SUBSIM Radio Room Forums
Page 5 of 6 1234 5 6
Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   Big cuts coming to US military (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=211492)

Wolferz 03-03-14 09:12 AM
I have a better idea...
Do away with armed conflict altogether.
All we are saying is give peace a chance.~ John Lennon~

Ducimus 03-03-14 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolferz (Post 2181049)
I have a better idea...
Do away with armed conflict altogether.
All we are saying is give peace a chance.~ John Lennon~
"So long as there are men, there will be wars."

Jimbuna 03-03-14 11:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducimus (Post 2181092)
"So long as there are men, there will be wars."
A few women have started one or two :)

MH 03-03-14 12:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainMattJ. (Post 2180766)
I've been raising hell about the F-35 project for a couple years now. The amount of money that is being flooded into this project makes me sick. Its like buying a bugatti veyron that can go 400 KM/h when you dont have anywhere near the money to pay for it and you already have a perfectly good car thats going to last you into the near future. Just look at what Turkey has done. Their F-16s can blow the pants off of damn near any aircraft in production with the right pilot behind the stick. With the skill of our pilots and the cost efficiency of upgrading the F-16 fleet, we wont need anything near an F-35 or an F-22 for many decades to come. I mean, who are we trying to compete against? Space Aliens? Nobody in the world fields anything near the ridiculous F-35, so why are we so desperate to make it? Grotesque waste of money.

The day the Department of "Defense" actually lives up to its name is the day i become a billionaire superstar. We could literally field about 1/4 of the active duty servicemembers we have now and still be ready for any invasion. China, the biggest potential threat, couldnt dream of putting together the logistical capacity to invade mainland USA.
Remember when f16 or f15 had been developed and what bleeding edge technology it is been?
That the reason the planes are still in service.
Same idea here.

Ducimus 03-03-14 12:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbuna (Post 2181114)
A few women have started one or two :)
While I can't think of any names aside from Cleopatra off the top of my head, I have no qualms in saying, "Your right!, how sexist of me in pinning all the blame on men!" :O:

Jimbuna 03-03-14 12:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducimus (Post 2181138)
While I can't think of any names aside from Cleopatra off the top of my head, I have no qualms in saying, "Your right!, how sexist of me in pinning all the blame on men!" :O:
Margaret Thatcher immediately springs to mind :)

Schroeder 03-03-14 01:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbuna (Post 2181146)
Margaret Thatcher immediately springs to mind :)
Well, technically Argentine started it with the invasion of the Falklands. Thatcher just gave a strong answer.:O:

Jimbuna 03-03-14 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schroeder (Post 2181195)
Well, technically Argentine started it with the invasion of the Falklands. Thatcher just gave a strong answer.:O:
LOL...The India Pakistan war of 1971, started by Mrs. Indira Gandhi.

Boudica, queen of the British Iceni tribe.

Queen Elizabeth 1

THE_MASK 03-03-14 07:00 PM
Reduced American military = back to the dark ages :yep:
Tribal warfare :yep:

CaptainMattJ. 03-03-14 07:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MH (Post 2181137)
Remember when f16 or f15 had been developed and what bleeding edge technology it is been?
That the reason the planes are still in service.
Same idea here.
Except that the DOD is trying to get out as many F-35s as they possibly can, before testing is completed. They've broken the "fly before you buy" rule. Its already cost us a couple billion to fix up the production model F-35s that have already been built. We aren't in the cold war anymore. If there is any shred of competency left in the world, there shouldnt be a real threat of all-out war for the foreseeable future. Our biggest "threats" are still fielding warplanes that are similiarly if not outmatched by block 52 F-16s. I'd rather have the DOD spend less now upgrading the existing fleet and wait until the F-35 becomes cheaper and the testing is completed. The F-16 turned out to be cheaper and more efficient than originally planned, whereas the F-35 has almost doubled in costs across the board and has run into a multitude of problems, the biggest is lockheed martin being behind in almost every department. Even adjusting for inflation, the F-35 is going to be the DODs most expensive acquisition program to date.

Oberon 03-03-14 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainMattJ. (Post 2181357)
We aren't in the cold war anymore.
That is something that might change in the very near future.... :hmmm:

Ducimus 03-04-14 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 2181375)
That is something that might change in the very near future.... :hmmm:

Where international diplomacy is concerned, it's been armature hour in the white house for awhile now. There was the thing with Syria. That was pretty much a professional poker match on the world stage, and Putin read Obama like a book. I see the headlines today, and i keep thinking, "Why in the hell would Putin listen to anything Obama or Kerry has to say?" Them condemning this, or saying that, it's tantamount to a guard dog with no teeth. All bark, no bite, and Putin knows it.

Jimbuna 03-04-14 02:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducimus (Post 2181610)
Where international diplomacy is concerned, it's been armature hour in the white house for awhile now. There was the thing with Syria. That was pretty much a professional poker match on the world stage, and Putin read Obama like a book. I see the headlines today, and i keep thinking, "Why in the hell would Putin listen to anything Obama or Kerry has to say?" Them condemning this, or saying that, it's tantamount to a guard dog with no teeth. All bark, no bite, and Putin knows it.
Agreed...Obama is now trying to recoup some credibility otherwise his legacy will be in the lower ratings.

Oberon 03-04-14 03:51 PM
The snag is, if Obama does nothing then he's going to get slated for it, and if he does something then he'll be slated for either not doing enough or being a dog with no teeth. In a situation like this, unfortunately, there's no option to 'not do anything', especially when you're supposed to be a leading superpower.

Tribesman 03-04-14 05:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 2181661)
The snag is, if Obama does nothing then he's going to get slated for it, and if he does something then he'll be slated for either not doing enough or being a dog with no teeth. In a situation like this, unfortunately, there's no option to 'not do anything', especially when you're supposed to be a leading superpower.
Another snag is that Obama and the US military are 80% reliant on maintaining goodwill with Russia and some very dubious former SSR leaders.
Lose that deal and the only real options are to go begging in Beijing and Tehran and see what price they will extort.
Not a great situation to be trapped in is it.
But that's a legacy issue. If they had gone with the 6 month timeframe the Pentagon study suggested instead of the 12 year mess they chose they wouldn't still be stuck with relying on Russia.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:32 PM.
Page 5 of 6 1234 5 6
Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.