United States Biden administration policies and actions - megathread

[mrttao]

Is it a waste to create the most advanced fighter in the world?

Are you seriously attributing this to the graft where politicians line their pockets at the taxpayer expense?

Also, they literally were not commissioned to make the most advanced fighter in the world. They had the most advanced fighter in the world, were commissioned by the military to create a budget airplane for mass deployment. And instead made another super expensive plane instead.

While embezzling 75% of the development funds, and then selling this airplane all across the worlds to other countries, diluting the USA's military advantage... and the funds from the sales didn't even go to the USA govt, it went to line the pockets of billionaires.

So realistically, we are looking at over 90% embezzlement... that also happened to develop the most advanced aircraft in the world... at 4x the time frame than planned.

And you are literally defending the mass embezzlement on the grounds of "well they produced results" (although not the result they were asked to).

I assure you the embezzlement was not a positive contributing factor for the results produced.

 

[Zachowon]

The F35 is ahead of the 22 in ways and vice versa.
The F35 allows the pilot to see 360 and the 35 also has the capability to include Link 16 for ISR to be collected and collided.
It can also allow for us to have F35s target things for other aspects of our military to work in conjunction with.
It is multi role.
The 22 is the top of the line air dominance fighter.
There is a diffrence and actually know what the 35 was created for instead kf being a reformer "Our 4.5 gen is fine our adversaries will never catch up so let's stagnate"
Let's nor he a fucking Russia

 

[LordsFire]

Are you seriously attributing this to the graft where politicians line their pockets at the taxpayer expense?

Also, they literally were not commissioned to make the most advanced fighter in the world. They had the most advanced fighter in the world, were commissioned by the military to create a budget airplane for mass deployment. And instead made another super expensive plane instead.

While embezzling 75% of the development funds, and then selling this airplane all across the worlds to other countries, diluting the USA's military advantage... and the funds from the sales didn't even go to the USA govt, it went to line the pockets of billionaires.

So realistically, we are looking at over 90% embezzlement... that also happened to develop the most advanced aircraft in the world... at 4x the time frame than planned.

And you are literally defending the mass embezzlement on the grounds of "well they produced results" (although not the result they were asked to).

I assure you the embezzlement was not a positive contributing factor for the results produced.

You really don't know much about what you're talking about here.

First off, Congress and the DoD are the ones who keep changing program requirements. It's not like the program was 'Get us a cheap alternative to the F-22' and then Lockheed-Martin went and did their own thing. Over the decades of development, politicians et al kept adding to the program requirements, particularly in how it included a variante capable of VTOL or STOVL carrier-capacity.

Congress asked for this.

Further, other countries also paid into the development costs, which is part of why they're being sold the F-35, unlike the F-22, which is very much an American exclusive.

The timeframe it took is ridiculous, and the cost paid for it certainly is inflated, but it's more about inefficiency and vote-buying (We build part of that in my district because of me! Keep voting for me, I brought jobs in!) than about massive embezzlement.

Part of the reason it took so long to develop though, was because (IIRC) the program started in the late 80's. Information and computer technology has been developing so insanely fast, and bringing changes to so many other sectors as a result. This still does not wholly justify, and certainly does not excuse the sheer scale of schedule and cost over-run, but there is some reason.

The crucial factor to all of this though, is that if there ever is a war against China, Russia, or any hostile nation that fields Generation 4/4.5 fighter craft, the F-22 and F-35 mean that the skies will be utterly dominated by the US and its allies.

Total Air Supremacy isn't a guarantee to winning a war, but it's about the closest thing there is to it, and for the US, it's a guarantee you won't lose, given the enemy needs to cross the ocean to get to you.


If you want something to really bitch about in wasted time and money regarding aerospace defense spending, Obama ending the production run of the F-22 and ordering the tooling destroyed, now that's something that there should be treason trials over.

 

[mrttao]

The F35 is ahead of the 22 in ways and vice versa.
The F35 allows the pilot to see 360 and the 35 also has the capability to include Link 16 for ISR to be collected and collided.
It can also allow for us to have F35s target things for other aspects of our military to work in conjunction with.
It is multi role.
The 22 is the top of the line air dominance fighter.
There is a diffrence and actually know what the 35 was created for instead kf being a reformer "Our 4.5 gen is fine our adversaries will never catch up so let's stagnate"
Let's nor he a fucking Russia

> lets stagnate
said literally nobody.
we are complaining about the fact the USA has over 90% graft on it.

not saying usa should halt military development. but that it should cut out the oligarchs stealing all that money.

because those USA scientists who developed were literally paid their salary directly by the govt throughout the entire project.
and could have easily developed it directly for the govt without the 90% graft. which would have freed up funds for 9 more projects on the same scale.

> But muh russia
We have seen how the mass oligarch graft fucked over russia military completely. Russia simply has vastly more corruption and graft.

Their development graft figure are even higher than the mere 90%, then the factories building them have graft too to produce trash with subpar components. then the generals sell their shit and run ghost battalion of non existent military.

so, with russia they are more like 99.999% graft. so usa has the advantage with their "mere" 90% graft. this is NOT a defense for graft and the very idea that it was all thanks to american oligarchs stealing 90% of the funds that we can thank for that advance development is UTTERLY ABSURD

 

[strunkenwhite]

Is it a waste to create the most advanced fighter in the world?

I think what people are saying is (and if they're not, I am): It sounds like the government isn't getting royalties on F-35s sold, despite footing the R&D bill, and if that is true why the hell is it true?

 

[mrttao]

I think what people are saying is (and if they're not, I am): It sounds like the government isn't getting royalties on F-35s sold, despite footing the R&D bill

Exactly. Yes.

if that is true why the hell is it true?

Because lockheed martin is among the top donors for both parties. and that is just the money they admit they give openly. there is also tons of money they funnel to the elected officials under the table.

LM is among the highest bribers of govt officials across the world (not just USA).

From 1995 there has been a total of 88 cases of lockheed martin being caught in corruption inside the USA alone (that means excluding the bribing of officials abroad). And not a single one of them lead to trial, instead they just settled with officials to pay a token fine... then kept on doing it.

 

[Blasterbot]

Is it a waste to create the most advanced fighter in the world?

from an uninformed lay person's perspective? yes it absolutely could be. I will freely admit I don't know the specifics of the F-35. but you can absolutely spend so much on the military you effectively bankrupt your country. it has happened to other countries in the past. it could happen to us if we aren't careful. if the F-35 was promised as a good fighter that would be affordable for our air bases so we could fill out our numbers but instead we get the most expensive and advanced fighter yet? while potentially useful we did not get what we asked for.

them coming back years later and saying they will need to develop a new fighter on our dime to meet the original concept since we still need it? that stings. us footing the bill for the R and D? you can make the argument for it certainly. but once again they went over budget and outside the scope of what we wanted last time. Them selling to our allies? justifiable certainly. we want our allies to be strong and we don't want the tooling to sit idle. saying that the government isn't getting a cut on these exports though? when we funded this originally? I ain't asking for an even split or a split based on R and D but is 10% for the big guy too much to ask here? feed it back into the military for all I care. but get something for the money you are squeezing out of the middle class.

 

[Zachowon]

from an uninformed lay person's perspective? yes it absolutely could be. I will freely admit I don't know the specifics of the F-35. but you can absolutely spend so much on the military you effectively bankrupt your country. it has happened to other countries in the past. it could happen to us if we aren't careful. if the F-35 was promised as a good fighter that would be affordable for our air bases so we could fill out our numbers but instead we get the most expensive and advanced fighter yet? while potentially useful we did not get what we asked for.

them coming back years later and saying they will need to develop a new fighter on our dime to meet the original concept since we still need it? that stings. us footing the bill for the R and D? you can make the argument for it certainly. but once again they went over budget and outside the scope of what we wanted last time. Them selling to our allies? justifiable certainly. we want our allies to be strong and we don't want the tooling to sit idle. saying that the government isn't getting a cut on these exports though? when we funded this originally? I ain't asking for an even split or a split based on R and D but is 10% for the big guy too much to ask here? feed it back into the military for all I care. but get something for the money you are squeezing out of the middle class.

The F35 was made the way it was because congress requested it that way.
They are the one that signs the RnD for the vast majority of big projects like that.

And the most allies have bought into it.


The F35 is worth it because it allows a mass produced 5th gen fighter.
Only one of its kind.
The US Militaries next one? Os going to he 6th gen.
They will contuike to make and modify 5th gen fighters as we still make amd buy 4.5 gen. But 6th gen is wher RnD is heading.

Because the US Military is not as stupid as we look when it comes to tech.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

You really don't know much about what you're talking about here.

First off, Congress and the DoD are the ones who keep changing program requirements. It's not like the program was 'Get us a cheap alternative to the F-22' and then Lockheed-Martin went and did their own thing. Over the decades of development, politicians et al kept adding to the program requirements, particularly in how it included a variante capable of VTOL or STOVL carrier-capacity.

Congress asked for this.

Further, other countries also paid into the development costs, which is part of why they're being sold the F-35, unlike the F-22, which is very much an American exclusive.

The timeframe it took is ridiculous, and the cost paid for it certainly is inflated, but it's more about inefficiency and vote-buying (We build part of that in my district because of me! Keep voting for me, I brought jobs in!) than about massive embezzlement.

Part of the reason it took so long to develop though, was because (IIRC) the program started in the late 80's. Information and computer technology has been developing so insanely fast, and bringing changes to so many other sectors as a result. This still does not wholly justify, and certainly does not excuse the sheer scale of schedule and cost over-run, but there is some reason.

The crucial factor to all of this though, is that if there ever is a war against China, Russia, or any hostile nation that fields Generation 4/4.5 fighter craft, the F-22 and F-35 mean that the skies will be utterly dominated by the US and its allies.

Total Air Supremacy isn't a guarantee to winning a war, but it's about the closest thing there is to it, and for the US, it's a guarantee you won't lose, given the enemy needs to cross the ocean to get to you.


If you want something to really bitch about in wasted time and money regarding aerospace defense spending, Obama ending the production run of the F-22 and ordering the tooling destroyed, now that's something that there should be treason trials over.

The F-22 tooling is actually still around just in storage that at this point to restart production is going to cost the equivalent of a Ford and a Burke before a single bird even is built not even factoring the numerous upgrades that would certainly be added to the extent I'm not sure calling it a F-22 would work. Maybe a F-22 B or something. As for the production run being axed short of the already trunidcated figure of 330 birds compared to the 800 plus birds the program originally envisioned was indeed a dumb move and likely the primary reason why the Air Force wants to retire the type way earlier than scheduled.

 

[Bigking321]

I can't remember. Was the 35 the one Obama wanted to make into the first green fighter? I think I remember that being a thing and it not working.

 

[Rocinante]

The F35 is ahead of the 22 in ways and vice versa.
The F35 allows the pilot to see 360 and the 35 also has the capability to include Link 16 for ISR to be collected and collided.
It can also allow for us to have F35s target things for other aspects of our military to work in conjunction with.
It is multi role.
The 22 is the top of the line air dominance fighter.
There is a diffrence and actually know what the 35 was created for instead kf being a reformer "Our 4.5 gen is fine our adversaries will never catch up so let's stagnate"
Let's nor he a fucking Russia

I haven't actually seen anyone (maybe someone did,) argue that the f35 isn't awesome, or isn't a great thing to have.

The problem is with all the corruption, and our money being spent in shady ways, and the fact that your defense is "we make our money back," when in fact we don't, LM makes money back.

 

[Zachowon]

I haven't actually seen anyone (maybe someone did,) argue that the f35 isn't awesome, or isn't a great thing to have.

The problem is with all the corruption, and our money being spent in shady ways, and the fact that your defense is "we make our money back," when in fact we don't, LM makes money back.

Most of our RnD is used fully to that extent for the kosr oart unlike our adversaries

 

[Bear Ribs]

I haven't actually seen anyone (maybe someone did,) argue that the f35 isn't awesome, or isn't a great thing to have.

The problem is with all the corruption, and our money being spent in shady ways, and the fact that your defense is "we make our money back," when in fact we don't, LM makes money back.

While I do dislike the corruption myself, it's worth noting that the R&D spent on military tech does trickle down to the Civilian sector and provides wide benefits.

Some of them are surprisingly weird. Did you know undershirts are one such? They're called "crewnecks" because the Navy had crewmen wear that style after researching them. Wanna know why sunglasses are called "Aviators?" Invented under a government contract for the Airforce in 1930. Duct Tape? Government contract by Johnson & Johnson in 1942. Tampons? No really, invented as a military R&D project by Kimberly-Clark Co. in 1914. Bug Spray? Military research project in 1941. The microwave? Developed by Raytheon while researching RADAR systems under government contract in 1946. Superglue was discovered while researching compounds for repairing gunsights by Eastman Kodak in 1942. Frozen Concentrated Orange Juice? A result of a government R&D project to make shipping rations easier in 1945. The entire internet? Evolved from a military communications program, ARPANET.

This list is by no means exhaustive.

While without any graft, we'd probably get even more benefits, the fact is that military R&D does in fact eventually throw a lot of good things into the civilian sector we all can enjoy.

 

[Typhonis]

As an aside Tang, power tools, and memory foam came from the space program.

 

[Rocinante]

While I do dislike the corruption myself, it's worth noting that the R&D spent on military tech does trickle down to the Civilian sector and provides wide benefits.

Some of them are surprisingly weird. Did you know undershirts are one such? They're called "crewnecks" because the Navy had crewmen wear that style after researching them. Wanna know why sunglasses are called "Aviators?" Invented under a government contract for the Airforce in 1930. Duct Tape? Government contract by Johnson & Johnson in 1942. Tampons? No really, invented as a military R&D project by Kimberly-Clark Co. in 1914. Bug Spray? Military research project in 1941. The microwave? Developed by Raytheon while researching RADAR systems under government contract in 1946. Superglue was discovered while researching compounds for repairing gunsights by Eastman Kodak in 1942. Frozen Concentrated Orange Juice? A result of a government R&D project to make shipping rations easier in 1945. The entire internet? Evolved from a military communications program, ARPANET.

This list is by no means exhaustive.

While without any graft, we'd probably get even more benefits, the fact is that military R&D does in fact eventually throw a lot of good things into the civilian sector we all can enjoy.

All of which can be accomplished without lining the pockets of politicians and foreign nations with bribes that are funded with our tax dollars.

 

[Bear Ribs]

All of which can be accomplished without lining the pockets of politicians and foreign nations with bribes that are funded with our tax dollars.

Easy to claim an alternate reality would support your position, harder to prove it. Nations without government aid programs and a solid military-industrial complex do not appear to be at the forefront of innovation in our world, though.

Nor do we really see private corporations innovating much unless the government hands them a check. Corporate culture, in general, puts a very high value on profits this quarter over anything that will pay off in ten years. Without heavy government intervention we've historically seen that there just isn't much innovation, the private sector will not cover it.

 

[mrttao]

While I do dislike the corruption myself, it's worth noting that the R&D spent on military tech does trickle down to the Civilian sector and provides wide benefits.

Trickle down is literally a strawman invented by bush senior to be used against reagan.

Reagan explicitly rebuked him in a debate, saying that he is not advocating trickle down, he is advocating unleashing the free market. Money then flows down, up, sideways, and in all directions. accelerating and gaining momentum.

Easy to claim an alternate reality would support your position, harder to prove it.
Nations without government aid programs and a solid military-industrial complex do not appear to be at the forefront of innovation in our world, though.

facepalm. double facepalm.
This position is utterly idiotic. it is like saying it is impossible to have a police force without bribery. That countries without police are disasterous anarchies. therefore police bribery is what prevents anarchy.
The logic is not only moronic, it is proven to be false.

To take a look at america for example, america has at various times in history had companies within the military-industrial complex that were not engaging in mass amounts of graft.

The notion that graft is necessary and integral to the process, and that anyone who is opposed to the graft is also opposed to military industry is beyond retarded.
I am utterly shocked that we have more than 1 person making this argument.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Trickle down is literally a strawman invented by bush senior to be used against reagan.

Reagan explicitly rebuked him in a debate, saying that he is not advocating trickle down, he is advocating unleashing the free market. Money then flows down, up, sideways, and in all directions. accelerating and gaining momentum.

Trickle Down economics has absolutely nothing to do with what I posted. You apparently fixated entirely on the word "trickle" and ignored the actual content given this complete derail.

facepalm. double facepalm.
This position is utterly idiotic. it is like saying it is impossible to have a police force without bribery. That countries without police are disasterous anarchies. therefore police bribery is what prevents anarchy.
The logic is not only moronic, it is proven to be false.

To take a look at america for example, america has at various times in history had companies within the military-industrial complex that were not engaging in mass amounts of graft.

The notion that graft is necessary and integral to the process, and that anyone who is opposed to the graft is also opposed to military industry is beyond retarded.
I am utterly shocked that we have more than 1 person making this argument.

Again, you appear not to have read the post at all. I haven't praised graft, I've said I dislike that part. I've pointed out, rather, than saying "the private sector can provide all the benefits of the MIC" hasn't been proven true by reality. I'm utterly shocked you managed to produce two strawmen of this magnitude in a single post.

 

[mrttao]

Again, you appear not to have read the post at all. I haven't praised graft, I've said I dislike that part. I've pointed out, rather, than saying "the private sector can provide all the benefits of the MIC" hasn't been proven true by reality. I'm utterly shocked you managed to produce two strawmen of this magnitude in a single post.

Strawman my ass.
You explicitly and literally quoted Rocinante saying

All of which can be accomplished without lining the pockets of politicians and foreign nations with bribes that are funded with our tax dollars.

This is literally his ENTIRE POST and all he says in that post is that "anything can be done without graft". He says literally nothing else other than that.

And your reply to him saying that everything that can be done, can also be done without graft is... to claim it is a "hard to prove" and "alternate reality".

Easy to claim an alternate reality would support your position, harder to prove it.

There is no fantasy. Throughout history there are countless examples which are graft free of everything we have discussed here.

From military-industrial complex, to police forces. There are examples with graft, and examples without graft.

You then further double down with specifying that military-industrial complex is essential... thus YOU are the one who is making the argument that a military-industrial complex cannot exist without graft. Not me, read your own posts

 

[Bear Ribs]

Strawman my ass.
You explicitly and literally quoted Rocinante saying

This is literally his ENTIRE POST and all he says in that post is that "anything can be done without graft". He says literally nothing else other than that.

And your reply to him saying that everything that you can do can be done without graft is... to claim it is a "hard to prove" fantasy.

Yes, so? That's not the only post you responded to and quoted, is it? Did that post have the words "Trickle Down" that so triggered you? No? So you're posting a strawman.

Also, you're ignoring that I was responding to an actual discussion of multiple posts, not just that specific one. Context matters.