H’mmmm. This guy is inadvertantly debunking you.
Try to explain. “Sluggo” was talking about the current fleet of tankers with the small KC-135 footprints.
He is saying the infrastructure renovations are significantly costly...and he is all set to do it again...spend taxpayer money as if it is water. Okay.
“significantly costly” compared to a super tanker full of fuel?
math:
Super tanker: 150,000 t (not quite a big one)
JP-8: 0,8 kg/l
Volume: 187,500,000 l
or 50,000,000 gal
with $2.5 per gallon
$125 million fuel cost for just one base.
What's the bigger waste, building a proper tanker base or losing a war?
And his fueling storage and resupply position I will now take with a hefty dose of salt.
Is it so hard to understand that a tanker base is useless without sufficient fuel supply on ground? To fly fuel in for aerial refueling is a joke.
AND buying the wrong tanker [one that flunked five of eight survivability criteria...and costs $5 billion+ more to acquire and probably $10 billion more to operate] and rewarding enemies of the United States of America and freedom everywhere.
So your framing of the choices was rather lame and shortsighted. You can't just misargue the micro issues...as you are want to do. You need to squarely face the larger issues. National Security.
Corruption, which undermines the rule of law, such as EADs and its K-Street lobbyists epitomizes [dwarfing every single allegation you guys make against Boeing or McDonnell Douglas] represents the death of democracy.