How would have new weapons like the F35 help us win wars
- Thread starter UCFhonors
- Start date
Interesting.
I'll simplify the question. How would the F35 help us not lose the the Afghanistan war if we had the F35 at the start of the war?
Ask Israel, they are the unofficial testing grounds for US defense companies. They have already used the F-35.
Why are they testing them?
Shouldn't Israel be helping us in the wars we are constantly losing? After all, it's our defense spending that is the only rest they exist.
Last edited:
They are not testing them, they are using them. In Syria against Russian missle defenses.
And it's not helping us win that one either.
I watched a documentary on the Syrian war. They are using walkie talkies and AKs over there.
Analysis of alternatives is part of the acquisition process, what makes these programs turn into shit shows is scope creep.
True. Unfortunately it's inevitable whenever you have more than one service driving the boat. It's bad enough with a joint program. International makes it damn near impossible. Then there's the whole LockMart factor. They are good at writing proposals...
F35 is a dumbed down F22 that can be sold to foreign partners. It replaces the F16 and A10, which are almost 40 years old. It serves a dual purpose, it replaces obsolete planes and bolsters our allies. It's so expensive because we are taking the bulk of the development cost in order to make it affordable for our allies.
It's also a major job creator, which is ironic, since Democrats tend to hate this sort of defense spending. The Military Industrial Complex is the one area where government spending does create jobs/growth.
I do think there's an argument to made about the utility of manned aircraft when we're about to enter the age of autonomous vehicles, laser weaponry, and hypersonics.
It's also a major job creator, which is ironic, since Democrats tend to hate this sort of defense spending. The Military Industrial Complex is the one area where government spending does create jobs/growth.
I do think there's an argument to made about the utility of manned aircraft when we're about to enter the age of autonomous vehicles, laser weaponry, and hypersonics.
"Job creator". What do you mean?
If I pay one person to dig a hole and another person to fill it would you describe that as a "Job creator".
Anyways the point of this thread is asking how really expensive weapons would have helped us in wars that we lost. I don't understand how the F-35 would have helped in the Afghan war or in the Syrian war or Libya.
The program sustains anywhere from 60k-130k jobs depending on the number you use. Those jobs exist because the government is providing that money to Lockheed. Therefore the government spending is creating jobs. Is it the most effective? That's a different argument and I can't argue the opportunity cost.
The biggest problem with politicized economics is that focus on the wrong number. Number of jobs doesn't matter. Production is really the only thing that should be considered when talking about economic policies.
My hole digging analogy was about maintaining job that provide no economic value - no production. This is comparable to building a bomb that you never use then later throw it away. Sure, it provided some value as a deterrent. But it's really hard to say the benefit of the deterrent was greater than cost of building, storing and destroying the bomb. Thus, that wasn't just a lost opportunity cost, it was an actualized net negative cost.
Again, I could sustain 60k hole diggers and 60k hole fillers that provide no production / economic value. That would be terribly stupid idea.
Is the 35 even considered a part of the US fleet? I have friends that are Engineers in the program down in Fort Worth. They describe it as not fully released.
We also limit the capabilities when we sell them to to "allies"
A good portion of these guys get shared with Skunkworks where the good stuff is actually made
We also limit the capabilities when we sell them to to "allies"
A good portion of these guys get shared with Skunkworks where the good stuff is actually made
People who support the military industrial complex think so.
How many innocent civilians has it killed this past 10 years?
Similar threads
