President Obama threatens to veto the F-22 Raptor - DFWstangs Forums
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-25-2009, 08:19 PM Thread Starter
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
 
Sgt Beavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lake Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,859
President Obama threatens to veto the F-22 Raptor

Looks like he was actually serious about this. The article says his people are just trying to get the House to put in changes but there are some pretty powerful members of Congress that are backing that plane.

I wonder if enough Republicans would join in just to override his veto.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090625/...ress_defense_1

Quote:
House nears vote on $550.4 billion defense bill

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. House of Representatives was poised to approve on Thursday a $550.4 billion defense authorization bill for fiscal 2010 that has drawn a veto threat from President Barack Obama because it contains money for fighter jets he does not want.

The bill also authorizes $130 billion to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the fiscal year that begins October 1.

The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) said it supported the overall bill but the president's senior advisers would recommend a veto unless some provisions were dropped.

One congressional aide, speaking on condition of anonymity, described the White House veto threat as "a bargaining tool."

The Senate Armed Services Committee was to unveil its defense authorization bill for 2010 later on Thursday, but the legislation was unlikely to be approved by the full Senate until September. House and Senate negotiators must then hammer out a compromise version before final passage.

The OMB said it strongly objected to the House decision to include $369 million in advanced procurement funds to buy 12 more F-22 fighter jets built by Lockheed Martin Corp despite a Pentagon decision to halt production at 187.

Some lawmakers are pushing to continue production of the F-22 until a current ban on exports can be lifted to allow Japan to buy a modified version of the premiere U.S. fighter jet. The Lockheed program employs workers in over 40 states.

The administration also objected to House lawmakers adding $603 million to the bill to continue work on an alternate F-35 fighter engine being built by General Electric Co and Rolls-Royce Group Plc.

The OMB said the changes would delay the fielding of the F-35 and have an adverse effect on the Pentagon's overall strike fighter inventory. It said the risks of a fleet-wide grounding with a single engine, an issue raised by the Marine Corps general who runs the program, were "exaggerated."

We're Adopting. Contact us through our website.

http://www.theboyetts.com

You can also LIKE us on Facebook
Sgt Beavis is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-25-2009, 09:02 PM
Factory Issue
 
Yale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Shippensburg, PA
Posts: 12,295
If they fuck with the Joint Strike Fighter, I'll stop making cheese in protest.

Give me a dollar.
Yale is offline  
post #3 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-25-2009, 09:16 PM
Dyno Racing King!!!
 
Juiceweezl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 2V-ville
Posts: 3,675
I read that as a threat to veto funding to purchase and ADDITIONAL 12 jets BEYOND what the Pentagon had already approved. Seems like a responsible act to me or am I missing something? Aren't you guys in favor of spending less tax dollars? Will not getting those 12 planes hurt our fleet?

Juiceweezl
Dallas, TX
2000 Black GT
2V with a fuel pump and some other goodies
Touched by the hand of a tuning god -- Mr. Wilson
Juiceweezl is offline  
 
post #4 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-25-2009, 09:33 PM
$uper $low
 
Magnus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Plano
Posts: 5,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juiceweezl View Post
I read that as a threat to veto funding to purchase and ADDITIONAL 12 jets BEYOND what the Pentagon had already approved. Seems like a responsible act to me or am I missing something? Aren't you guys in favor of spending less tax dollars? Will not getting those 12 planes hurt our fleet?
Yes, a ton.

Magnus is offline  
post #5 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-25-2009, 09:54 PM
Lifer
 
topher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington
Posts: 3,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juiceweezl View Post
I read that as a threat to veto funding to purchase and ADDITIONAL 12 jets BEYOND what the Pentagon had already approved. Seems like a responsible act to me or am I missing something? Aren't you guys in favor of spending less tax dollars? Will not getting those 12 planes hurt our fleet?
Not sure about the fleet, but this looks like their reasoning for keeping the program alive.

"Some lawmakers are pushing to continue production of the F-22 until a current ban on exports can be lifted to allow Japan to buy a modified version of the premiere U.S. fighter jet. The Lockheed program employs workers in over 40 states."

I am a fan of cutting some of the fat, but this appears to employ lots of people and could extend the program if we are able to export the sale of this fighter to Japan.

1989 coupe
2006 R6S

topher is offline  
post #6 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-25-2009, 10:33 PM
PAN
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Under a rock
Posts: 20,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juiceweezl View Post
I read that as a threat to veto funding to purchase and ADDITIONAL 12 jets BEYOND what the Pentagon had already approved. Seems like a responsible act to me or am I missing something? Aren't you guys in favor of spending less tax dollars? Will not getting those 12 planes hurt our fleet?

Yes, we are.

It's just that the tax dollars we prefer to not spend are housed in the billions of dollars wasted annually in pork, in welfare, in bullshit studies on what makes a bullfrog croak, etc. etc...

The defense of our country against those mindless fucking dolts indoctrinated in the destruction of our country is NOT an area in which we feel expenses should be curbed.

Rather simple concept for some to grasp...
Fox466 is offline  
post #7 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-25-2009, 11:04 PM
Bullet Sponge
 
forever_frost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cooper, Tx
Posts: 3,142
I'm okay with spending money on defense. Handing cash to Obama supporters? Not so much. Fucking dismantle ACORN
forever_frost is offline  
post #8 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-26-2009, 12:00 AM
Fuzzy Flounder Fishin'
 
CoorsLightCoupe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the express train to management training in hell.
Posts: 2,547
Quote:
Originally Posted by forever_frost View Post
I'm okay with spending money on defense. Handing cash to Obama supporters? Not so much. Fucking dismantle ACORN
Plus fucking one. I'll support the military and defense long before i support some scumbag motherfucker who refuses to get off his ass.

Sad thing is i thing Obummer would rather use that billions to feed his minions, and THAT's what i have a problem with.

┌∩┐(-_-)┌∩┐
That's directed at you, UHHHbama
CoorsLightCoupe is offline  
post #9 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-26-2009, 12:11 AM
PAN
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Under a rock
Posts: 20,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoorsLightCoupe View Post

Sad thing is i thing Obummer would rather use that billions to feed his minions, and THAT's what i have a problem with.

Duh. It's those billions spent on buying the votes of stupid mother fuckers who think he will pay their mortgages and car payments and keep them in good standing with the local fucking crack dealer that put his bullshit spewing ass in power...
Fox466 is offline  
post #10 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-26-2009, 12:25 AM
Meeeeooowww
 
ALLAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: the MCO airport
Posts: 20,309
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juiceweezl View Post
I read that as a threat to veto funding to purchase and ADDITIONAL 12 jets BEYOND what the Pentagon had already approved. Seems like a responsible act to me or am I missing something? Aren't you guys in favor of spending less tax dollars? Will not getting those 12 planes hurt our fleet?
AF was supposed to get 700 F-22's.
Now down to less that 200.
Would rather spend that money on aircraft than bailing out companys and crappy heathcare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by topher View Post
Not sure about the fleet, but this looks like their reasoning for keeping the program alive.

"Some lawmakers are pushing to continue production of the F-22 until a current ban on exports can be lifted to allow Japan to buy a modified version of the premiere U.S. fighter jet. The Lockheed program employs workers in over 40 states."

I am a fan of cutting some of the fat, but this appears to employ lots of people and could extend the program if we are able to export the sale of this fighter to Japan.
The Aussies want F-22 too. They need it with the Chicoms upgrading to SU-27 variants.
F/A-18s and F-111s won't cut it.

ALLAN is offline  
post #11 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-26-2009, 06:18 AM Thread Starter
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
 
Sgt Beavis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lake Dallas, TX
Posts: 10,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yale View Post
If they fuck with the Joint Strike Fighter, I'll stop making cheese in protest.
The JSF F-35 is VERY safe. One of the reasons Obama wants to stop F-22 production at 187 is so that production of the F-35 can be accelerated. As I've stated before, the "current" mission needs warrant the F-35 a lot more than the F-22. However there is a genuine concern for future needs due to China and Russia.

Quote:
Originally Posted by topher View Post
Not sure about the fleet, but this looks like their reasoning for keeping the program alive.

"Some lawmakers are pushing to continue production of the F-22 until a current ban on exports can be lifted to allow Japan to buy a modified version of the premiere U.S. fighter jet. The Lockheed program employs workers in over 40 states."

I am a fan of cutting some of the fat, but this appears to employ lots of people and could extend the program if we are able to export the sale of this fighter to Japan.
Yea, Lockheed was really smart when creating the F-22 and F-35 production lines. They made it as politically bulletproof as they can. That is why I think an Obama veto could very well be overridden.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALLAN View Post
AF was supposed to get 700 F-22's.
Now down to less that 200.
Would rather spend that money on aircraft than bailing out companys and crappy heathcare.



The Aussies want F-22 too. They need it with the Chicoms upgrading to SU-27 variants.
F/A-18s and F-111s won't cut it.
Yea, something around 700 was originally callled for. Cutting that number is one of the reasons the plane became so expensive on a per unit basis. However nobody in the defense establishment thinks the AF needs that many.

It was congress that originally blocked sale of the F-22 to Australia and Japan. It looks like they are finally coming around. I think they should look into selling them to South Korea too, that would certainly scare the shit out of North Korea.

We're Adopting. Contact us through our website.

http://www.theboyetts.com

You can also LIKE us on Facebook
Sgt Beavis is offline  
post #12 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-26-2009, 06:56 AM
Lifer
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juiceweezl View Post
I read that as a threat to veto funding to purchase and ADDITIONAL 12 jets BEYOND what the Pentagon had already approved. Seems like a responsible act to me or am I missing something? Aren't you guys in favor of spending less tax dollars? Will not getting those 12 planes hurt our fleet?
Well lest just see if your missing something..... How much of our money was given to Chase to help shore (stabilize) them up? And right after this Chase bought my bank and a few others, that holds my credit card and immediately jacked my interest rate from 11% to 27 %

Or should that money have been given to a legitimate contractor that would have given jobs to thousands to help stimulate the economy?



All men should know Honor first, above all else!

Honor is not holding your hand out for something you did not earn.
Honor is not forcing your ideas, or belief on others.
Honor is not something given to you by way of job, or title.

Honor is learned, earned, practiced and respected by all decent men and women.
tazz007 is offline  
post #13 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-26-2009, 07:52 AM
DFWMUSTANGS.NET
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by tazz007 View Post
Well lest just see if your missing something..... How much of our money was given to Chase to help shore (stabilize) them up? And right after this Chase bought my bank and a few others, that holds my credit card and immediately jacked my interest rate from 11% to 27 %

Or should that money have been given to a legitimate contractor that would have given jobs to thousands to help stimulate the economy?
Chase wanted, nor needed the money. That is why they have already paid it back.


However, giving the money to any bank was a mistake IMO. They should have let capitalism run its course there, and honored there agreements with these plane companies, as well as our US millitary personnel.

With sukhoi already designing their own Gen 5 fighter (thats what the F22 is), it seems stupid to stop production on ours.

Last edited by sc281_99-0135; 06-26-2009 at 10:19 AM.
sc281_99-0135 is offline  
post #14 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-26-2009, 12:21 PM
Bullet Sponge
 
forever_frost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cooper, Tx
Posts: 3,142
I'm for anything that creates jobs, because as soon as cap and trade passes tonight..... it's over with. We become 3rd world.
forever_frost is offline  
post #15 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-26-2009, 12:28 PM
T-MINUS
 
Sean88gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 28,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by forever_frost View Post
I'm for anything that creates jobs, because as soon as cap and trade passes tonight..... it's over with. We become 3rd world.
Just ask Spain.

1/19/09, the last day of Free America.
Pericles "Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. "

"[T]he people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government and to reform, alter, or totally change the same when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it." --Samuel Adams


Sean88gt is offline  
post #16 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-30-2009, 01:54 PM
DFWMUSTANGS.NET
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,635
Best F-22 picture Ever...

breaking the sound barrier

sc281_99-0135 is offline  
post #17 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-30-2009, 02:10 PM
Banned
 
DOHCTR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Waco
Posts: 5,539
Everybody needs to back track just a bit. Heres the way it is right now-


We currently have, or are building, 187 f22 raptors. These are the best, most advanced fighter that the earth has ever seen and there is no plane in production, or even planned for production that comes close to matching it.

We still currently use the "old" f15 eagle fighter. Sure it was designed by a bunch of dudes with slide rulers and protractors... but lets break down its operational history here-

The F-15 in all air forces had an air-to-air combined record of 104 kills to 0 losses in air combat as of February 2008.
To date, no air superiority versions of the F-15 (A/B/C/D models) have ever been shot down by enemy forces.

Is there really need to buy a shit load more raptors? Sure, they are the shit but our old busted garbage planes get the job done damn well.
DOHCTR is offline  
post #18 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-30-2009, 02:21 PM
Time Served
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sc281_99-0135 View Post
Best F-22 picture Ever...

breaking the sound barrier

That looks sick!
Gumby5.0 is offline  
post #19 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-30-2009, 03:19 PM
Lifer
 
46Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 33,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by DOHCTR View Post
Everybody needs to back track just a bit. Heres the way it is right now-


We currently have, or are building, 187 f22 raptors. These are the best, most advanced fighter that the earth has ever seen and there is no plane in production, or even planned for production that comes close to matching it.

We still currently use the "old" f15 eagle fighter. Sure it was designed by a bunch of dudes with slide rulers and protractors... but lets break down its operational history here-

The F-15 in all air forces had an air-to-air combined record of 104 kills to 0 losses in air combat as of February 2008.
To date, no air superiority versions of the F-15 (A/B/C/D models) have ever been shot down by enemy forces.

Is there really need to buy a shit load more raptors? Sure, they are the shit but our old busted garbage planes get the job done damn well.
The F-86 had a 10:1 kill ratio over Korea, maybe we should put those back into production since they are "old busted garbage planes that got the job done damn well."

Technology is steadily improving all over the world, eventually someone will devise a plane that will knock F-15s and F-22s out of the sky. Keeping the USA at the forefront of aircraft technology is a priority for me. I have no problem paying for programs, even expensive ones, when there is a payoff. When our technological status goes away (our manufacturing competency is already GONE) then we will wither into insignificance. Keep building the most badass planes the world has ever seen AND put another one on the drawing board that will kick it's ass.
46Tbird is offline  
post #20 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-30-2009, 03:52 PM
Bullet Sponge
 
forever_frost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cooper, Tx
Posts: 3,142
Why don't we pull money from the Osprey? That fucker has been in the works for 20 years and STILL won't fly
forever_frost is offline  
post #21 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-30-2009, 03:54 PM
Lifer
 
46Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 33,187
Maybe they heard it's kill ratio is extremely high... but they're looking at the wrong one.
46Tbird is offline  
post #22 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-30-2009, 05:23 PM
Banned
 
DOHCTR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Waco
Posts: 5,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by 46Tbird View Post
The F-86 had a 10:1 kill ratio over Korea, maybe we should put those back into production since they are "old busted garbage planes that got the job done damn well."

Technology is steadily improving all over the world, eventually someone will devise a plane that will knock F-15s and F-22s out of the sky. Keeping the USA at the forefront of aircraft technology is a priority for me. I have no problem paying for programs, even expensive ones, when there is a payoff. When our technological status goes away (our manufacturing competency is already GONE) then we will wither into insignificance. Keep building the most badass planes the world has ever seen AND put another one on the drawing board that will kick it's ass.
I agree Danny, but the f22 is ridiculously ahead of its time. And that is the kicker, it has already been developed and there is no plane even planned that could compare.

Sure, a nation could say, "We will build a fifth gen fighter" but that doesnt mean shit unless the r&d starts up.

Also, no nation even comes close to having the ability to deploy the fighters, even if they developed them. We have 12, fucking 12 aircraft carriers cocked and locked with the greatest pilots in the world flying the greatest planes in the world... further supported by the greatest navy in the world (larger than all the rest of the worlds navies combined tonnage wise). Italy and the uk (nearest good navies) have 2 carriers each, that fucking blow compared to our nemitz class, and are comparable to our amphibious assault craft (of which we have 6).

China has 1 carrier and has said that it will build 1 more. We have 14,947 airports, the nearest nation (Brazil) has 4,263. China has 467 (for a country larger than ours, with exponentially more people).

Everyone is so scared the the Chinese are catching up with us militarily, but the numbers just dont show that to be true.

More examples-
We have 18,169 airborne systems active and ready
China has 1,900
UK has 1,891

We have 4,593 helicopters
China has 491
UK has 779

We have 29,920 land systems (Abrams tanks, bradleys, etc)
China has 31,300 old soviet era tanks and have not developed anyting to replace them
Uk has 5,121

We have 6,465,799 km of paved roads
China has 1,930,544 km

We spend $515,400,000,000 on defense (more than the rest of the world combined)
The nearest nation (France) spends $61,571,330,000...We spend over 8 times this
China spends $59,000,000,000




This should want to make any of you sit for a second and say, "Damn, my country is fucking awesome"... because thats sure what I did
DOHCTR is offline  
post #23 of 24 (permalink) Old 06-30-2009, 06:51 PM
Time Served
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Watauga Tx
Posts: 659
With chinas manufacturing base and money they are in the same position to develop new military technology as what allowed us to. They arent using 80s russian tech, they have modern tanks they have developed and with their money they buy the newest equipment from russia. They have access to all of russias newest stuff including their 5th gen fighter plan they are developing.

Chinese attack chopper
http://www.military-today.com/helicopters/z10.htm

Chinese main battle tank
http://www.futurefirepower.com/chine...armor-of-china

Now their stuff isnt as good as ours but its gettin close enough and with their insane manufacturing capability we gave them, which was fucking stupid, there is a very good chance we couldnt stop them. Think of WW2 or the civil war for example, the side that can produce the most history has shown to be the victor.

Why we arm countries that are hostile to the US is beyond me. People whine about the 3000 that the arabs killed....what about the 100s of thousands that the chinese have directly and indirectly killed? Yet this country is chinas bitch and we are allowing them to develop into a superpower that can challenge the US, i dont get it.

The trouble with doing something right the first time is that nobody appreciates how difficult it was.
Slammy is offline  
post #24 of 24 (permalink) Old 07-01-2009, 12:16 AM
Meeeeooowww
 
ALLAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: the MCO airport
Posts: 20,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by forever_frost View Post
Why don't we pull money from the Osprey? That fucker has been in the works for 20 years and STILL won't fly
Seems to be ok until the Marines got it.

Never crashed on in Arlington all the years that Bell was testing.

ALLAN is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the DFWstangs Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome