so - we could cut 1/3 of the entire budget. Reagan's inflation-adjusted numbers were about that level. Did you agree with Reagan's defense positions? My guess is yes.

A wise person has fewer enemies. That has a desirable impact on the defense requirements of the nation as well.

Go read a book, and then fill in your own gaps.

from around the block - just so that you know. why that series of helicopter is so expensive. it is all the electronic counter measures to keep the President safe. The Command, Control, Communication electronics packages to remain in constant contact with the US Government. Add to this long range capabilites (including mid air refueling), etc. all put together by expensive US Civilian Labor.

Perhaps we should scrap the Cold War Era idea of an Air Force One.

Ok, how about not allowing Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi any more use of USAF Aircraft.

Dorfy WRONG AGAIN

take a look at THAADS

Yes indeed, Phil, we can read and most of us, have read history.

Just about every incoming democratic administration has done this, and very time, we end up paying for it, with the lives of the military, holding off an agressor,while our industrial areas catch us back up, again.

Our military seldom receives even the handed-down attriculation of wealth from the fortunes of the defense contracts. The soldiers on the front lines earn less than the civilians on the production lines. Furthermore, for years we've wasted on "projects" to appease this sector. What cents does it make to water-proof an M1Abrahms that is going to be sent to the desert?

As for the newsvine fearmongerer's... The manufacturing CAPABILITY won't change when the production-quota gets revamped. American defense will be just as good as it has been. Military installations aren't going to start closing down over night. Lastly, this administration isn't weakening our deterrent capability's by restructuring the defense budget and priorities. The fact of the matter is, the military is growing and the US can no longer afford to pay those exxaggerated profit-over-performance prices to Lockheed, Martin and Boeing.

Mr Breakin,

You're right, the capability won't change it's the industrial CAPACITY that would leave us in danger. Once you kill capacity, it's very difficult to ramp it back up again. The experienced defense people will be gone on to other jobs. Why people are referring to presidential helicopters in the exchange - I don't know. But the argument is just ridiculous.

The government keeps the blueprints. The products Lock and Boe can create can be produced at 100 times the rate in event of conventional war. The enemy should be reminded by the increase in production of naval ships and equipment and other necessary war items after the bombing occured at Pearl. Don't think for a second that the gov won't rewrite the laws that regulate against the government competing with private enterprise. Our question is as it always has been, why then, doesn't our government create the waves of military equipment at the production rate it's capable of NOW instead of waiting for a modern Pearl? Why not pre-prepare? Isn't that why it's called PRE-eminent or Pre-emptive?

mrbreakinnews, YOU HAVE NO CLUE

What cents does it make to water-proof an M1Abrahms that is going to be sent to the desert?

Ah because they have to be sent by ships that go across oceans filled with corrosive SALT WATER.

Our question is as it always has been, why then, doesn't our government create the waves of military equipment at the production rate it's capable of NOW instead of waiting for a modern Pearl?

Because after the President Clinton Reduction In Forces we are barely catching up to what we almost need. It will be many decades more before our Special Warfare and Intelligence Capabilities are up to demand even with the current "off the street" (no experience, no maturity) recruiting of Special Warfare Operators.
As noted before, we are using pre 1990s US Military Equipment (most being reconditioned, or refurbished). The other primary world suppliers of Military Equipment, China, and the Russian Federation are supplying current, 2000s weapons to whoever has money to buy them.

Yeah, sensible is terrorizing a small Carribean island for not bowing down to manifest destiny.

Tell me Jp, what has this country done to you, to make you hate it so?

Are you, by chance, related to Jane Fonda?

Jerry,

I love my country. But that does not mean I do not understand when it does wrong. I love my brother, but if he murdered someone I would still call it murder.

Our political philosophy: We have been opportunists cloaked in a sanctimonious cloak for the last century. We continued abuse of the Black population, killed off most of an entire race of American Indians, helped craft a Carthagenian peace treaty at the end of WWI that made WWII almost inevitable, overthrew governments on every continent - some democratically elected, invented and used the atomic bomb twice, gobbled up enormous amounts of natural resources and scarred the land repeatedly to get what we wanted, etc etc...all in the name of becoming bigger and more powerful.

Our social philosophy: We are better than anyone, we have a better system of government, we are wealthier, we are freer, we are more holy, everyone wants to be us. Fortunately many Americans realize this is all not true. They know the truth.

Our standard of living is ranked below at least a dozen other nations, our healthcare is ranked 37th in the world, we have contributed to wars worldwide, now started a war, support nations that make us wealthy instead of who take moral positions, and we have more limitations on us that block our rights than most would imagine. An American with money cannot be beat. An American without it sleeps under a bridge and dies with no teeth and no home. There are millions here.

Americans have good hearts, but are easily led by "salesmen" - either in business, in government, or in churches. They do not participate in their democracy, and prefer someone else be responsible if things mess up. They don't like controls, but complain when things go out of control. They fall back on lame symbolism to get them pepped up, like at pep rallies in school, later football games, emotional church services, and they use lame symbols to keep their political ideas easy to digest - like flag pins, marching bands, colorful flags, guns, etc. Cheerleaders wear little outfits and shake their beehinds like pole dancers, but that's OK as long as they are wearing a letter sweater. Americans love this country, but often refuse to look at it straight on.

Because we do love this place with all its flaws, we need to see what we can do to make it better. It can be better. But this only comes from studying reality - not the fantasy we wish was true.

I am not negative, but your "excuse it all if it's from the Right" approach forces me to bring up facts that are not complimentary. You brought up Jane Fonda ( that was 40 years ago!) The real traitor is the person who does not act in this country's best interests. Lies and dishonor will be repeated unless we understand we are capable of them, and focus on what we need to do to avoid them. If you truly care about this country's future, you need to see us in the light of day.

Road Warrior is right. Democrats always cut defense spending. Kennedy was the last dem who didn't. nouse in attacking him for stating an irrefutable fact.

Road Warrior is right. Democrats always cut defense spending. Kennedy was the last dem who didn't. nouse in attacking him for stating an irrefutable fact.

Dorfy actions speak louder than words, don't use a computer, don't drive, or use any oil based plastics (including the computer keyboard, mouse, etc.), electricity generated by oil burning power plants, etc..

I think your information may be incorrect as to how close the completion of these copters is.

I live in Vestal NY (12 miles from Owego) and know first hand how complete the first group is. Many of my engineering associates work for Lockheed as I have before my retirement from BAE Systems.

Basically all that remains to be done is paint and finish the equipment load.

They are flying operational helicopters as they stand, that's how they got here. I don't think you know just how complete they really are.

Well apparently Secretary Gates doesn't feel it is in the best interest of the USA to finish them.

Secretary Gates takes his marching orders from the Prez. Obama shut down this program before he really knew its condition. Shoot from the hip and most times you will miss your target.

Since Mr Obama had NO experience what so ever with any military project, he should have listened before he talked.

It will cost a billion dollars to close down this project. about 800 million to complete the first group and put them on station with all parts,supplies and crews.

We are now going to spend a billion dollars and junk the helicopters. Start a new design and do it all over again.

I have worked on some stupid programs in my career, watched a lot of money dissapear on useless equipment. But these helicopters are NEEDED NOW not another 10 years down the road.

It takes a lot of cash to build 28 flying White Houses ,all identical,all capable of the same thing as the Air Force 1 except smaller.

You do realize that squadrons all over the Navy fly equipment that has been around even longer than the current presidential helicopter right? Yeah I didn't think so. There are over 30 year old F/A-18's flying over Iraq & Afghanistan right now. Yet somehow, we manage to send them up & bring them back in one piece over & over & over & over & over...

Floyd-291641 from around the block is just being a troll or is too lazy to do the research.

csl22387 - I do not believe bubble gum, paper clips and bailing wire is going to hold them together much longer. Especially, when the replacement parts are no longer made.

pish posh...I hot pump hot seated an F/A-18 A that busted an anchor nut in a stress critical panel. we were short on time so i sacrificed my last piece of Orbit & popped the fastener back in.

There has to be a definite decomm date set before they stop making the parts. If so, then when that day comes, I suppose the president will just have to settle for one with less fancy features.

No.

Defense spending as a % of GDP rose under Carter.

Clinton decreased defense spending in the early 90s as a result of the end of the cold war. However, he increased defense spending from 1999-2001.

LetsBeReasonable - Explain Carter's defense spending to the thousands of highly trained military personell who left the military when their pay was cut/frozen. Carter has a well and widely known reputation for cutting the military. We can massage the numbers to tell any story we like - figures lie and liars figure!

Patriot...your facts are way off. Carter never cut spending or froze or cut pay. In fact, Carter increased spending over Ford's budget by $28B capping 4 consecutive years of real increases in defense spending.

What's more is JFK, LBJ and Carter increased defense spending while Republicans Eisenhaurer, Nixon and Ford decreased defense spending. Reagan was the first Republican since Herbert Hoover to increase defense spending.

To hear Reps tell you, they total revise history and say just the opposite.

Yes, that why he couldn't find 5 helicopters worth of a trip across the desert for the emabassy mission, in Teheran.

you just added ZERO to the conversation. Try to stay focused on what we are talking about/.

Will a true patriot capitulate?

Does a valient soldier ever die?

Nuts.

FYI-The laser was the dumbest-part of the missile defense shield anyway.

But you are sounding logical. That isn't what the far right wants to hear.

See above talk is cheap, when you are in the tough places people die, to savy you .5o.

Might want to give some consideration to working from the inside out.

Your testimony would be more impressive, that way.

If you live.

What's your point? I've been to the tough places people die. I was in both Vietnam and the first Iraq war.

LetsBeReasonable - Just to prop up a few military towns? How is that any different than propping up the economy with other "stimulus" spending.

If you take a look at the CBS News, "Pricey Jet Fighters Add Up To Local Jobs", then you know it is not just to prop up a few military towns, it is major US Civilian Cities and States. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/25/eveningnews/main4893248.shtml?source=search_story

How is that any different than propping up the economy with other "stimulus" spending.

We are not getting outrageous bonuses for failure and every cent must be accounted for incase of GAO Audits.

Thank you for your service. However, that doesn't make you an expert in how to handle defense contracts or spending.

You opinion is open to speculation since you claim to be a military man but do not have the honor and respectful tone that a Commander and Chief deserves even if you disagree with him.

My son is a Marine and he would never speak as you have with words like Nobama.

Hey, "from around the block" that was a great reply to PaulC-379820. It's hard to take someone seriously who starts his rant with "Cutting defense" when the article clearly stated that overal defense spending will increase!(DuH!).

Some weapon systems will be cut, yes. But what the article didn't mention were the ones that are going to be increased, such as the Predator and Reaper unmanned drones and the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The F-35 will be used by the Air Force, Navy and Marines.

By the way, despite all the conservative propaganda, Jimmy Carter INCREASED defense spending every year he was in office. Carter was the one who gave the OK to build the Stealth Fighter.

USAF also said they do NOT need the C-17 planes that Congress is insisting on.

From, I was a marine, also, I can promise you, that what we said about Kennedy and Johnson was a lot worse that that and well deserved.

Actually, I thought his description could have been a little mellower, I thought the sentiments, were accurate.

That may be the problem. You said you were a Marine. My son served in the first Iraq war. My son says 'once a Marine, always a Marine'.

And talking within your ranks is different from spouting on a web site that can be read all over the world.

From,

No it isn't different to talk about it in any forum. We gave up most of the rights you take for granted, such as freedom of speech. Who are you to tell us, that bled to support this country and the innocents around the world what we can and can't say and the forum in which we say it! How dare you even question a man's service and sacrifice?

I congratulate your son on having the courage and honor to serve. Once a Marine always a Marine is right, but we do become inactive and use the past tense. That is our perogative. You have no say in the matter, ever, end of discussion.

So, we will continue to speak out against people, and we will not have respect for individuals whom we feel as AMERICANS do not deserve it. I will not speak ill of Obama as a man, but his policies are not generally supported by myself. Same as I spoke out about Clinton and Bush. Are you going to question that? Are you going to say that I do not deserve the EGA tattooed to my skin because I speak out against what I beleive is the wrong direction and the corrosion of the same liberties that I fought for and my brothers and sisters died for?

Get back on topic and get off subjects in which you have no knowledge, experience, or right to speak on.

Sorry everyone else, but questioning people's service really ticks me off.

Paul C-379820, unfortunely I have to agree with most of what you stated, this is my second vote for your post.

from around the block - My son is a Marine and he would never speak as you have with words like Nobama.

That is your son, NOT YOU. Or you would have learned basic Leadership, Respect is earned.

LiberalVet, YOU HAVE NO CLUE, read:

http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1341

UNLIKE TAKING EVERYTHING FOR GRANTED (the errata of this article) IT IS A DEFENSE CUT by 10%.

LetsBeReasonable - USAF also said they do NOT need the C-17 planes that Congress is insisting on.

They (jet jockeys, current USAF Generals) want their jet fighters and the more expensive C-27, the USAF also does not want to do their mission just like during the Vietnam Era with the CV-2 and C-7 Caribou (taken away from US Army, due to wing span, and scraped by USAF with no replacements) and Military Airlift Command (MAC). Now known as Airlift Mobility Command (AMC). This is like the scrapping of the A-10s and the USAF not wanting to continue the Close Air Support (CAS) Mission.

Bill M NY - you might want to explain to those that have not served that the US Military is not a democracy, and we give up many "rights" while "in". Neither is the US Military Socialist, it is more Authoritarian or Totalitarian. As you can see I am "Politically Incorrect", I was quietly told that this is why I was orignally sent to Afghanistan after Iraq after pissing off the Politicians at D.C. as a Congressional Liason Officer (told some they did not know anything about the "Middle East").

They (Politicians) are making a grave mistake. Think how long it would take to trust someone if you did not speak their language, understand their culture, know their religion, and live someplace else. So you think relieving the Theater Commander after 11 months was smart, he was the person that came up with the "new plans" and even explained them in detail during a CBS Evening News interview with Kate Courriec, his mistake was pulling a General Erik Shinseki; asking for more Soldiers to implement his plans. This is why I stay here even after getting shot, because the Afghans villagers finally trust me.

Gee everyone, let's look at a few things here okay? Most of you are correct on several points, not necessarily on every one though. First my background: 34 years in the Marine Corps and Marine Corps Reserve. Currently mobilized to active duty for Enduring Freedom. Civilian employment: Contract Negotiator for Lockheed Martin Corporation. Political affiliation: Republicrat (or Demoblican, take your choice).

1. The FY2010 Defense Budget does have 4% real growth over 2009's. President Obama and Secretary Gates have eliminated the $60B wish list that the Armed Services present to Congress each year. So there is real growth-while the wish list is exactly that. What has happened every year since, oh, probably the War of 1812 is that Congress, with appropriations authority, has added to the President's proposed budget. This is a game they play in Washington. For instance, the Marine Corps officially requests 2 new C-130J transports in the budget. Yet, when we appear before Congress during budget hearings, we're asked if we want more. So we say, "Well, 4 would be nice..." and viola, Congress adds funds for 2 more. Now, where "Cold War" programs have been recommended for reduction/termination, other programs have fared well. Lockheed is one company that is crying "wolf" with the VH-71 and F-22. Why? Because we are getting a $4B increase in the F-35 program and the addition of a second Littoral Combat Ship. I also believe that our C-130J program has had additional aircraft budgeted for (remember, the C-130J is built in the same plant as the F-22: many workers who leave the F-22 will be transferred to the C-130J-they won't be laid off). Secretary Gates's budget calls for an increase of 15,000 people in Special Forces. So the FY2010 budget reflects a change in reality: conventional wars are less likely in the future, while unconventional wars are more likely. Hence, restructure the budget to reflect that reality. Yes, the conventional forces will be reduced, but not weakened qualitively.

2. Back in the early 90's, everyone will recall that the Soviet Union finally fell, done in by the inability to compete with the US military buildup under President Reagan and the economic strength of the US. Once the Berlin Wall fell, EVERYONE in the US went "Hallejulah!" and the perception was that the US defense establishment could now be reduced to more moderate levels as the Cold War nemesis no longer existed. Good reasoning! Did President Clinton take the reduction too far? Perhaps but remember, everyone on both sides of the Congressional aisles were clamoring for defense reductions. Fiscal responsibility reigned and we began to experience the first budget surpluses in decades. It was during this time, in the late 90's, that the F-22, F-18E/F and F-35 were in their design phase. And defense analysts everywhere were warning that the proposed budgets coming for 2000-2005, would not and DID not support 3 concurrent manufacturing lines. Something would have to be cut/scaled back. But then lo and behold, 9/11 happened and President Bush opened the budget spigots and suddenly EVERYTHING defense related was funded and yes, the defense budget doubled in size from FY2002 through FY2009, in terms of real growth. You can make a pretty compelling argument that a more restrained, focused approach should have been used, increasing funding only for those things needed to fight an irregular war in Afghanistan (I'm not going to get into Iraq - as a career Marine, I was screaming that Iraq was irrelevant and not the center of gravity in this war, also that the reasons the Administration were using to justify it were pretty thin at best) (oh yes, on my qualifications, I forgot to mention that I am a career intelligence officer and serve the Mecca of US Intelligence, the NSA (no, not the CIA - (they think they know EVERYTHING about EVERYTHING!)).

3. Defense contractors like Lockheed are not corporate welfare, contrary to popular opinion. Yes, we do make $200 hammers, which cost what they do because of very specific requirements levied on us by the USG (would a $5 hammer from Ace Hardware work just as well? You bet, except ours would survive a thermonuclear blast and would still drive nails, while Ace's would be a melted puddle of goo, but I digress...). The facts are that we employ a lot of very talented engineers, scientists, skilled machinists, business people, who do get paid wages that are equal to or higher than many similar commercial companies around us. But our wages are driven by competition and by the USG requirement that we pay competitive wages. I can tell you though, that before the dot.com meltdown, we COULD NOT compete with what was being offered by commercial companies: entry level enginering graduates were being offered starting salaries of $80K in the late 90's. Our top executives are constrained by USG regulations as to how much they can be paid that is reimburseable in our overhead rates. Many top defense CEO's make considerably less than their Wall Street or commercial peers. And the ripple effect of our manufacturing contracts helps minority and disadvantaged businesses around the nation that otherwise would never get off the ground. Again, partially driven by USG requirements and also by the need to be good corporate and community citizens.

So in closing, just want to get some things straightened out. If you want to know my specific views on certain things, then here goes: F-22 - wind it down; Airborne Laser - kill it; Littoral Combat Ship - yep, make more of 'em and faster; UAV's - they are the future (not something the Air Force wants to hear), make more of them, a LOT more and make them bigger, with longer range/payload. Best of all, make them expendable!; EFV for the Marine Corps - kill it (the design is bad); next generation aircraft carrier (CVN-78) - kill it (carriers are the most vulnerable seagoing asset we have and with only 10-11 at a price tag of about $7B each, the Navy will not commit them anywhere in the world where there is a credible defense - besides, submarines, even the diesel ones used by the Chinese/North Koreans can take one out without being detected). So, let the sniping begin!

Perhaps they did me a favor by sending me to Afghanistan.

Many posters here do not realize that range on a missile that can reach orbit is not essential. Once the missile achieves near orbit, you let the earth rotation achieve range. Using a Chinese GPS for targeting. The entire US and anywhere of the World is achievable as a target.

Note the North Koreans during the missile launch prior to the nuclear test, stated that they were trying to launch a satellite. If they can achieve this they can put a nuclear weapon into orbit. Depending on the "throw weight" (lift capability) of the missile.

Also most of what we still have after the scrapping of the US INF (Intermediate Nuclear Forces) are the big ones (Thermonuclear); that cannot be used without significant collateral damage to South Korea, China, etc..

We're not at war with two different "places". We are fighting a "war on" terrorism that takes place mostly in Afghanistan and we are trying to make something of the mess we started in Iraq. That isn't a war either...than was an unprovoked attack.

Defense is easily the most wasteful spending we've had over the last 30 years.

And I blame that on both Dems and Reps...Carter, JFK, LBJ and Reagan increased defense spending while Eisenhauer, Nixon, Ford and Bush cut defense spending. Clinton decreased defense spending from 1993-1998 but increased it from 1999-2001

LOL...A goofball chimes in. WE ARE AT WAR IN TWO PLACES. What rock you living under moron? Go back to sleep.

Iran and North Korea are both pains in the arsenal... I'll give them that. I won't however succumb to the rationale that they have armies capable of whooping any part of our great military in the event that they grow some balls. The shipping business is their primary hard target, OK... maybe Admiral McCain was a better Navy man for the job of dealing with them. Sure. But the GOP lost, and the decision is left with Commander in Chief Obama. He'll make the call as to how we proceed with the threat of medium range rockets and near-nuclear warheads.

Have more faith in your country. These sheeple are starting to resemble lemmings.

The military is not the only government agency that wastes money - government, in general is wasteful. What government program has brought real value to the taxpayer? Compare government facilities to private enterprise. Government buildings are lavish and overbuilt. Compare government emplolyee benefits to private enterprise - the government is excessive in all respects.

Don't single out the military when you talk about wastful spending - the entire government falls in this category.

You are absolutely correct. But I still say that our President might get just a little space to accomplish an overhaul long due.

But then I guess you think he hasn't had anything on his plate since he was elected.

And by the way, I used to work with the federal government on making necessary repairs to old and outdated federal buildings all over the country. That was after 9/11. So all government buildings aren't how you discribe them.

It's not simply about money, even though there well articulated article hooked us with the tag word "Recession". Our homeland security and national defense are on the line. The issue is more than a blog debate and political Dick Cheney measuring contest across party lines.

Some of us like to dumby it down too much. What are the underlying sentiments in this article? Point out those, and you'll really have a conversation worth contributing comments too.

Thanks for caring. Bullets save lives!

Thank you for you statements. A voice of reason.

Good now tell Congress stop with their "pet projects" that we don't want.

Pertaining to the DIVAD (Divison Air Defense), failure. Putting an F-16 radar and a gun system together on a tracked vehicle (obsolete tank, that could not keep up with the mobility of the M1 Abrams and M2 Bradley). As tested at El Paso Texas (White Sands), could not shoot anything down and kept firing at the ground. This compared to the effective Gepard 1A2 of the Bundeswehr (German Army), USSR ZSU-57-2 and ZSU-23-4. So doug-p the Sgt. York (DIVAD) is a terrible example (especially since Congress demanded certain components (micromanaged) be included (like the F-16 radar) or funding would be withheld). This is when I was first educated about US Military R&D, Project Management and Procurement, when I said that we should just buy the already built working German Gepard ("Buy US Only Products, Goods, and Services"). And also when I learned that it is not a matter of the best for our US Military, it is more a matter of whose State the US Military Equipment is made at.

As far as effective equipment, how about telling Congress we want Bulletproof Vests (like Dragon), not high velocity fragmentation resistant Interceptor Body Armor. Just because Interceptor Body Armor is made in a certain State.

God bless every good teacher!

Forget it, you have already lost your arguement. Read comments before yours.

The article clearly stated that overall defense spending will increase....

from around the block since you have nothing to offer except to mimic what others have said, please refrain.

You make yourself look silly in public and always trying to tell others what to do.

Alan, I don't believe my comments look anymore silly than yours. You still haven't answered my question to you of what you would like to see the President do about North Korea and Iran.

And you don't believe that calling our President weak isn't putting someone down? What do you think the world thinks about those kind of comments about our commander and chief? If they only looked at these blogs, they would think that the United States is weak because of all the hateful remarks made about President Obama.

They will think, the same thing about, him, they think now, that, he is attempting to live on rhetoric and charisma, and is not to be taken seriously

Jerry Bingo!

from around the block I won't cast pearl's before swine.

Alan and Jerry, he is attempting to live on rhetoric and charisma, and is not to be taken seriously

So where in the world have you been that you have seen all these people laughing at our President?

Neither one of you will answer a straight question.

from around the world Trinidad and Tobago; Australia; Venezuela; Pakistan; Iran; North Korea; France; Libya; Israel; Lebanon; Russia; Somalia; Egypt; Spain; Italy; the U.K is holding their breath; Brazil and oh. so many more.

The answer to Iran and North Korea is simple. Keep patrolling the International Waters that protect the Hormuz and the Suez and the Seas, and nothing more. Don't shoot first and ask questions later. Don't be naive and turn an ignorant eye to them. Don't let yourself be deceived by warmongerer's and profiteers.

mrbreakinnews sounds like something Nevil Chamberlain would say and voila; WW2.

Sanctions aren't the answer. New taxes on someone who doesn't pay taxes anyway aren't going to get them to stop with the illegal activity.

Furthermore, they're protected by China. That's an incredible disertation in itself to explain the ramifications behind. Beyond the business ventures and debt, the cold war would definitely explode if relations between our great nations soured under the current administration.

Thirdly, Ahmedinijad and his provocative rhetoric doesn't scare me as an American. When Saudi Arabia decides it's time to make drastic changes in the Middle East leadership, then they'll call US. Going on, the Taepodong and the Shahab suck... they're dumb (inaccurate), slow, and limited with laughable blast diameters.

Ok.

America first. I don't know how to take your Nevil Chamberlain comment though.

WW2 was one of the greatest wars our great country and soldiers have ever had the honor to be apart of. Those who died are heros and patriots and God-bless them and their families.

letsdance - get over yourself.

You also pay a flat tax, 20%, with no loop holes; and a Value Added Tax (VAT). This is a good thing and opposed by the US Government (especially President Obama's statement to Joe the Plumber about Flat Taxes like Europe), to protect the rich from paying taxes.

You also have real Universal Health Care, etc, that takes the Insurance Companys inflation out of the health care cost equation.

The Bridges, Roads and Infrastructure in each State is the RESPONSIBILITY of the individual States as part of "States Rights".

Add to the above (post #25.2)

You also have manditory,"Compulsory","draft", Service to earn your Citizenship, our US Military is made up of volunteers (US Citizens, Taxpayers).

Yes, some how it's hard to see the logic in how putting one of our few remaining American assets, our "Technology Base" on the chopping block makes a lot of sense. American scientists, engineers and skilled workers are going to be a thing of the past and we will wind up relying on our overseas "Out-Source" market for the technology we need

Some how we have managed in the past to come up with innovative technology, develop it, and when it's ready to market, send it overseas to be copied, manufactured and sold back to us while our own technology companies go out of business. (Don't be surprised when you start seeing F-22's or JSF Strike Fighters with the very familiar "Made in China" sticker on them!!) I spent 39 years in the Aerospace Industry starting as a new Engineer and retiring as a Program Manager in our Advanced Technology Programs and have seen it happen tiime and again. We put up the bucks to develop technologies and our allies (or are they really our competition??) reap the profits!

I believe the problem lies in the fact that many don't realize that when the Government spends $Billions on Military, Aerospace or other technology programs that we areactually getting something back for our money. Maybe it does seem overpriced, and yes the defense contractors and technology companies may not be the cheapest, but at least we are keeping our skilled workforce in place and our technology in-house so maybe it won't wind up like the TV's, Electronics and even the laptop I'm using as I type this, "made in Japan" !!

Are we better off giving these $Trillions to the Banks and Insurance Companies and the speculators that got us in this economic mess in the first place or should we keep what's left of our healthy infrastructure intact?

I agree with Leroy.  Besides all of the other walfare systems that help some people has change , I say some because many took advantage of the systems and some uses it to better themselves, and this one need to be change for the better also.

And lets not leave letsdance comment out.  Many didn't know that Dick Cheney made a killing off...meaning he got filthy rich... the war.  Halliburton is truly his business.  It supplies the fuel that was used in both wars.  I was told about Halliburton by an American resident from another country in 2002.'

letsdance and letstalk678 . NO VALUE.

If President Clinton did not cut the US Military to the bone in his Reduction In Forces (RIFs), the US Military would still have it's own capabilities and the expensive US Civilian Contractors would not be necessary (would never have been created).

Cause + Effects = Results

Also stated before ok get rid of the requirement for the US Military to "Buy Only US Services" so we can outsource this to cheaper foreign Contractors and unemploy a butt load of expensive US Civilians that work for the US Contractors.

Leroy-

The Government can not compete against the private sector. That would be akin to full blown socialism, or communism.

What needs to be done is to control the spending and waste... Some of that waste is actually a reflection of how the government wants to do business... they want to spend a dollar of accounting to make sure that a penny is not wasted. The end result is tons of meetings and layers and layers of functions that provide very little Return on Investment from a product point of view.

However, from the contractor's point of view, all those "wasted" layers and jobs are required by the customer (the Gov) and all generated profit.

Heck, if the Gov. were to go into business on its own ( think Obama and GM -Government Motors- ) the end result would be far more waste. Can you imagine the DMV running a factory?

The answer with Defense spending, from my point of view, is to streamline the process and to cut down on unnecessary control and management. To do this, however, the Gov. itself will have to reform itself and its rules and regulations.

A great start is to eliminate all guaranteed profit contracts ( pretty much a cost plus ) and to make every thing into a fixed cost -with provisions for "change orders" as the product requirements are modified.

The only place were we should allow cost plus is in DARPA (and like R&D) projects where the intent of the program is to push technology and thus the final costs are unknown. But since those programs -as a rule- don't cost as much and do return good technology, that should not be a problem.

Nonetheless, in those cases of gov. funded R&D, the patents should solidly stay on US soil and no technology exports should be allowed ( ie: ITAR controlled).

Wait a minute Leroy! In every Government procurement contract I ever saw there is a clause called "Rights in Data" whereby the "Government" is NOT obligated to protect your rights and can "open bid" any and all of your design rights to other sources. There is little or no protection of "vendor proprietary rights" when dealing with the US Government.

Tony, the Government is and has been "in business". What do you think they build in Naval Shipyards or Air Force Depots? How about Nuclear R&D at Los Alamos and other "secret" facilities like "Area 51"? The Government/NASA went to the moon on our money so don't kid yourself it's not "in business"!

The government does not make a monetary profit from building things. No military personnel work in the Naval Shipyards. They hire civilian contractors to come in & build. The USS George Washington recently went into SRA (I don't remember what it stands for, but they basically tore the whole ship apart & fixed everything). It took place at the naval base in Yokosuka, but ALL the work was done by Japanese & American contractors. When our aircraft need a depot level inspection or repair, we send them over to the depot hanger right down the street.

You believe there was a shooter on the grassy knoll too don't you?