Battle lines form over fate of F-22 fighter: Obama vows to veto funds

The Washington Times ^ | July 17, 2009 | Stephen Dinan

[Scanian]

The Democrat-controlled Congress is challenging President Obamas resolve to cut an Air Force fighter plane program - a move the White House calls the first major test of its efforts to curb runaway spending and slash unneeded projects.

Mr. Obama and his spending-cut allies on Capitol Hill are going head-to-head with powerful Democratic committee chairmen and lawmakers from both parties with home-state interests in building the F-22 Raptor who are trying to add money for the fighter plane over the objections of the president and the Pentagon.

"The Pentagon doesn't want this plane; the Pentagon doesn't think we need this plane," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said. He told The Washington Times that Mr. Obama will follow through on his threat to veto any bill that restores money for the fighter, and said the White House considers this battle to be the first test of Mr. Obama's vow to begin holding the line on spending.

Those words were echoed by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates who, in a speech Thursday, said the administration views the F-22 as a "red line."

"If we can't get this right, what on earth can we get right?" Mr. Gates said in a speech Thursday night to the Economic Club of Chicago. "It is time to draw the line on doing defense business as usual. The president has drawn that line. And that red line with regard to a veto is real."

Mr. Obama's budget froze the F-22 program at 187 planes, but lawmakers in both the House and Senate have added money back in for more.

In the House's defense spending bill, unveiled Thursday, Rep. John P. Murtha, Pennsylvania Democrat and chairman of the House's military spending subcommittee, added back $369 million for a dozen F-22s.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

There was an excellent article yesterday that said the F-22 greatly magnifies the F-16’s capabilities. The F-22 provides so large an air superiority advantage that we can depend on older technology to perform as it was originally designed. The argument was that the F-22 effectively breathes new life into the aging fleet of F-16s. I thought this was very persuasive.

[LuxMaker]

All of those in the military or who have served who voted for Zero deserve exactly what they are going to get.

[Pontiac]

This is treason but you know that.

Obama or me?

[Rappini]

Hussien wants the Ruskies and the Chicoms Aviation Technology to catch up to the US.

[too_cool_for_skool]

The USAF is claiming the F-22 has a 150:1 kill ratio in exercises. Even if the real life kill ratio is a fraction of this at 50:1, that means the existing 187 F-22s would match up with 9000 enemy fighters - more than all the fighter jets in the world put together.

Cap the order at 187 and spend the money on developing the 6th generation fighter.

[rlmorel]

Yes. What most people refer to is the Northern Edge exercise in Alaska a few years back, when the F22 first took part, detailed in this link:

Aviation Week and Space Techology's Article on the F-22 in Northern Edge

What is impressive is that they really still at that point had not realized what a force magnifier the F-22 is, and how best to use it.

[rlmorel]

Well, that may be true. I am making my assumptions on what is good for the country (at least as I see it) and I don’t think Obama has any such intention.

I think he is trying to deliberately destroy this country as we have known it to reshape it in what HE thinks is what it should be.

[Jet Jaguar]

BTTT

The perfect tool to kill the Stimulus II bill.

Add a rider to fund the F-22.

[PIF]

Along those (We are doomed.) lines:
The Coming Age of Obama. A Prediction
As Obama Vows to Change the World, So We Make a Prediction
http://thepoliticallyincorrectfish.com/pif2/?p=544

But “we” are only doomed for a historically short time. We will rise up stronger, better than ever, once the idiots eliminate themselves, as they always do.

[jpsb]

Gate's thinking seems to be that the USA will be fighting terrorists or other low intensity conflicts and not first world nations. Ergo, the F22, which is a very expensive air superiority weapon is unnessccesry. If he is correct and we have nothing to worry about from Russia, China, Iran, Pakistan, Cuba, North Korea, etc. then cool, cancel the F22. However, IMHO, that is a very dangerious gamble and there will be no substitute for the F22 should we find ourselves in need of it. Think of Germany, late 1944 and the Mesurmit (jet fighter)