Why Congress is at War with the Air Force to Save the F-22

The rules have changed. If you're looking for a great job, with a great company, with great benefits, that you will have your entire life, until you retire, stop looking. That was then this is now. That job doesn't exist anymore for 99% of us. Unless you have unique and remarkable skills you better figure out what will work best for you and your family. I am a former executive who left the corporate world to help people adjust to the new realities. My suggestion to most is to do what millions of people are doing now, find a good home business. That won't work for everyone but if you find one that you can get into for virtually no investment and learn the right skills, you should do well.
There are two opportunities that my clients have had the most success with. One is an amazing opportunity to profit from Ebay and there are well over 720,000 people making a full time living with them. http://cli.gs/HomeBizSuccessSystem That's a huge company to work with. The other great opportunity is working with an amazing program from Robert Allen http://bit.ly/RobertAllenIncomeStreams , a true genius, who shows you how to create multiple streams of income from home. The results have been spectacular
So many of my clients tell me that they are loving working for themselves, making more money than before, in less time, and enjoy the extra time they have to spend with their families.

No surprise here!!! The Lobbyists always write the legislation our elected officials vote on. Energy, Health Care, Agriculture, Pharmaceuticals, Defense. Once upon a time, the Government would tell industry what WE needed and ordered it built. Now it's the other way around. Something better change cause Corporate Welfare costs the taxpayer 100x more than any social program out there. What a farce!!!

There isn't much call in Afganistan for submarines either, but that doesn't mean we have to scrap the programs. The author seems extremely shortsighted.

Yeaaaahhhh! Mr. Wood I can see from your resume ya think a main force battle with China is never going to happen so why prepare for it. Good thinking for a Quaker who simply wants peace. Rotten thinking for a warrior who must prevent or win wars.

DETERRANCE is a lot of the reason that a military confrontation with China not likely to happen, and right now a large number of two generation advantage high tech weapon systems is the only armed deterance we have against Chinese mega numbers and rapidly improving Chinese technology. That's why the Chinese have placed so much emphasis on asymetric warfare in the last few decades with us rather than direct military confrontation.

Lose that deterrance and military confrontation with China, especially over Taiwan, becomes very likely. The extra F-22s would be a big part of gaining immediate air superiority in any such conflict and that is crucial to the rest of our military force operating effectively.

When will the military learn? Congress knows best. The American public knows this now and its time for the military to fall in line.

What about Korea, China, and possibly other targets besides these? Now. all of a sudden someone says we don't need them? Is this because we're saving the money for some other weapon or what? The big picture here isn't being shown on this! Is this really about spending more or spending wiser? Americans are for defending ourselves but HEY!, what are we talking about here?

Very simple you got people like Ms Boxer and Sen Murray who are whores to the Air Force.

Once again the military is not allowed to do the job they are trained and ready for. Non-military wonks (rummy) have always paid their cronies instead of helping the military men and women. When the military leaders plan and execute wars and the needs we win. When partisan wonks step in we are mired in excess. The airforces trained personnel say we do not need F-22, the wonks who want the money say we do. Who do you believe, the rummy's or the military. Me, I will side with the trained and ready MILITARY.

Tha author obviously opposes the f-22 because of cost alone. If it isn't the proper plane to use in this situation then we should develope one. Getting rid of the f-22 is ludicrous. Not one word in the article about future wars, thats right, future conflicts. Without the f-22 we will NOT have air superiority and we will lose. The usa's very future depends on it and yet they play politics with it.
This is a typical democrat opinion. They need to divert these funds over to entitlement programs or they may not get re-elected. Thats the truth- the bottom line.
Democrats feel that if a conflict arises we can just send chief angelic face to negotiate and give away some more sovereignty, just like we just did with the russians and defensive missiles. Thought provoking question for democrats-How's the negotiations going for you with north korea??? HUH??
Suggestions for all Americans- write and call your congressman, and senators, and ask tham to keep the f-22, our fiuture depends on it.
Suggestions for those of you who will try and marginalize my opinion by cutting down my grammer or spelling- get a better arguement .....

To the best of my knowledge we have more nuclear missles than china and always will, that will be a detterent enough for them!

Deterrent

Folks, the author isn't pushing to end production or stop the use of these weapons. The secretary of defense is. That's his job. He knows the military threats to America probably better than just about anyone else, including Obama. And, curiously enough, he's a republican and probably a true fiscal conservative. He doesn't want us paying tax payer money for weapons that we're not going to use. Congress wants that money spent to go to businesses and workers that produce parts. Heck, even locally we have a business that manufactures sensors for bearings on jet aircraft and I have to wonder just what that will do locally.

So solutions? One, don't buy em. It'll suck for the business but it's not the governments job to buy stuff that it knows we're not going to use. Two, buy em anyway. We've been over armed since 1991. Why stop the tradition. Option three... sell them. Not easy given that a lot of buyers are potentially hostile, like China. Selling to israel would just be throwing oil on fire. Africa probably couldn't afford them or use them well. Iraq... doesn't really have any money right now. India would cause problems with pakistan. Hmmm... how about south America? Would Brazil like a cutting edge air force?

We need the F22 fighter , The cost be damned , We are talking about the security of this country !!!!!!

These Congressional yahoos should cancel the Lockheed F-22 and use the money to build more Lockheed C-130s to be converted into AC-130 Gunships whch are more accurate in tactical situations and have longer endurance over the battlefield. Using a supersonic fighter to drop a 2000lb bomb on 6 guys with AKs is not only a waste of resources....they often hit the target and kill innocent bystanders.

When the U.S. entered WW1 we did not have a fighter equal to our enemies
and when WWII started we could not match the zero or the 109. We had to play catch up. In korea the Mig15 was better than the Thunder jet and we did'nt catch up untill we deployed the Saber Jet. Again, catch up. In Vietnam the Phantom was a good plane but was used as an all purpose aircraft and its been said it was like flying a bus. Now we have the best fighter ever built. Instead of going back to sleep why don't we continue to perfect this amazing plane. The argument that we have many other types of aircraft to perform a variety of functions is true but whats not being considered is how will they operate in the future if we come up against an enemy that has a superior fighter that that gives them control of the skies oover the war zone?

I'm not saying that we should build an unreasonable amount of F-22s But don't scrap the program.

Dan Jackson,

Maybe not! Obama just agreed to reduce our nuclear arsenal by a third and slowed down our missle defense system. China will certainly gain the tacit support of the Russians, the North Koreans, and the Iranians (one old and two soon to be nuclear powers) in any future conflict and that will be parity enough for the situation.

But it doesn't matter. The Chinese know that we don't have the political will to release nukes until they are released at us. Even then, we are still largely politically reluctant to release if the target is not our homeland. So, without vast technological superiority, especially in the skys, the advantage shifts to the Chinese in future, limited main force engagements.

China not china

.....and always will. That will be deterrent enough for them.

Yeah! We can all play sophmoric, spelling and grammar, proofreading games.

'If "ya" live in a glass house it's really not wise to start "chunking" stones and therein, inviting others to do the same.'

This author's premis is way off base. A) It's not the Pentagon that wants to curtail production. The Pentagon WANTS every copy of the Raptor it can get. It's the Obama administration (ie: Gates) that wants to cut production of the Raptor and redirect the funds to it's other (social) priorities. B)The Raptor isn't the vehicle of choice for terrorizing Pashton's. It *IS* however the vehicle of choice for putting the Fear of God into pilots from other countries ( Iraq, N. Korea, China) just by showing up in their rear view mirror without so much advance warning as a blip from their radar. There is NO price too high for any other country if they could pay for this capability, but the US Military is the ONLY force that can use it without wreaking havoc in world politics. Last but not least the economic problems in the dozens of communities affected byt cutting this program is FAR more than the economic benefits of continuing the program. So far the man has spent TRILLIONS attempting to shore up the economy. But if Obama cuts this program, he's PERSONALLY responsible for every person put out of work as the program shuts down, as there's really not much of an alternative market for aeronautical engineers working on the cutting edge of technology.

Remember ..........the latest weapons for our military is bad.
Allowing queers into the military is good.

The military knows what it needs more than congress does. Congress just knows what it needs to get re-elected.
The military-industrial complex is far too big as it is and controls far too much of our nations resources and power. Industry should not be telling the military (through their bought congress) what the military needs.