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.

 

Obama and Gates Gut the Military

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Actually the ship I was on spent a lot of time in the north Atlantic doing weather patrols and the like.




posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Avenginggecko
I have an honest question. If we halted military development for the next 5 years, wouldn't the US still have the top military in the world?

Realistically, who would be our possible enemies? Russia and China? Aren't their militaries still pretty far behind ours technologically? And China has waaaay too much money invested in us to go to war and lose it all.

And, we have NATO and the EU at our backs for any legitimate defense, correct?

It's just hard for me to get mad at a cut in military spending when our military spending is so ridiculously bloated compared to everything else, and for what purpose? To project our power over the entire globe? Why don't we just project our power in North America and worry about what happens on another continent when it does actually happen.


If we stop military development we won't start again. The start up costs for anything, much less a program on this scale are astronomical and that's not even including the scale-down costs that would incur. Once you start a program of this magnitude, you can't stop unless you never want to start again.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
or you could infact watch this ...

www.c-spanarchives.org...




Secretary Gates talked about his proposed budget changes for the Department of Defense and outlined a $534 billion plan for fiscal year 2010. The proposed budget included increases for intelligence and surveillance capabilities and production of the unmanned Predator drones used in the Afghanistan theater, but cut funding for F-22 fighter jet program and the purchase of 28 new VH-71 presidential helicopters. He also responded to questions from reporters.


Hope that helps



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by elston
 


Yah, I was just rattling jericho's cage a little...


Ah, the good ole' Buff. Still a cool airplane.

(was trying to learn how to bring a YTube in here, still bugger it up...this one is sad, shows a hotshot who went too far showing off. Search 'B-52 Fairchild AFB Crash 1994'. Maybe someone can drop it in for me?



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 






if you want to put a youtube vid in follow this step

take the url .youtube.com/watch?v=UJb08ZzejAA

remove the url and only copy and paste this part UJb08ZzejAA

remove all the rest



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by symmetricAvenger
 


Hey, thanks....tried it, guess I'm all thumbs or just not savvy enough.

Couldn't edit the URL...just went all blue....



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


As long as he doesn't cut the overall budget things will be fine, my husband said that the F-22 project is becoming to costly and no efficient as they were hoping for, so is OK to find some other way to divert those funds.

Still if he keeps pushing the war in the middle east he still will have to support the troops so is not way to he will cut the budget for now when it comes to the military.

Believe me my husband is keeping a closed watch on this one as his job depend on that budget.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


Sorry about the language there, I meant more along the lines of halting the budget growth or cutting some of the ridiculous programs, not ceasing the development of all of our programs.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Avenginggecko

I believe the UK is also buying up JSFs...I think our military will be quite all right for awhile.


Wouldn't bank on it. Although construction has started on our two new Carriers, they are still at real risk of cancellation depending on how deep this recession bites.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


when it goes blue press CTRL and keep hold then press C with the ctrl key held down or right click the url @ youtube and do copy then come to ats make the post you wish to do..

then hit the youtube vid button in posting were it says enter test just remove everything befor the = sign so you are left with letters and numbers. as i show in the other post.

hope that helps abit more



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Avenginggecko
All this talk about F 16s and F 14s...

Isn't our military ordering almost 2500 Joint Strike Fighters? Wiki says on April 9th Gates placed that order to replace our aging Air Force fighters.

I believe the UK is also buying up JSFs...I think our military will be quite all right for awhile.


There are a couple of HUGE problems here.

Problem #1 (and it's a biggie): The AVERAGE age of the F-15 (our current premier fighter until more F-22 squadrons are activated) as of March 2008 was 25.5 years old. That's the AVERAGE now. The F-16 isn't much younger. The F-18 (which is still being phased into service) is over 13 years old as of the same date.

The B-52 and KC-135 average age is 49+ years old this year. They are the mainstays of our bomber/tanker fleets. The next generation bomber is being canceled and if the KC-45 had gone forward starting last year, it would be 2048 before all the KC-135s were replaced.

Problem #2 (and it's another good one): They are retiring 250 of the oldest fighters next year, and ordering more F-35s to replace them. The F-35 isn't even close to being completed with the testing program. They only recently started in flight refueling trials (middle of last year or so), and the F-35B hasn't even hovered yet.

So we're going to lose 250 fighters next year, and won't get them replaced for years to come. One of the big reasons why this is a problem is because the oldest fighters get handed down to the Air National Guard. Over half of the bases that are responsible for the air defense mission in the US will be shut down by 2022, because their fighters are at the end of their useful life.

Problem #3: Every project except for the tactical aircraft being retired has a backup. The Zumwalt can be replaced by more DDG-51s. The FCS can be replaced by more MRAPs.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by gottago
So the WSJ says that this is a "gutting." Look at the source. The Wall Street Journal.




Just another Murdock propaganda and tabloid product. Seriously tho, I really liked the 4-headed alien baby story on page 4.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   
We spent over a trillion dollars in additional funds on the military over the last 8years. We spend more on our military a year than near 80% of the world combined. We have triple the amount of military expenditure of Russia, China and the UK combined. The pentagon has over the last few decades constantly increased the military expenditure, this administration will be halting any more further increases.

I dont see an issue here, especially in this economy.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
Wouldn't it be the ultimate shock to find out Obama was really planted here by the Mideast to bring our country down? I mean that would be the ultimate slap in the face. What if he's doing everything he can to disarm and dismantle us, to leave us completely powerless to attack. So meanwhile we disarm our nukes, have all guns outlawed (maybe? eventually?) and downsize our military........I mean, this just does not add up people! And he can do it all in the guise of "peace". Honestly, I think he's a snake. And I hope he doesn't make it through his term. His "change" sucks.




posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Losing 250 fighter planes is not a big concern. Although showing its age, the F16 is still a dominent aircraft on the world stage. While the F18 still reigns supreme with a combination of numbers and capability, as well as our experience flying it. Now the SuperHornet takes it up a notch. We'll be fine until the F35 comes around. Look at how much money we just put into all the various models of C-130. It would have been cheaper to engineer a new aircraft. But with as many as we had in inventory and its service record, we just made a good plane better.

Don't forget, you are talking about a country that built the Sr71 in the 50's and the F117 in the 70s. We have capabilities you are not aware of. Fear not.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Hey Zapho....I admit I'm ignorant about this notion, but I'm sure you can help: How hard would it be to tool-up to build new tried-and-true airframes, such as the -15s, -16, and -18s??

Equipped with new latest/greatest avionics and tech....it'd me maybe like the MD-11 compared to the old DC-10, something along those lines?

Tankers....wow, THAT was a debacle...but aren't the -135s all re-engined and re-furbished by now?



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocknroll
Wouldn't it be the ultimate shock to find out Obama was really planted here by the Mideast to bring our country down? I mean that would be the ultimate slap in the face. What if he's doing everything he can to disarm and dismantle us, to leave us completely powerless to attack. So meanwhile we disarm our nukes, have all guns outlawed (maybe? eventually?) and downsize our military........I mean, this just does not add up people! And he can do it all in the guise of "peace". Honestly, I think he's a snake. And I hope he doesn't make it through his term. His "change" sucks.



WOW!

I really don't think that's an issue. Don't worry this country wouldn't stad for it. Your second to last sentence may have people showing up at your door pretty soon. knock knock



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Hey Zapho....I admit I'm ignorant about this notion, but I'm sure you can help: How hard would it be to tool-up to build new tried-and-true airframes, such as the -15s, -16, and -18s??

Equipped with new latest/greatest avionics and tech....it'd me maybe like the MD-11 compared to the old DC-10, something along those lines?

Tankers....wow, THAT was a debacle...but aren't the -135s all re-engined and re-furbished by now?


Yes, all the C/KC 130/135s are all up to date. Do some youtube on the the special forces versions.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   
This was written on November 15, 2008. It is an outline of EXACTLY what is happening. Having read many of President Obama's papers, opinions and listened to his speeches, I could see the obvious disconnect from his campaign pep rallies and what he had proposed in his writings. The US Army will be a global 'meals on wheels' social aid organization armed with rocks soon.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 4/9/2009 by SGTChas]



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by elston
 


In the short term it's not, but in the long run, it's going to take so long to get their replacements up and running that it's going to bite us. There are THREE bases that will have their fighters replaced before the fighter gap becomes a big concern, and two of them are going to a combined ANG/AD F-22 squadron.

The F-35 won't be fully combat ready until at least 2014 or later. They're going to keep retiring fighters every year until there is a very large gap in our capabilities.

The F-15 is G limited, and the F-16 has its own problems. They actually canceled a Top Gun class because of cracks in the airframes of their F-16s. Almost 25% of the F-16s have cracks in them. The Block 25/30/32 stood at 3% in March 2008, and the Block 40/42 were at 18%. All of them were between 4500-5000 hours, with one cracking near the bulkhead, and the other near the wingroot.

But even if everything was perfect, the F-15 and F-16 are reaching the point where there are other fighters out there that can beat them with regularity. A pair of F-15Es jumped a single Typhoon in England one day, and had their heads handed to them.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join