Bush & Co. Continue to be "Friends" to Militar

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-10-30 09:26am

MKSheppard wrote:[NMD is rolling, nah, how about we cancel the F-22 and RAH-66 Comanche
instead? Those programs will never see the light of active service until
2010. Fuck that.

I'd definitely agree with cancelling RAH-66, but the first F/A-22s have already been delivered to the first unit, so it's a bit late. RAH-66 on the other hand is the annoying technical nightmare that won't die.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-10-30 09:33am

Vympel wrote: I'd definitely agree with cancelling RAH-66, but the first F/A-22s have already been delivered to the first unit, so it's a bit late.

Uh, source? How many of them? What unit?

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-10-30 09:40am

MKSheppard wrote:Uh, source? How many of them? What unit?

"Home of Air Dominance"

TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE, Fla., September 29, 2003 -- The first operational F/A-22 Raptor was delivered to the Air Force's F/A-22 schoolhouse here Sept. 26.

Tyndall, once known as "The Home of Air Superiority" became "The Home of Air Dominance," with the arrival of its first F/A-22. The Raptor will eventually replace the F-15 Eagle and sets the foundation for the next generation of combat-fighter pilots.

Lt. Col. Jeffrey Harrigian, commander of the 43rd Fighter Squadron here, flew Raptor 18 from the Lockheed Martin Corp. assembly plant in Marietta, Ga., to Tyndall. Harrigian's squadron will train future F/A-22 pilots.

"This is truly a historic event for Tyndall and the U.S. Air Force", said Brig. Gen. Larry New, 325th Fighter Wing commander. "We're very excited down here -- both the people here at Tyndall and our local community partners -- about standing up the Air Forces very first operational F/A-22 squadron, bringing in the next chapter of Air Force history in air dominance and serving our nation."

"This is a great honor for me personally," Harrigian said. "I never thought I'd have the chance. This is a huge day, not just for the 43rd and the 325th, but for the entire Air Force and Bay County. I think we're all really proud to have the airplane here."

Harrigian thanked the entire Raptor team -- base members, contractors and the community.

"I know it's been years and years of effort. From the bottom of my heart, I really do appreciate it," he said. "We'll do it right here, and just as General New said, this is just the beginning. Air dominance will be our job and we look forward to doing that."

The F/A-22, the Air Force's premiere fighter, is a multi-role aircraft, designed to perform both air-to-air and air-to-ground combat missions. The Raptor elevates U.S. technological advantages and updates 70s technology using stealth, integrated avionics, maneuverability and supercruise (the capability to reach and maintain supersonic speeds without using fuel-expensive afterburners). These characteristics will provide the warfighter air dominance in any battlespace, according to officials.

The F/A-22 is a critical component of the Global Strike Task Force designed to project air dominance, rapidly and at great distances, to counter and defeat threats that will attempt to deny access to our forces. The F/A-22 cannot be matched by any known or projected adversary fighter aircraft.

The 325th FW, which trains F-15 pilots, air-battle managers, intelligence officers and air traffic controllers, was officially selected as the site for the F/A-22 pilot training program in August 2000.

Tyndall is expected to receive 50 Raptors over the next two years.

A typical defense contractor-like advertising screed (note the "designed for both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions" falsehood) gushing about it's product, but yeah.

There's only a handful- so IOC is still 2005.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-10-30 10:13am

Vympel wrote: There's only a handful- so IOC is still 2005.

About fuckin time

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-10-30 11:48am

Get these clowns out of town. Bush has pissed off almost all of his once-strong supporters. Fucking disabled vets in the ass is about as low as you could go.

The Dems better hurry up and pare down their collection of candidates so I can see who to choose from. Idaho has no caucases or primaries to make that descision, I have to wait until the national party decides. Depending on who floats to the top, they may well have my vote.

At the very least, ain't no way in hell Bush is getting any support from me.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-10-30 11:53am

Coyote wrote: The Dems better hurry up and pare down their collection of candidates so I can see who to choose from.

Wesley Clark For President Then!

Seriously, he's the only guy who is actually electable. The rest are a
bit loopy left.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-10-30 03:24pm

Coyote wrote:
At the very least, ain't no way in hell Bush is getting any support from me.

Ditto

I basically felt the same way about Gore last time and I disliked Bush so I had to go the protest vote route with Nader. I'm glad he didn't get elected because he's a wacko but I would like a strong third party, if not as an alternative, then to push the two main parties away from their wacko fringes.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-10-30 03:25pm

MKSheppard wrote: Wesley Clark For President Then!

Seriously, he's the only guy who is actually electable. The rest are a
bit loopy left.

He's not the greatest choice either.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-10-30 03:32pm

Tsyroc wrote:
Coyote wrote:
At the very least, ain't no way in hell Bush is getting any support from me.
Ditto

I basically felt the same way about Gore last time and I disliked Bush so I had to go the protest vote route with Nader. I'm glad he didn't get elected because he's a wacko but I would like a strong third party, if not as an alternative, then to push the two main parties away from their wacko fringes.

The problem is that the wacko fringes tend to EMBRACE the third parties...

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-10-30 04:19pm

Iceberg wrote:The problem is that the wacko fringes tend to EMBRACE the third parties...

So what you're saying is that we need two more parties so all the wack jobs can go play there and then what is left of the Republican and Democratic parties can merge into one generally sensible party.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-10-30 04:21pm

Tsyroc wrote:
Iceberg wrote:The problem is that the wacko fringes tend to EMBRACE the third parties...
So what you're saying is that we need two more parties so all the wack jobs can go play there and then what is left of the Republican and Democratic parties can merge into one generally sensible party.

The electoral college and all-or-nothing voting make the penetration of a third party to the national level a virtual impossibility. But that's turf we've trod many, many times.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-10-31 04:20am

I hear talk of Republic strategists trying to make gay marriage the BIG issue of the 2004 election campaign- i.e. get the religious fundies who basically sat out the 2000 election in on the Republican side, because I can't imagine which Democratic candidate would kowtow to them.

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-10-31 04:29am

The Republican party is in danger of turning itself into a fringe party if it does not reign in its fundy loonies. It is becoming, essentially, the Christian party. Soon the field will be left open for another more 'mainstream' party to take command.

And Dean is not as much of a leftist whackjob that people think-- he is the only candidate to get an "A" rating from the NRA on gun rights issues. If Clark were to run as his veep, to speak on behalf of the veterans and to help direct and guide military policies, then we may have a winning ticket as far as this wild dog is concerned.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-11-03 06:20am

AniThyng wrote:
Go ahead, let the UN into Iraq, I'm sure they'll give their people the same protection that they gave Mr. Vieira de Mello.
considering it is impossible for the UN to actually maintain a credible armed force without the US's tacit approval, i'm wondering just how you expect them to provide protection beyond mere security guards.

The UN does not maintain any[i/] armed forces, full stop. UN peace keepers are just units loaned out from their home nation on a tempory basis to fix situations as they crop up.

AniThyng · Post by **AniThyng** » 2003-11-03 10:57am

The UN does not maintain any[i/] armed forces, full stop. UN peace keepers are just units loaned out from their home nation on a tempory basis to fix situations as they crop up.

yes yes i know that. so really thay cannot in any way maintain any more then hired security guards. and it is not as if UN peacekeepers will be allowed to police iraq even if they wanted to, today.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-11-03 01:14pm

Vympel wrote:I hear talk of Republic strategists trying to make gay marriage the BIG issue of the 2004 election campaign- i.e. get the religious fundies who basically sat out the 2000 election in on the Republican side, because I can't imagine which Democratic candidate would kowtow to them.

That would be a good way to start killing the party IMO. I don't understand why the Republicans would continue to cater so strongly to a portion of the populous that is likely to vote for them anyway. As it is they usually keep enough religon in their platform to keep the Christian vote while also making it so that I have trouble voting for them.