F-22 necessary for any pre-emptive strike on Iran

- Definitive signs of weapons deployment by a bellicose regime in Iran might lead to a decision in favor of pre-emptive, multinational action. While none would be eager for this kind of scenario, the fact remains that it would task Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT)/Boeing F-22 Raptors heavily.

Wouldn’t we rely more on cruise missiles and drones?

Nope, neither can carry 2000 lb bunker buster type bombs. Most of the Iranian nuclear stuff is well burried, and they would be needed, if even they could do the job.

The job is really the one that the F-117 was built for, while the F-22 was designed as an air superiority fighter/interceptor. The A-12, which was canceled by Dick Cheney when he was SecDef, would have been a better platform for the job.

Oh, the B-2 could do the job as well, but we only have 20 of those. Another "gift" from Clinton, originally 132 where to be built, instead production was cut off at 21 (numbers, except perhaps the planned production, include the test aircraft) . The B-1 could also do the job, although at somewhat more risk to the aircarft, because they are less stealthy.

It was killed by Carter, and resurrected by Reagan, but we still only produced around 100. We now have only 65 "on line", including 2 test aircraft. A few have been destroyed, but most of the difference sets in the Boneyard in Arizona. Put there during the Bush Administration, to save Operations and Maintenance money that Congress would not appropriate. The money saved went to keeping the others' flying.

Folks —

Do the math.

A few B-2s can deliver the payload/throw weight of ALL the F-22s put together.

Not to diss the F-22; just keep in mind we have the required first strike platforms already.

Hi Moonman Which one are you talking about? Bush, or Reagan? 2 of my son's were in the Military during Carter. One in the air force and he said at any given time they couldn't get all planes necessary in the air as Carter had gutted the military and they scavenged 2 planes to get one in the air...After Reagan he said it was a world of difference. They got all the parts they needed. He was a jet engine mechanic. Bush 1 continued to build the military after Reagan, Clinton gutted it and Bush 2 increased military spending and money to the Pentagon...Especially after the invasion of Iraq. As Rumsfeld said in a press conference once, we have to go with the military we have and not the one we need. Bush pushed thorough higher spending on Military....

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.