Robert Gates is right on the F-22

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Robert Gates is right on the F-22
11
Fri, 07-10-2009 - 1:24pm

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/24538.html

Congress is busying itself trying to overturn Secretary of Defense


Robert Gates’s decision to stop producing the F-22 fighter. But President Barack Obama has threatened to veto a spending bill for the entire Defense Department if it contains a single F-22 over the 187 now authorized.



Gates has said that, without a doubt, Obama should veto a bill that includes additional F-22s. The fact that there are doubts demonstrates the mess our defenses are in.



The House committee wants to make a down payment on 12 more F-22s in 2011; the Senate committee wants seven more in 2010.



The House passed its version of the bill on June 25 by a vote of 389-22. So Obama and Gates have a long way to go to show that they have the 145 or so votes they would need to sustain a veto.



Gates and Obama’s case against the F-22 is reasonable but needs to be more comprehensive.



Gates has argued that not a single F-22 has flown in the wars in Iraq


and Afghanistan. But there simply are no enemy air forces there.



Also, the F-22 is outrageously expensive. The 187 now authorized are costing the nation more than $65 billion, almost $350 million for each one.



More important, but so far unaddressed, is whether the F-22 is even a good fighter. Actually, it is a gigantic disappointment.



Its boosters advertise the F-22 as a technological wonder — which it isn’t.



Its “stealth” characteristic is greatly exaggerated. And, while the F-22 is less detectable by some radar at certain angles, it is easily detectable to many types of radar in the world, including early Russian and Chinese models. Just ask the pilots of the two stealthy F-117 bombers that were put out of action by Serbs in the 1999 Kosovo air war using antiquated radar systems.



Worse, the F-22 depends on its radar and long-range, radar-guided missiles. Such “beyond visual range” radar-based air warfare has failed time and time again in war.



There are two problems. First, even the low probability of intercept radar in the F-22 is vulnerable to detection by enemies, especially with the proliferation of spread-spectrum technology in cell phones and laptops. The radar not only signals the F-22’s presence to enemies but also acts as a beacon for their radar-homing missiles. While both the Russians and the Chinese specialize in such missiles, our Air Force, in its exercises, insists that such capabilities do not exist.



Second, its aerodynamic performance, short-range missiles and guns are nothing special, which I observed at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada when an F-16 “shot down” an F-22 in exercises.



A vote in Congress for more F-22s is a vote to decay our pilots’ skills, shrink our Air Force at increasing cost and reward Congress’s lust for pork. Congress’s new defense bill should, indeed, be vetoed if a single F-22 is added. Pro-defense members of Congress will support that move.



Winslow T. Wheeler is the director of the Straus Military Reform Project of the Center for Defense Information. He is the author of the new anthology “America’s Defense Meltdown: Pentagon Reform for President Obama and the New Congress.”


With Vote on F-22 Jet, Panel Defies Veto Threat


http://nytimes.com/2009/06/26/business/26defense.html


Sign to stop the F22


http://act.truemajorityaction.org/p/7002/bluepetition?petition_KEY=125

Photobucket      The WeatherPixie 

 


Photobucket&nbs

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-23-2005
Sat, 07-11-2009 - 2:33pm

Do you think this why Obama picked Gates? Gates knows he needs $ for the insurgent army. Where do we sign up to get them to cut the funding to the robotic bombers

Did you see the pentagon wants Gates to ban tobacco on military ops too?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sat, 07-11-2009 - 3:31pm

The F-22 isn't a robotic bomber. Perhaps you're referring to the X-45 or Predator drones. Would not want to cut their funding since they are far less costly, both in dollar terms and U.S. lives.

Am not sure either why it would be a bad idea to ban tobacco on all military installations. Actually, it's a WONDERFUL idea. The VA health system is already being taxed by the demands of two ongoing wars. Why add to the strain by treating the costly side-effects of tobacco use--cancer, emphysema, COPD, etc.?

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-23-2005
Sat, 07-11-2009 - 9:20pm

I understand the link was left for f22.

I asked re: the robot because the f22 is not being flown, according to Gates, in afghanistan. We are awash in a. Congress who doesn't know right from wrong

I want the war machine stopped.

I don't believe in ranking the costs when it comes to the loss of lives. Death and destruction by the robots (predator drones) only creates another generation of haters.

I heard the change message Obama was selling. I agree, he needs more of us to take to the streets to back up a peaceful world vision.

Does the military/national security industry leading us into afghanistan make you feel safer?

I find the tobacco ban amusing and a distraction by the pentagon to doing the real cost cutting by ending the wars.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Sun, 07-12-2009 - 9:25am

No I hadn't heard about the proposed tabacco ban. Though it's a good idea to stop smoking I doubt the troops would be of that mind.


Cutting military spending isn't popular, although much of it is wasteful, it means loss of US jobs.


The warning ignored........


Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY


 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-23-2005
Sun, 07-12-2009 - 4:33pm

I haven't got my data card in my blackberry today so I can't see the youtube link.

Eisenhower would have seen how Truman got pushed to drop the bomb on japan, so I probably would agree. I think this is when the usa veered off from humanity.
I like to think obama believes in the world vision of kennedy(how kennedy extended his hand to kruschev) then I read about baghram and think he looks to be pulled off coarse.
I do believe the media focus on mj instead of iraq was disturbing in re:to what it says about our society.

In re:to loss of jobs
I think boeing, lockheed, etal could retool their plants and make/develop transport systems and communication networks with their spy satellites that won't blow people up.
Why wouldn't The loss of jobs be felt in the health care industry and in the tobacco states too? That's not a rational reason is it?
;)

I think if we marched an army of highway crews, power/water grid workers, and set up field hospitals in afghanistan/pakistan we would win over their people and get their aid in over turning terrorism faster then drone survelliance.

Re:tobacco use
Shouldn't we ban this in prisons first?

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-25-2008
Sun, 07-12-2009 - 7:18pm
Yes he is right.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-25-2008
Sun, 07-12-2009 - 7:51pm

I want the war machine stopped.


Not going to happen, at least not in the forseeable future.

 


"      

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Tue, 07-14-2009 - 9:47am

Obama Repeats Threat to Veto Bill Over F-22 Jet


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/us/politics/14defense.html


President Obama placed his political capital on the line Monday and reiterated his threat to veto a military spending bill unless the Senate removed $1.75 billion set aside to buy seven additional F-22 fighter jets.


Mr. Obama stepped up his campaign after liberal Democrats like Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John Kerry of Massachusetts said they supported the purchases, arguing that the program would retain high-paying jobs in many districts nationwide. (Me: Isn't this "busy work" if the military does not need these fighters?)


The F-22, the world’s costliest fighter jet, is the most prominent weapons system that Mr. Obama wants to cancel or cut in his plan to rein in military spending. A vote by the Senate to keep producing the plane would be an embarrassing setback for him.


Military analysts say it has always been hard to persuade Congress to halt big weapons programs like the F-22, made by Lockheed Martin, which has suppliers in 44 states and provides 25,000 jobs.


Congress has agreed with Mr. Obama’s plans to cut more experimental programs like missile defense. But support for the F-22 has strengthened recently. As the Senate took up debate on the bill on Monday, Senate leaders said it was hard to predict how the vote would go.


Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Senator John McCain of Arizona, the panel’s top Republican, are leading the fight to cap F-22 production at 187 planes.


Their committee voted 13-11 in late June to add the money for the seven additional planes. But Mr. Levin and Mr. McCain, who was Mr. Obama’s opponent in the 2008 election, voted against that measure, and they filed an amendment on Monday to remove the money from the bill.


In a letter to Mr. McCain on Monday, Mr. Obama wrote that Pentagon leaders “do not need these planes.”


The Pentagon would rather buy unmanned aircraft to gather intelligence in Afghanistan and accelerate the testing for the F-35, a new plane designed to attack ground targets. Pentagon officials say the F-22 is hard to maintain and costs $44,000 to operate for an hour, compared with $30,000 for older planes.


But many Republicans in Congress say more F-22s, which were designed for aerial combat, are needed as a hedge against countries like China.


And a growing number of Democrats are questioning why the administration would let such high-paying union jobs go when it is spending billions to save or create other jobs.

Photobucket

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Wed, 07-15-2009 - 10:56am
Air Force Project Being Probed Is Linked to Murtha
Lawmaker Arranged Earmark for It

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/14/AR2009071402251.html?nav=hcmodule


When an Air Force command in north Florida sought new battlefield technologies, Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) steered millions in federal dollars its way to hire defense contractors.


The research effort at the Pensacola Air Force base fell apart, however, when investigators found evidence that it was used to improperly pay a series of companies linked to Murtha. A handful of defense firms were paid for work that was never done or not called for in the contracts. Some of the companies involved, based in Wyoming, Florida and Murtha's district in Pennsylvania, had hidden owners, prosecutors allege; one was secretly owned by the Air Force official who helped approve the payments.


As prosecutors reveal new details of their criminal probe into the $8 million earmark that Murtha arranged for the Air Force project, one familiar player is never mentioned by authorities. Several of the companies had hired the lobbying firm of the lawmaker's brother, Robert C. "Kit" Murtha.


Today, one of Kit Murtha's earliest clients has agreed to tell the government what he did and the crimes he said he saw committed as the lead contractor on the Murtha-orchestrated project. Richard "Rick" Ianieri, former chief executive of Coherent Systems International, is expected to plead guilty to taking kickbacks and preparing fraudulent invoices. Ianieri, a Pennsylvania entrepreneur, saw his business grow dramatically after hiring Kit Murtha's firm, KSA Consulting.


There is no indication that Murtha or his brother were aware of the alleged misuse of funds. Charges have focused on a small group of defense executives and the Air Force official and, thus far, companies that received funds improperly are not accused of wrongdoing.


But the charges have brought criminal allegations the closest yet to Murtha's controversial practice of steering "earmarked" funds to favored firms.


"We had no knowledge of these disturbing transactions, and if they are true then the individuals and companies in question should be held accountable under the law," Murtha spokesman Matthew Mazonkey said in an e-mailed statement.


Over the years, Murtha arranged tens of millions of dollars in earmarks for two Pennsylvania firms central to the investigation, Coherent Systems International and Kuchera Defense Systems.


"It really puts a fine point on the murky, unaccountable web that exists around earmarks," said Steve Ellis, of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense. "These earmarks, because there is very little accountability, provide a petri dish for corruption."


Several years ago, Ianieri told the news media that he had selected Kit Murtha's lobbying firm on the advice of Murtha's chief of staff. Federal prosecutors in Florida charge that Ianieri helped an Air Force contract manager, Mark O'Hair, pay five companies -- including Coherent's fellow KSA clients Gensym and VidiaFusion -- nearly $2 million that they should not have received.


Prosecutors charge that Gensym and VidiaFusion collected $300,000 and $274,000, respectively, for purported software for the communications system, known as "Ground Mobile Gateway." Authorities say their work consisted of a few compact discs that stayed locked in a Coherent Systems closet.


Gensym lists as its North America headquarters the same Rockville address and office suite as KSA Consulting's offices.


Murtha's congressional staff and KSA founder Ken Stalder have said they have little recollection of VidiaFusion, a KSA client from 2004 to 2007. But Mike Hoban, VidiaFusion's president, is someone who should be familiar to both offices.


Hoban, who was briefly a General Dynamics employee, co-founded Aeptec Microsystems with a base office in Murtha's district. The defense company also hired KSA. Hoban could not be reached for comment.


In 2002, Murtha and Hoban came together to announce good news: the opening of a data facility the Navy was paying Aeptec to operate in Blairsville, Pa.


"My congratulations to Aeptec Microsystems for contracting with the Navy to establish and operate the Ready Response Center," Murtha said then. "This contract illustrates that, in a very short time, Aeptec has demonstrated its strong capabilities."


In addition to Gensym and VidiaFusion, prosecutors allege that the Air Force project improperly paid Kuchera, Schaller Engineering and Colorado Power Systems.


Ianieri also is charged with submitting an invoice for O'Hair to approve, paying Kuchera $650,000 for five "prototype cards." Prosecutors say these cards were not part of the mobile communications contract.


In a related Pennsylvania case recently unsealed, Ianieri has agreed to plead guilty to Pennsylvania charges that he accepted $200,000 in kickbacks from an unidentified company that closely resembles Kuchera Defense Systems.


O'Hair, a retired Air Force colonel, is a central figure in the Florida probe. Prosecutors allege that he concealed from his bosses that he had a financial stake in companies he arranged for the Air Force to pay. O'Hair was a director of Schaller Engineering with a fellow Air Force colleague, Dick Schaller, and paid a firm to create a Wyoming company he owned, authorities allege, and approved invoices for both.

Photobucket

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-11-2009
Tue, 07-21-2009 - 2:54pm

I think Gates and Obama are getting their way:


Senate sides with Obama, removes F-22 money

JIM ABRAMS | 07/21/09


WASHINGTON — The Senate voted Tuesday to halt production of the Air Force's missile-eluding F-22 Raptor fighter jets in a high-stakes, veto-laden showdown over President Barack Obama's efforts to shift defense spending to a next generation of smaller, single-engine F-35 Joint Strike Fighters.


The 58-40 vote reflected an all-out lobbying campaign by the Obama administration, which had to overcome resistance from lawmakers confronted with the losses of defense-related jobs if the F-22 program is terminated.


Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said it was "probably the most impactful amendment that I have seen in this body on almost any issue." He said it was "about whether we will stop doing business as usual, and that is continuing to fund weapons systems that are no longer needed."


The vote removed $1.75 billion set aside in a $680 billion defense policy bill to build seven more F-22 Raptors, adding to the 187 stealth technology fighters already being built.


The Senate action also saved Obama from what could have been a political embarrassment. He had urged the Senate to strip out the money and threatened what would be the first veto of his presidency if the F-22 money remained in the defense bill.


Immediately after the vote, Obama told reporters at the White House the Senate's decision will "better protect our troops."


White House officials said Vice President Joe Biden and chief of staff Rahm Emanuel lobbied senators, as did Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who both publicly and in conversations with lawmakers stressed that the Pentagon has enough F-22s for its operational needs and can put the money to better uses.


Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Tuesday that spending on the stealth fighter would "inhibit our ability to buy things we do need," including Gates' proposal to add 22,000 soldiers to the Army.>>>full article at the link above

 

Pages