It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Australia's Joint Strike Fighter Order...

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi
But then if your parents and / or grandparents had taken that attitude then we would all be Nazi's or ruled by the Janpanese

It's this type of reasoning that perpetuates the need for the war pigs to buy their war toys.

You're using something that happened over 60 years ago, to try and justify wasting seven billion dollars today?

You do realise that it's 2008, right? Which country is going to invade us, so that we NEED to have all of these war toy planes? Name one country that is going to send a fleet of ships towards us with the intention of invading our entire country? Russia, China, Indonesia? No way, none of them will invade us by any military means. Take a look around you now and you'll see that we're already being 'invaded' by Asian migration, as it is. Military forces are world-wide examples of which leader has the biggest d___ competition.

Our population is hurting with the costs of living, but instead of welfare and compassion, we waste seven billion dollars for ego-fuelled fly-boys to get a kick out of smelling the jet fuel?

Australia should be leaders in a free world and set a standard for peace by rejecting any and all purchases of further war toys. Swords to plowshares. The Earth needs a new age, not a throw-back to historical times of evil.

Your argument is void, as it perpetuates an arms race for the sake of the war pig leaders that we are forced to follow.




posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 02:32 AM
link   

The Ausie government, yes they might save some money, but they seem very pushy for this purchase....why?

Because our current F-18s are on the verge of falling apart. We can either spend BILLIONS of dollars replacing the centre barrels to upgrade a LEGACY thirty year old design. Or, we can spend BILLIONS of dollars getting a new aircraft that is just a million times better than both the french fries and the super french fries. So you want to get rid of the entire airforce? Or upgrade some worthless aluminium cans?

If you want to talk about wasteing money you can talk about the 6 billion dollar purchase of 24 Super fries, that is LESS capable than the F111. Also the 40 million dollars the South Australian governement paid for Microsoft office, or how we're STILL in Iraq despite Rudd saying he'd get us out of there. OUT. NOW! And who was the genius that decided to get a bunch of second hand Abrams tanks? Waste of money. F-35? Nup. Perhaps 100 might be overkill however.

It is definately true that militaries are a competition of which leader has the bigged D___. However, the world is not some perfect place where everyone is united, these aircraft should last 35+ years, can you honestly, definatively, say there is no proper use for the aircraft, AT ALL, throughout the next 35 years? I'm all for getting rid of the military, but to just make the whole thing disapear despite the fact all our neibors are getting stronger, very quickly, is NOT the way to do it. Unite the world - ala, the EU, ASEAN... etc, to get rid of arms. Throwing your hands up all of a sudden will not accomplish anything.

reply to post by mattguy404
 


No, incorrect. You're only about two years off. F-35 JSF flew in 2006. Short take off or vertical landing flew about a week ago. The whole programme is in LRIP (Low rate initial production) right now. And why should we get F-22? It's commonly estimated to cost over 140 million a peice, compared to the 60 million for the JSF. For the same price we could only get 30 of them - and each one is extremely maintainence heavy, and expensive to operate, unlike the JSF. Would be a astronomical waste of money for LESS capability. No thanks.

[edit on 16/6/2008 by C0bzz]

[edit on 16/6/2008 by C0bzz]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   
The F-22 while in design is very similar, it's meant for a totally different role. There's no doubt that the F-22 is the best air to air fighter in the world, but that's what it's designed to do. The F-35 on the other hand is a multirole fighter, so it's meant to be the jack of all trades. It's not meant to do air to air with the same expectations as an F-22, but it'll still do an excellent job.

While I think that the F-22 would be a useful addition to any military I think that the F-35 is a bit more appropriate for a military such as Australia's. The only thing likely to match the F-35 in air combat is probably the Eurofighter Typhoon, and that's a pretty unlikely match up in combat given who the primary users are unless for some reason a war starts with Saudi Arabia in the future. So the F-22 is a bit unnecessary for Australia since it's not like you guys are trying to be a superpower.

[edit on 6/24/2008 by cyberdude78]



new topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join