The U.S. Senate has voted to stop producing the F-22 Raptor fighter jets currently ordered by the Air Force, in an important victory for Pres. Barack Obama's administration.
A new amendment will help remove $1.75 billion that was originally slated for manufacturing seven more F-22 Raptors. Despite being a fleet of reliable fighters, the Pentagon has received heavy criticism for already investing $65 billion in the F-22 program already.
President Obama threatened to veto the $679.8 billion bill if additional funds were to be given for further F-22 production. The President hopes the 58-to-40 vote victory gives him the ability to continue with proposed military spending overhauls. The Air Force discussed ending the program earlier in the year, so it's no surprise there is again talk about fighter jet issues.
Other military branches are struggling to fill a fighter gap that may only grow, as the Navy is trying to prepare for a larger fighter gap.
Even though the F-22 is the most advanced fighter in the world, many lawmakers said the expensive craft would not be ideal for fighting militant insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although U.S.-led control in Iraq is scheduled to end, many soldiers are expected to make their way to Afghanistan to continue fighting the Taliban.
The F-22 is seen by many as a "relic" from the Cold War, and the military must evolve and develop new fighters to deal with new battles.
Lockheed Martin warns F-22 development helps provide 25,000 jobs and reportedly has an impact on 70,000 additional jobs. Boeing and Pratt & Whitney also are contractors working with the U.S. government to develop F-22 technology. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, however, said focusing on the next-generation F-35 fighter jet will replace many of those lost jobs from Lockheed Martin.
Gates has fought against additional F-22 development for almost four months, and wants the military to move ahead to the F-35. Once this becomes official, the Air Force will have just 187 F-22 Raptors, which is about half than expected.
quote: ...the Obama Administration's approval ratings trump those of recent previous administrations.
quote: ...the Obama Administration's approval ratings trump those of recent previous administrations
quote: The reason he was voted down isn't because of his military facts, but because of his ridiculous assertion that we (the United States) are headed toward a 'civil war'That comment might have played true during the Bush Administration, because it was pretty clear how divided the country was politically. However, even with the economy being bad and things seeming financially hopeless for the next few years, the Obama Administration's approval ratings trump those of recent previous administrations. In other words, that comment has no place on a tech site.
quote: Um, no. Not even close. Obama's approval ratings are below Bush's at the same point in their presidencies, according to Rasmussen's daily tracking polls, in spite of a press whose warmth and support are unprecedented. I've heard he is actually tenth of the last twelve presidents in approval...
quote: You're an idiot. We could have nothing but nuclear missiles and still not fear an invasion
quote: I said INVASION you dumb illiterate tard
quote: A blockade to stop foreign oil from reaching us, for instance, would decimate the country.
quote: But would you be the person willing to explode a nuke over a naval blockade to end it?
quote: But would you be the person willing to explode a nuke over a naval blockade to end it?Because as soon as you do, that opens the door for them to start sending theirs onto our mainland, and from there it only gets worse. Having a navy of our own to combat a blockade would be much better than only having nukes.
quote: The only problem with that assesment is that we're outspending all our top 10 enemies COMBINED.
quote: what you've just described is EXACTLY why nuclear weapons are an EXCELLENT deterrent.If you never know "where the line is" at which point your enemies will start firing nukes, you'd be crazy to try & find it.
quote: Wrong on several counts. First, China and Russia don't publicly report huge segments of their military budget.
quote: Secondly, you can't compare dollar-for-dollar anyway.
quote: I think you are missing the point or are limited by what you think a naval blockade is or that the intent would be made public.
quote: The US and China are in a symbiotic economic relationship, and attacking your economic partner can only do more harm to your nation than good.
quote: Carriers are big expensive targets that can be taken out by sufficiently large volleys of cheap cruise missiles, as has has been demonstrated time and again in US navy wargaming.
quote: Ground troops and air superiority are irrelevant in a conflict between nuclear powers, because any shooting war between any two of them is bound to go nuclear
quote: the reason that China has no carrier parity with the US is that the carrier is obsolete
quote: You think a country like that is just going to surrender after we pound them into dust with conventional weapons? No, they're going to launch their nukes and achieve a draw over a loss.
quote: Do you really think that Russia, China, or the US wouldn't launch their nukes if someone was stupid enough to invade them and strong enough to pose a threat?
quote: We've been lucky lately that the countries that have opposed us didn't have a very advanced airforce.
quote: Which I believe has contributed most to the F-22's death. The belief that we will always be fighting stone-throwers is willful ignorance. At some point there will be a conflict where our AC-130s, A-10s, Apache's and even the marine-variant F-35 will not have total freedom for close air support, and we'll wish our air-to-air options weren't 30 years old.
quote: In other words, we outpsend China by a factor of 5 to 1.
quote: by saving that money and spending it on 187 F40's / X-wing's / whatever, we will be able to dominate their ancient F22 fighters.
quote: No we don't. See my other post on the subject.
quote: The problem is this mythical 6th-generation fighter isn't even on the drawing board yet
quote: Given the timeframe on these projects That means it can't be in the air till almost 2050. What do we do till then? Close our eyes, stick our heads up our a** and pray real hard?
quote: But I personal hope not, there's just something awesome about air superiority fighters like the f-22 and f-15.
quote: Who cares about "air" superiority... SPACE SUPERIORITY FTW! Take the moon and plant a giant laser on it. Then if anyone wants to engage the U.S. in "air" combat, just point the laser at them and laugh.
quote: You could litterally buy an entire squadron of F15s for the same money as one of these.
quote: You could literally defeat an entire squadron of F-15s with one.
quote: Then why has the F-22 never once been used in combat despite the fact that the Air Force already has 187 of them?
quote: And if a military (war) situation comes up that requires something like the F22, its production can kick in at any time.
quote: Please liberals wake up from your dream worlds before it's too late.
quote: Only if the republicans wake up and realize that spending such an OBSCENE amount of money to protect us from boogeymen that don't exist is DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY
quote: Just borrow it from your kids - THE REPUBLICANS ARE!
quote: In only six short months, Obama has run up the deficit more than every president before him COMBINED. And yet you actually have the gall to say that? I take it back, it's not funny. It's just plain sad.
quote: Obama is in the middle of asking for ONE THOUSAND TIMES that much to socialize our healthcare system.
quote: But they are saying "it won't be useful for it's effective life", ie for a 20 years to come
quote: Anyway, the money is not unlimited, you'd be better off with 40,000 more trained troops than 7 more fighters, especially given that most of the world's enemies at the moment are fighting from the top balcony of their mother-in-law's house, not from the cockpit of a mig-29.
quote: there's more then one way to achieve air superiority, and drones seem to be doing that job rather well...apparently a drone took out bin laden's son.
quote: Right, he hates weapons so much that he allowed an increase in the military budget
quote: You just illustrated your short sightedness perfectly. Drones carry out grounds strikes today, but...
quote: sure there's no money for advanced weapons programs, that's why the NAVY is not about to be testing lasers...
quote: It wasn't Obama who cut the funding. Nice job trying to spread a lie. What he basically did right now was confirm that he will not restart production.
quote: The whole point is that we should take the money spent on the F22 and re-alocate it to something more visionary, TODAY
quote: there's more then one way to achieve air superiority, and drones seem to be doing that job rather well.
quote: Drones carry out grounds strikes today, but who's to say that you won't be able to put some air to air missiles on them and use them against targets in the sky in the future?
quote: You don't even need extreme dogfighting capability if they could carry some BVR radar homing missiles lets say.
quote: Investing in a single platform just because it's the most amazing thing you can conceive of in the near future is foolish.
quote: "Man, we just lost that damn war. If only we'd had 194 fighters instead of a measly 187 it would have been so different! All it would have cost is another $1,750,000,000!".
quote: You're probably right, I'm just saying, never know what one might need, and if your just a little short of something you need then you might as well not have any at all.
quote: The F-22 Raptors may be the most advanced fighter jets in the world, but if they are not the best suited to help in our current war on terror why spend hundreds of millions of dollars on them?
quote: Damn some of you guys can't read
quote: Even though the F-22 is the most advanced fighter in the world, many lawmakers said the expensive craft would not be ideal for fighting militant insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although U.S.-led control in Iraq is scheduled to end, many soldiers are expected to make their way to Afghanistan to continue fighting the Taliban.