Posted on 06/24/2010 3:28:11 AM PDT by Jet Jaguar
I should think the extant c-5s and c-130s should cover our needs....
It must be nice to live in a peaceful world where you don't need weapons.
Cutting defense is "a man issue" with Hussein.
Here it is the same logic, you put defense spending up for cuts and when you have resistance it keeps the much more politically risky social cuts from having to be considered. Maybe the C-17 fleet does not need additional units, but does the government need more artists for the National Endowment for the Humanities?
Obama stands “squarely behind” Gates.
#
Quote:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2524484/posts
Obama Backs Gates in Budget Debate
DEFENSE.gov (AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE) ^ | May 28, 2010 | n/a
Posted on May 31, 2010 2:47:38 AM PDT by Cindy
NOTE The following text is a quote:
Obama Backs Gates in Budget Debate
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, May 28, 2010 President Barack Obama today promised to veto any legislation that includes funding for an alternate engine for the F-35 joint strike fighter or more C-17 cargo jets, expressing his strong support for Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates budget-reform effort.
As the Congress continues its work on funding bills for the Department of Defense, I want to reiterate my strong support for the reforms Secretary Gates is advancing at the Pentagon, Obama said in a written statement the White House released today. He has kept me fully apprised of his efforts to reform how our military operates and bring needed efficiencies to the Department of Defense.
Obama said he stands squarely behind Gates’ position on the second F-35 engine and the C-17 program.
As the statement of administration policy made clear, the president said in his statement, our military does not want or need these programs being pushed by the Congress, and should Congress ignore this fact, I will veto any such legislation so that it can be returned to me without those provisions.
Gates is nothing but a kissass to the Obama regime. He is gutting the US military with all of his cuts, which include Navy warships.
I really despised Dick Cheney years ago when he was SecDef and kept trying to kill the V-22 Osprey program, as well.
I’m a big Cheney fan, but I just don’t get why he (and now Gates) would try to reduce the military superiority. We are falling behind to others in the world and it will likely bite us in the ass.
I should think the extant c-5s and c-130s should cover our needs....
Do you have any idea how long it takes to procure a new aircraft from scratch? Try
20 years (or more). So...when you actually field one, its important
to get it in the quantities you really need—cause the replacement
won’t be coming anytime soon (if ever).
Speaking of Gates...
Off Thread Topic:
http://www.truthusa.com/IRAN.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2532380/posts
“Gates: Nuclear Weapons Would Make Iran Less Secure”
DEFENSE.gov (AMERICAN FORCS PRESS SERVICE) ^ | LONDON, June 8, 2010 | By John D. Banusiewicz
Posted on June 11, 2010 2:20:34 AM PDT by Cindy
#
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2530932/posts
UN to slap fresh sanctions on Iran (Oh Yeah. Thatll work.)
AFP on Yahoo ^ | 6/9/10 | Gerard Aziakou
Posted on June 9, 2010 8:29:41 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
#
www.defense.gov//News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=59558
“Obama Applauds New U.N. Sanctions on Iran”
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
SNIPPET: “WASHINGTON, June 9, 2010 President Barack Obama today lauded the U.N. Security Councils decision to impose new sanctions on Iran for violating its Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty obligations.
This resolution will put in place the toughest sanctions ever faced by the Iranian government, and it sends an unmistakable message about the international communitys commitment to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons, Obama said in the Diplomatic Room at the White House.”
Boeing Eyes Narrower C-17Boeing plans to provide more detail on its C-17FE concept at Farnborough.
The FE, for fuel efficient, would have a narrower fuselage by several feet than the aircraft now in production. It also would involve lightening of the structure through use of composites, says Tommy Dunehew, Boeings C-17 business development representative.
The goal is to meet the nominal Joint Future Theater Lift program. The concept "is fairly advanced," with the same engines, tails, and wing, Dunehew says.
The Army and Air Force would impact the design as requirements would evolve. But the goal is to meet 99% of the JFTL requirement with the C-17FE.
The concept effectively supplants the C-17B concept.
NO I dont know the strategic reason for this particular piece of equipment. or if they can refit existing pieces to serve that purpose....I know we have been refurbishing and re-building B-52 since the early 50s. I love the BUFF.
I was po’d when fighter jets were cut by zer0, like the f-22. I know Reagan and Bush Sr. cut back on certain military uneccessities...even closed bases... We need to cut back things that are not necessary in a recessesion. I know the ‘messiah’ has a political agenda to destroy the military...but I do not necessarily agree that one MATS cargo plane design would be doing that.
Nukes... don’t need them... Generals... don’t need them either... 1.2 trillion for union thugs and street punks... we need that sh!t!
LLS
It will be brought down by a daisy bb gun and it will break in two pieces if it has to land where a C130 has steep decline requirements... other than that... it will be great!
LLS
I agree that aircraft need replacing. The question as I see it is, would we get more airlift for the buck by buying more C-130Js, or a smaller number of C-17s?
OK...well that sounds like a reason to continue it.
I do not know any more than I see on the Military Channel. I was just floating the possibilities....and I was also bringing up the point that even rock ribbed conservative presidents....(we only have had one in the past century or so and he was Reagan)...have cut back on what was construed as duplication or waste....
just saying....that's all.
I tend to live in the past...you know, like when you go to war you go to WIN...Unconditionally.
I also highly recommend saturation bombing over smart bomb technology....it breaks the spirit....just ask the Japanese. See what they have to say about reforming a full time aggressive army (not their little policing army)....we cooked them 65 years ago and they are still cooked.
I have been stuck in so many places waiting on a C-5 to get repaired, never been stuck with a C-17.
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.