yes. because the country that spends more on the military than the next 7 countries combined needs more military spending.
but how dare anyone say we can afford universal healthcare.
He also says he wants to leave entitlements alone and cut taxes. Which will balloon the deficit.
Even fox admits it.
"By increasing defense and leaving Medicare and Social Security untouched, the Trump final budget plan is sure to project sizable deficits."
It'll be interesting to see how this goes over with the freedom caucus
While yes spending more on the military without cuts or raising taxes would increase the deficit and that might not be a smart idea, I always hate when people use total dollars spent for their comparison instead of GDP. This isn't to say we don't spend a lot, but with respect to the GDP we don't spend that much. Entitlements are about 14% of the GDP while defense is 3.5%.
We don't need to spend 3.5% is the point
This is incorrect and here is why; our Air Force and missile defense systems are extremely outdated.
Do we need to spend that much every year? No. We do however need to get the F-22 and F-35 projects finished. The F-15/16/18 platforms are Cold War era fighters. The A-10 is post-Vietnam.
We are unbeatable because of our air superiority. A lot of that has to do with the weapons systems, but the aircraft matters a great deal as well. A single F-22 can take out an average of seven F-15's in a dog fight scenario.
The F-22 program was scrapped after about 1/3rd of the original order was built and about 1/10th of the F-35's from the original order number have been built.
What recent war has warplanes mattered?
All of them for the past 100 years?
How many airplanes does ISIS engage us with? How many planes did Iraq or Afghanistan engage us with? I guess I should have been more clear. Why invest in old school war planes when we can use drones?
yes. because the country that spends more on the military than the next 7 countries combined needs more military spending.
but how dare anyone say we can afford universal healthcare.
He also says he wants to leave entitlements alone and cut taxes. Which will balloon the deficit.
Even fox admits it.
"By increasing defense and leaving Medicare and Social Security untouched, the Trump final budget plan is sure to project sizable deficits."
It'll be interesting to see how this goes over with the freedom caucus
While yes spending more on the military without cuts or raising taxes would increase the deficit and that might not be a smart idea, I always hate when people use total dollars spent for their comparison instead of GDP. This isn't to say we don't spend a lot, but with respect to the GDP we don't spend that much. Entitlements are about 14% of the GDP while defense is 3.5%.
We don't need to spend 3.5% is the point
This is incorrect and here is why; our Air Force and missile defense systems are extremely outdated.
Do we need to spend that much every year? No. We do however need to get the F-22 and F-35 projects finished. The F-15/16/18 platforms are Cold War era fighters. The A-10 is post-Vietnam.
We are unbeatable because of our air superiority. A lot of that has to do with the weapons systems, but the aircraft matters a great deal as well. A single F-22 can take out an average of seven F-15's in a dog fight scenario.
The F-22 program was scrapped after about 1/3rd of the original order was built and about 1/10th of the F-35's from the original order number have been built.
yes. because the country that spends more on the military than the next 7 countries combined needs more military spending.
but how dare anyone say we can afford universal healthcare.
He also says he wants to leave entitlements alone and cut taxes. Which will balloon the deficit.
Even fox admits it.
"By increasing defense and leaving Medicare and Social Security untouched, the Trump final budget plan is sure to project sizable deficits."
It'll be interesting to see how this goes over with the freedom caucus
While yes spending more on the military without cuts or raising taxes would increase the deficit and that might not be a smart idea, I always hate when people use total dollars spent for their comparison instead of GDP. This isn't to say we don't spend a lot, but with respect to the GDP we don't spend that much. Entitlements are about 14% of the GDP while defense is 3.5%.
We don't need to spend 3.5% is the point
This is incorrect and here is why; our Air Force and missile defense systems are extremely outdated.
Do we need to spend that much every year? No. We do however need to get the F-22 and F-35 projects finished. The F-15/16/18 platforms are Cold War era fighters. The A-10 is post-Vietnam.
We are unbeatable because of our air superiority. A lot of that has to do with the weapons systems, but the aircraft matters a great deal as well. A single F-22 can take out an average of seven F-15's in a dog fight scenario.
The F-22 program was scrapped after about 1/3rd of the original order was built and about 1/10th of the F-35's from the original order number have been built.
What recent war has warplanes mattered?
All of them for the past 100 years?
How many airplanes does ISIS engage us with? How many planes did Iraq or Afghanistan engage us with? I guess I should have been more clear. Why invest in old school war planes when we can use drones?
This isn't a video game or Top Gun where aircraft dog fight. Air superiority/supremacy extends far beyond that narrow scope.
For someone that likes to knock people for not doing research or knowing facts, you're woefully out of touch on this subject.
yes. because the country that spends more on the military than the next 7 countries combined needs more military spending.
but how dare anyone say we can afford universal healthcare.
He also says he wants to leave entitlements alone and cut taxes. Which will balloon the deficit.
Even fox admits it.
"By increasing defense and leaving Medicare and Social Security untouched, the Trump final budget plan is sure to project sizable deficits."
It'll be interesting to see how this goes over with the freedom caucus
While yes spending more on the military without cuts or raising taxes would increase the deficit and that might not be a smart idea, I always hate when people use total dollars spent for their comparison instead of GDP. This isn't to say we don't spend a lot, but with respect to the GDP we don't spend that much. Entitlements are about 14% of the GDP while defense is 3.5%.
We don't need to spend 3.5% is the point
This is incorrect and here is why; our Air Force and missile defense systems are extremely outdated.
Do we need to spend that much every year? No. We do however need to get the F-22 and F-35 projects finished. The F-15/16/18 platforms are Cold War era fighters. The A-10 is post-Vietnam.
We are unbeatable because of our air superiority. A lot of that has to do with the weapons systems, but the aircraft matters a great deal as well. A single F-22 can take out an average of seven F-15's in a dog fight scenario.
The F-22 program was scrapped after about 1/3rd of the original order was built and about 1/10th of the F-35's from the original order number have been built.
What recent war has warplanes mattered?
All of them for the past 100 years?
How many airplanes does ISIS engage us with? How many planes did Iraq or Afghanistan engage us with? I guess I should have been more clear. Why invest in old school war planes when we can use drones?
This isn't a video game or Top Gun where aircraft dog fight. Air superiority/supremacy extends far beyond that narrow scope.
For someone that likes to knock people for not doing research or knowing facts, you're woefully out of touch on this subject.
Clearly. I still think drones are the wave of the future, not warplanes.
After Obama depleted the military to the extent he did, Trump really has no choice but to rebuild/resupply the military.
It sure is going to be generating a lot of healthcare, retirement plan funded jobs.
Boeing says hi! Easy one for Patty Murray and Maria Cantrell to vote YES! for.
Lol, $600B in spending, military is so depleted.
Boeing actually produces something btw. Military is 95% paper pushers and glorified janitors.
The bulk of military spending goes to contractors. For instance just hretainere there are $12 billion in knowledge based contracts. Those are for people that don't actually do anything, but used to, so they basically are on a retainer.
yes. because the country that spends more on the military than the next 7 countries combined needs more military spending.
but how dare anyone say we can afford universal healthcare.
He also says he wants to leave entitlements alone and cut taxes. Which will balloon the deficit.
Even fox admits it.
"By increasing defense and leaving Medicare and Social Security untouched, the Trump final budget plan is sure to project sizable deficits."
It'll be interesting to see how this goes over with the freedom caucus
While yes spending more on the military without cuts or raising taxes would increase the deficit and that might not be a smart idea, I always hate when people use total dollars spent for their comparison instead of GDP. This isn't to say we don't spend a lot, but with respect to the GDP we don't spend that much. Entitlements are about 14% of the GDP while defense is 3.5%.
We don't need to spend 3.5% is the point
This is incorrect and here is why; our Air Force and missile defense systems are extremely outdated.
Do we need to spend that much every year? No. We do however need to get the F-22 and F-35 projects finished. The F-15/16/18 platforms are Cold War era fighters. The A-10 is post-Vietnam.
We are unbeatable because of our air superiority. A lot of that has to do with the weapons systems, but the aircraft matters a great deal as well. A single F-22 can take out an average of seven F-15's in a dog fight scenario.
The F-22 program was scrapped after about 1/3rd of the original order was built and about 1/10th of the F-35's from the original order number have been built.
What recent war has warplanes mattered?
All of them for the past 100 years?
How many airplanes does ISIS engage us with? How many planes did Iraq or Afghanistan engage us with? I guess I should have been more clear. Why invest in old school war planes when we can use drones?
This isn't a video game or Top Gun where aircraft dog fight. Air superiority/supremacy extends far beyond that narrow scope.
For someone that likes to knock people for not doing research or knowing facts, you're woefully out of touch on this subject.
Clearly. I still think drones are the wave of the future, not warplanes.
yes. because the country that spends more on the military than the next 7 countries combined needs more military spending.
but how dare anyone say we can afford universal healthcare.
He also says he wants to leave entitlements alone and cut taxes. Which will balloon the deficit.
Even fox admits it.
"By increasing defense and leaving Medicare and Social Security untouched, the Trump final budget plan is sure to project sizable deficits."
It'll be interesting to see how this goes over with the freedom caucus
While yes spending more on the military without cuts or raising taxes would increase the deficit and that might not be a smart idea, I always hate when people use total dollars spent for their comparison instead of GDP. This isn't to say we don't spend a lot, but with respect to the GDP we don't spend that much. Entitlements are about 14% of the GDP while defense is 3.5%.
We don't need to spend 3.5% is the point
This is incorrect and here is why; our Air Force and missile defense systems are extremely outdated.
Do we need to spend that much every year? No. We do however need to get the F-22 and F-35 projects finished. The F-15/16/18 platforms are Cold War era fighters. The A-10 is post-Vietnam.
We are unbeatable because of our air superiority. A lot of that has to do with the weapons systems, but the aircraft matters a great deal as well. A single F-22 can take out an average of seven F-15's in a dog fight scenario.
The F-22 program was scrapped after about 1/3rd of the original order was built and about 1/10th of the F-35's from the original order number have been built.
What recent war has warplanes mattered?
All of them for the past 100 years?
How many airplanes does ISIS engage us with? How many planes did Iraq or Afghanistan engage us with? I guess I should have been more clear. Why invest in old school war planes when we can use drones?
This isn't a video game or Top Gun where aircraft dog fight. Air superiority/supremacy extends far beyond that narrow scope.
For someone that likes to knock people for not doing research or knowing facts, you're woefully out of touch on this subject.
Clearly. I still think drones are the wave of the future, not warplanes.
yes. because the country that spends more on the military than the next 7 countries combined needs more military spending.
but how dare anyone say we can afford universal healthcare.
He also says he wants to leave entitlements alone and cut taxes. Which will balloon the deficit.
Even fox admits it.
"By increasing defense and leaving Medicare and Social Security untouched, the Trump final budget plan is sure to project sizable deficits."
It'll be interesting to see how this goes over with the freedom caucus
While yes spending more on the military without cuts or raising taxes would increase the deficit and that might not be a smart idea, I always hate when people use total dollars spent for their comparison instead of GDP. This isn't to say we don't spend a lot, but with respect to the GDP we don't spend that much. Entitlements are about 14% of the GDP while defense is 3.5%.
We don't need to spend 3.5% is the point
This is incorrect and here is why; our Air Force and missile defense systems are extremely outdated.
Do we need to spend that much every year? No. We do however need to get the F-22 and F-35 projects finished. The F-15/16/18 platforms are Cold War era fighters. The A-10 is post-Vietnam.
We are unbeatable because of our air superiority. A lot of that has to do with the weapons systems, but the aircraft matters a great deal as well. A single F-22 can take out an average of seven F-15's in a dog fight scenario.
The F-22 program was scrapped after about 1/3rd of the original order was built and about 1/10th of the F-35's from the original order number have been built.
What recent war has warplanes mattered?
All of them for the past 100 years?
How many airplanes does ISIS engage us with? How many planes did Iraq or Afghanistan engage us with? I guess I should have been more clear. Why invest in old school war planes when we can use drones?
I totally get you don't understand how war works and that's fine. We haven't shot down an enemy aircraft since 1991. An F-15 from Oregon shot down an Iraqi MIG with two AIM-120A's.
The military knows this and that's why the Air Force only has one air superiority training school for the F-15C/D, F-22, and F-35 platforms and they only graduate around 28 pilots a year. That's not the point.
The reason why we haven't had to shoot down an enemy since 1991 is because we are currently in a theater where the air war was almost non-existent. However, if we were to ever engage with anyone else on the shit list, be it Russia, China, Korea, etc. The air war wouldn't be a given. Our entire war fighting doctrine is based on air superiority, period. We don't have fighter drones yet because they aren't fast enough and can't maintain length during combat maneuvers. That will one day be resolved, no ETA on those though.
The Air Force is smaller today than it was in 1947 when it started. The Army and Navy are much smaller as well. When you have a smaller force that is built for efficiency and minimal casualties you have to be completely air dominant. We have ancient air superiority aircraft. We need to spend the money to change that.
yes. because the country that spends more on the military than the next 7 countries combined needs more military spending.
but how dare anyone say we can afford universal healthcare.
He also says he wants to leave entitlements alone and cut taxes. Which will balloon the deficit.
Even fox admits it.
"By increasing defense and leaving Medicare and Social Security untouched, the Trump final budget plan is sure to project sizable deficits."
It'll be interesting to see how this goes over with the freedom caucus
While yes spending more on the military without cuts or raising taxes would increase the deficit and that might not be a smart idea, I always hate when people use total dollars spent for their comparison instead of GDP. This isn't to say we don't spend a lot, but with respect to the GDP we don't spend that much. Entitlements are about 14% of the GDP while defense is 3.5%.
We don't need to spend 3.5% is the point
This is incorrect and here is why; our Air Force and missile defense systems are extremely outdated.
Do we need to spend that much every year? No. We do however need to get the F-22 and F-35 projects finished. The F-15/16/18 platforms are Cold War era fighters. The A-10 is post-Vietnam.
We are unbeatable because of our air superiority. A lot of that has to do with the weapons systems, but the aircraft matters a great deal as well. A single F-22 can take out an average of seven F-15's in a dog fight scenario.
The F-22 program was scrapped after about 1/3rd of the original order was built and about 1/10th of the F-35's from the original order number have been built.
What recent war has warplanes mattered?
All of them for the past 100 years?
How many airplanes does ISIS engage us with? How many planes did Iraq or Afghanistan engage us with? I guess I should have been more clear. Why invest in old school war planes when we can use drones?
I totally get you don't understand how war works and that's fine. We haven't shot down an enemy aircraft since 1991. An F-15 from Oregon shot down an Iraqi MIG with two AIM-120A's.
The military knows this and that's why the Air Force only has one air superiority training school for the F-15C/D, F-22, and F-35 platforms and they only graduate around 28 pilots a year. That's not the point.
The reason why we haven't had to shoot down an enemy since 1991 is because we are currently in a theater where the air war was almost non-existent. However, if we were to ever engage with anyone else on the shit list, be it Russia, China, Korea, etc. The air war wouldn't be a given. Our entire war fighting doctrine is based on air superiority, period. We don't have fighter drones yet because they aren't fast enough and can't maintain length during combat maneuvers. That will one day be resolved, no ETA on those though.
The Air Force is smaller today than it was in 1947 when it started. The Army and Navy are much smaller as well. When you have a smaller force that is built for efficiency and minimal casualties you have to be completely air dominant. We have ancient air superiority aircraft. We need to spend the money to change that.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. We do need planes even just for protection of air Force one and commercial aircraft. There are many instances where fighter planes are called upon to escort a commercial plane that we never hear about.
My comment was on someone ranting about a bunch of investment in all these different planes. My point wasn't to say we need to stop investing in fighter planes, it's that times have changed and the need for a huge stockpile of planes isn't necessary. We should invest in better technology that's conducive to the future.
yes. because the country that spends more on the military than the next 7 countries combined needs more military spending.
but how dare anyone say we can afford universal healthcare.
He also says he wants to leave entitlements alone and cut taxes. Which will balloon the deficit.
Even fox admits it.
"By increasing defense and leaving Medicare and Social Security untouched, the Trump final budget plan is sure to project sizable deficits."
It'll be interesting to see how this goes over with the freedom caucus
While yes spending more on the military without cuts or raising taxes would increase the deficit and that might not be a smart idea, I always hate when people use total dollars spent for their comparison instead of GDP. This isn't to say we don't spend a lot, but with respect to the GDP we don't spend that much. Entitlements are about 14% of the GDP while defense is 3.5%.
We don't need to spend 3.5% is the point
This is incorrect and here is why; our Air Force and missile defense systems are extremely outdated.
Do we need to spend that much every year? No. We do however need to get the F-22 and F-35 projects finished. The F-15/16/18 platforms are Cold War era fighters. The A-10 is post-Vietnam.
We are unbeatable because of our air superiority. A lot of that has to do with the weapons systems, but the aircraft matters a great deal as well. A single F-22 can take out an average of seven F-15's in a dog fight scenario.
The F-22 program was scrapped after about 1/3rd of the original order was built and about 1/10th of the F-35's from the original order number have been built.
What recent war has warplanes mattered?
All of them for the past 100 years?
How many airplanes does ISIS engage us with? How many planes did Iraq or Afghanistan engage us with? I guess I should have been more clear. Why invest in old school war planes when we can use drones?
I totally get you don't understand how war works and that's fine. We haven't shot down an enemy aircraft since 1991. An F-15 from Oregon shot down an Iraqi MIG with two AIM-120A's.
The military knows this and that's why the Air Force only has one air superiority training school for the F-15C/D, F-22, and F-35 platforms and they only graduate around 28 pilots a year. That's not the point.
The reason why we haven't had to shoot down an enemy since 1991 is because we are currently in a theater where the air war was almost non-existent. However, if we were to ever engage with anyone else on the shit list, be it Russia, China, Korea, etc. The air war wouldn't be a given. Our entire war fighting doctrine is based on air superiority, period. We don't have fighter drones yet because they aren't fast enough and can't maintain length during combat maneuvers. That will one day be resolved, no ETA on those though.
The Air Force is smaller today than it was in 1947 when it started. The Army and Navy are much smaller as well. When you have a smaller force that is built for efficiency and minimal casualties you have to be completely air dominant. We have ancient air superiority aircraft. We need to spend the money to change that.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. We do need planes even just for protection of air Force one and commercial aircraft. There are many instances where fighter planes are called upon to escort a commercial plane that we never hear about.
My comment was on someone ranting about a bunch of investment in all these different planes. My point wasn't to say we need to stop investing in fighter planes, it's that times have changed and the need for a huge stockpile of planes isn't necessary. We should invest in better technology that's conducive to the future.
30 seconds of research and some bad ass videos tell me that as of now there won't be dogfights if an f22 is involved because it will fuck up everything else in the sky before they even see it.
yes. because the country that spends more on the military than the next 7 countries combined needs more military spending.
but how dare anyone say we can afford universal healthcare.
He also says he wants to leave entitlements alone and cut taxes. Which will balloon the deficit.
Even fox admits it.
"By increasing defense and leaving Medicare and Social Security untouched, the Trump final budget plan is sure to project sizable deficits."
It'll be interesting to see how this goes over with the freedom caucus
While yes spending more on the military without cuts or raising taxes would increase the deficit and that might not be a smart idea, I always hate when people use total dollars spent for their comparison instead of GDP. This isn't to say we don't spend a lot, but with respect to the GDP we don't spend that much. Entitlements are about 14% of the GDP while defense is 3.5%.
We don't need to spend 3.5% is the point
This is incorrect and here is why; our Air Force and missile defense systems are extremely outdated.
Do we need to spend that much every year? No. We do however need to get the F-22 and F-35 projects finished. The F-15/16/18 platforms are Cold War era fighters. The A-10 is post-Vietnam.
We are unbeatable because of our air superiority. A lot of that has to do with the weapons systems, but the aircraft matters a great deal as well. A single F-22 can take out an average of seven F-15's in a dog fight scenario.
The F-22 program was scrapped after about 1/3rd of the original order was built and about 1/10th of the F-35's from the original order number have been built.
What recent war has warplanes mattered?
This is the dumbest shit I have ever seen written here.
Comments
For someone that likes to knock people for not doing research or knowing facts, you're woefully out of touch on this subject.
It sure is going to be generating a lot of healthcare, retirement plan funded jobs.
Boeing says hi! Easy one for Patty Murray and Maria Cantrell to vote YES! for.
Boeing actually produces something btw. Military is 95% paper pushers and glorified janitors.
The military knows this and that's why the Air Force only has one air superiority training school for the F-15C/D, F-22, and F-35 platforms and they only graduate around 28 pilots a year. That's not the point.
The reason why we haven't had to shoot down an enemy since 1991 is because we are currently in a theater where the air war was almost non-existent. However, if we were to ever engage with anyone else on the shit list, be it Russia, China, Korea, etc. The air war wouldn't be a given. Our entire war fighting doctrine is based on air superiority, period. We don't have fighter drones yet because they aren't fast enough and can't maintain length during combat maneuvers. That will one day be resolved, no ETA on those though.
The Air Force is smaller today than it was in 1947 when it started. The Army and Navy are much smaller as well. When you have a smaller force that is built for efficiency and minimal casualties you have to be completely air dominant. We have ancient air superiority aircraft. We need to spend the money to change that.
My comment was on someone ranting about a bunch of investment in all these different planes. My point wasn't to say we need to stop investing in fighter planes, it's that times have changed and the need for a huge stockpile of planes isn't necessary. We should invest in better technology that's conducive to the future.
http://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-nation/2017/02/28/Republicans-oppose-Trump-s-defense-spending-plans-domestic-cuts/stories/201702280227