F-22 critics release new video

What a bunch of whiney, BS filled liberal dumba**es. Terrorists will not be the only enemy the US will be forced to fight in the future... If it were up to these losers the F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, B-1B and many other defense systems, which are utilized worldwide successfully, would have never been procured... I would sure like to know how they come up with such assanying opinions. There is no hope for these folks...in the words of comedian Ron White "you can't fix stupid!"

Should be a real hoot when they do a video on the F-35 program.

Gotta love how the ignorant toss around the word "liberal".

Neither the Strauss Military Reform Project (POGO is another matter) or Winslow Wheeler are "liberals"- they're conservatives. They're not about cutting the budget, they just want cheaper, technologically less ambitious stuff but more of it. Wheeler really doesn't care for what he describes as "technologists".

They are the old guard from the F-16 "fighter mafia" of the 60s and 70s- this attack on the F-22 is really about the cabal of Pierre Sprey, Everest Riconni, Stephenson and Dilliger etc al simply not understanding or wanting to understand modern technology. While Boyd is gone, his disciples are still here attacking the whole concept of the 5th generation fighter. The F-22 is anathema to their entire way of thinking.

Mind you they don't seem to care that the only reason the F-16 is relevant today is because of it new radar, and the sensor pods etc that are being hung from it. It's not quite the light weight day fighter that Sprey remembers from the F-16A days.

Of course there's "less bang for the buck", since an ever-increasing amount of the defense budget is paying for over-paid government workers and their cushy pensions (warfighters excepted).

And don't be fooled. These are libs. Notice how they never indict our wonderful federal government in the claims of 'oversight', 'over budget', etc.?

Clearly, the process is broken, not the aircraft. I happen to agree the F-22 needs to be canceled, but a more rationed approach certainly wouldn't necessiate my need to respond with critique.

I went to a CDI lecture on the MX missile in the early 80's. They have been against every advanced system as long as I can remember. They were for unilateral disarmament when the Soviets were building missiles like sausages. If you have teamed up with CDI you are a liberal or a close proximity.

Is it always the left who say "That anti-global warming group got funds from "Big Coal" or "Big Oil" so their report can be ignored?" I say let's be consistant with this report.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he came to believe the U.S. military would not "need any more fifth-generation fighters to take out fourth-generation fighters." Gates say his decision to field only 187 models came after discussions with the military's combatant commanders, as well as Air Force leaders. Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that Lockheed Martin's Joint Strike Fighter now being built could be the last manned fighter jet before robotic planes take over that role.
Gates told that he believes "the only defense to a surface-to-air missile is not just something with a pilot in it."

It's the same line, just given a new coat of paint. "More bang for the buck," "give our soldiers/pilots/marines the best."

Translation: the military is eivl and costs too much.

Notice that they do not, ever, propose what is to replace the F-22. F-16s (block 50/52)? F-15s (a la silent eagle)?

Nope, just F-22 *bad*.

As our current fighters die from metal fatigue, they propose doing nothing.

Slate is probably trying to forget the OIF I era column where the author said that our present aircraft would "do nicely". When the F-15 and F-117 groundings occurred he shut is pie-hole.

We need the F-22 and F-35. The F-15/16 series fighters are lunchmeat to the newer SAMs, and SU-27/30, J-11 etc.

POGo said the same about the M1-A1 until Desert Storm shut them up. You can't even find their articles about the M1 on their website.

Here in the UK the Government in the 1950's famously predicted the end of manned fighters. They were going to be replaced by missiles. Adm. Mullen is now saying that the F-35 will be the last manned fighter. UAV's are now seen as the modern panacea to all military aviation issues, especially cost. Is a UCAV really that much cheaper than a manned aircraft? Has anybody done any serious research into this? Remember when the 'computer' was going to give us a paperless, bookless, magazine and newspaper free scociety....well thank goodness that never happened. A computer is an aid not a replacement to all the above. Likewise why MUST the manned aircraft be replaced by a UCAV. Anyway how many UCAVs have shot down manned fighters. UAV's do have their place in aviation but as a complement and not a replacement for manned flight.

UCAV:remote controled vehicle.Always had a men in the loop.