Support NeoGAF

[antonz]

it's 2014. we should be solving shit with lazer tag by now anyway!

USS Ponce will be getting its first Laser based weaponry installed this summer

You realize there's not a country on earth that comes close to our navy power right? We can afford to downsize without losing significant strength abroad. This isn't an all or nothing game, especially when you compare US carriers to the rest of the world.

As China expands it will require more and more of our assets shifted to the Pacific to maintain balance. China has 4 Carriers under construction now beyond the one they launched. They will be pumping those things out at a faster pace then us. We need to be able to keep balance in more than one location and China is going to force us to shift heavily in one direction

 

[OfWhiteSkinOnRedLeather]

The robot apocalypse begins...

Yup, they recently said they want to replace a shit ton of troops with robots by 2030. That's only 16 years away.

U.S. Army general says robots could replace one-fourth of combat soldiers by 2030: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/robotic...eral-says-robots-may-replace-combat-soldiers/

 

[TacticalFox88]

You realize there's not a country on earth that comes close to our navy power right? We can afford to downsize without losing significant strength abroad. This isn't an all or nothing game, especially when you compare US carriers to the rest of the world.

People honestly think Naval power is a game of battleship.

It's absurd.

Most of our naval power comes from the Fighters onboard the carriers, not the cruisers.

 

[casmith07]

As someone facing a separation board in two weeks, I think they're going about it the wrong way but acknowledge that budget cuts need to happen.

 

[Fenderputty]

Good bye 10's if not hundreds of thousands of American manufacturing jobs and companies.

IMO, this is a really poor argument for continued goverment spending on military, but a good one for reallocation of that spending.

 

[DarkFlow]

I think they have some contractual obligations to keep the F-35 program running...

Like that's every stopped them from cutting shit before. The F-35 is a giant black hole for money. They might as well burn the money, at least the heat would be more useful.

 

[geomon]

I'll believe it when I see it and I bet you this doesn't include their blackops budget.

 

[Ovid]

Yes, that's what we call the "war machine". Those people should be put to work on things that more directly benefit the American people

Agreed

 

[GavinGT]

Nah, someone will look at us the wrong way and we'll be back to war in no time.

 

[daw840]

Cutting the A-10 makes me sadder than Harold Ramis dying.

My absolute favorite plane. Such a badass. A gun with a plane built around it.

 

[antonz]

Cutting the F-35 Program alone would save the US a planned 488 billion dollars.

 

[eBay Huckster]

I don't agree with this at all. What are they gonna do when we get some surprise attack?

Probably run off and attack someone unrelated to it like we did last time?

 

[To Far Away Times]

Fantastic news.

 

[Divus]

IMO, this is a really poor argument for continued goverment spending on military, but a good one for reallocation of that spending.

Poor argument...hum...

So what should we spend billions on that won't be outsourced out the country? So far nothing else.

You guys are fairly clueless on how this works. Its not like most of these places are a Stark Enterprise where they make weapons of death. Most of these places make a couple of fittings, a electrical motor, few gears, a couple of wheels and without steady work they will cut American jobs or close entire factories that support towns.

 

[daw840]

Cutting the F-35 Program alone would save the US a planned 488 billion dollars.

What benefits does it even have over the F22? The F22 is complete air superiority in the world right now...

 

[GK86]

Canada has been waiting for this moment to strike.

 

[PhoenixDark]

People honestly think Naval power is a game of battleship.

It's absurd.

Most of our naval power comes from the Fighters onboard the carriers, not the cruisers.

That part of the debate still makes me chuckle. It's rare to see such a simple bullshit talking point ("our military is the smallest it's been since x, our power is waning") shot down with an equally simple retort. And the smug condensation of the Commander In Chief saying it...priceless.

 

[BattleMonkey]

Good bye 10's if not hundreds of thousands of American manufacturing jobs and companies.

That's exactly the logic that's been used for years. We keep spending money we don't have on stuff we don't need, just to keep many Americans employed. Like recently the military itself was pushing to cut the purchase of hundreds of new battletanks, because they admit we don't need them. We have one of the largest tank build ups in the world, and tank warfare is not really that feasible anymore, with many of these new tanks being stockpiled and never actually being deployed anywhere. Yet the politicians didn't want to lose out on the billions in contracts and voter jobs so they ignored the militaries own advice. So hundreds of new tanks are being made, billions spent, and majority of it is going to be stored away somewhere to likely never be used.

But when it comes time to cut budgets, they don't cut the wasteful projects and spending, they cut benefits and shit from our military men and women.

Poor argument...hum...

So what should we spend billions on that won't be outsourced out the country? So far nothing else.

You guys are fairly clueless on how this works. Its not like most of these places are a Stark Enterprise where they make weapons of death. Most of these places make a couple of fittings, a electrical motor, few gears, a couple of wheels and without steady work they will cut American jobs or close entire factories that support towns.

It has nothing to do with what we should be spending on, it's all about we spend way too much money on military. Our Government is driving the value of our money into the ground, the rest of the world wants to pull the dollar away from being the world currency for exchange because of its continual decline. Government is not spending money it has, it's spending more than it has, it's just printing money and taking loans, all while murdering the value of it all. Military is a huge source of over spending.

 

[ronito]

Obama is just weakening us to make us easier to conquer

 

[pigeon interrupted]

Yup, they recently said they want to replace a shit ton of troops with robots by 2030. That's only 16 years away.

U.S. Army general says robots could replace one-fourth of combat soldiers by 2030: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/robotic...eral-says-robots-may-replace-combat-soldiers/

Wow. So much for carrying soldiers' kits. Wasn't there some kind of international charter drawn up to erm prevent this? Please :'(

 

[DarkFlow]

What benefits does it even have over the F22? The F22 is complete air superiority in the world right now...

Well the F-22 was really only designed to shot other planes out of the sky and that's it. The F-35 was supposed to be more a F-15 and be a multi role fighter, meaning it could shot you out of the sky, then go bomb a building or something.

 

[Epsilon-delta]

You realize there's not a country on earth that comes close to our navy power right? We can afford to downsize without losing significant strength abroad. This isn't an all or nothing game, especially when you compare US carriers to the rest of the world.

Yup. I don't how many times it needs to be repeated that no nation on earth compares to our Navy. Our carriers, attack, and nuke subs alone makes us the greatest Navy and that's not even counting our amphibs, cruisers, combat, destroyers or frigates.

What I don't agree with is that these cuts seem like it will raise the cost of living for retirees and active duty personnel.

 

[biggersmaller]

Needs to read:

Pentagon potentially to reduce size of the US Army to pre-World War II levels with congressional approval

Plus, there is no way this will pass legislation unless the Chinese get that bridge built of over the Long Island Sound.

 

[eBay Huckster]

So what should we spend billions on that won't be outsourced out the country?

Domestic infrastructure seems like a really good place to start.

 

[Fenderputty]

Poor argument...hum...

So what should we spend billions on that won't be outsourced out the country? So far nothing else.

You guys are fairly clueless on how this works. Its not like most of these places are a Stark Enterprise where they make weapons of death. Most of these places make a couple of fittings, a electrical motor, few gears, a couple of wheels and without steady work they will cut American jobs or close entire factories that support towns.

Infrastructure spending.


Edit ... Damit huckster.

 

[paile]

Bet conservatives crying salty tears. They love their little military.

 

[Guevara]

I've already been seeing paranoid conspiracies about how wicked Obama is defunding the military while building up a private Homeland Defense brigade of soldiers that he will personally control.

Change the wording here a little bit and this doesn't sound paranoid enough to me.

 

[Ravek]

Well the F-22 was really only designed to shot other planes out of the sky and that's it. The F-35 was supposed to be more a F-15 and be a multi role fighter, meaning it could shot you out of the sky, then go bomb a building or something.

Um...the 22 part is mostly true. Its main mission is air to air, but it can do air to ground no problem.

The 35 part is true because that's what its intended to do. However, most of the AF knows that's bullshit and don't want the piece of shit.

Additionally, its interesting that they're cutting all the these soldiers and the A-10. Only because the Army values the A-10 more than the AF.

 

[massoluk]

Nice, there's change I can believe in.

 

[Tesseract]

and the job losses continue, this is gonna be a rough decade.

 

[Archer]

Yes, that's what we call the "war machine". Those people should be put to work on things that more directly benefit the American people

 

[DarkFlow]

Um...the 22 part is mostly true. Its main mission is air to air, but it can do air to ground no problem.

The 35 part is true because that's what its intended to do. However, most of the AF knows that's bullshit and don't want the piece of shit.

Additionally, its interesting that they're cutting all the these soldiers and the A-10. Only because the Army values the A-10 more than the AF.

Oh I know the F-22 COULD do it, but it's not as good at it as say a F-15. As for the F-35, they stretched that thing too thin trying to get it to fit different branches needs. If they had focused on one thing, say a Navel F-35 and none of the VTOL bullshit it would have came out just fine I think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(CVN-80)

 

[TacticalFox88]

Oh I know the F-22 COULD do it, but it's not as good at it as say a F-15. As for the F-35, they stretched that thing too thin trying to get it to fit different branches needs. If they had focused on one thing, say a Navel F-35 and none of the VTOL bullshit it would have came out just fine I think.

You're confusing the F-15 with the F-16.

F-15 is an air superiority fighter, and the 22 is the replacement for it.

The F-16 is a multi-role fighter that does it job extremely well, which is why every backwater Air Force in the world uses them.

 

[DarkFlow]

You're confusing the F-15 with the F-16.

F-15 is an air superiority fighter, and the 22 is the replacement for it.

The F-16 is a multi-role fighter that does it job extremely well, which is why every backwater Air Force in the world uses them.

I'm not confusing it, I'm saying it's not as good as something made for that role... The Strike Eagle is a multi role fighter. Guess I should have put E after it, my bad.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-15E_Strike_Eagle

 

[Charcoal]

There's talk like this after every major conflict. I don't remember the saying off hand, but it's something like America has been involved in a military conflict every 4-5 years since WWII.

 

[Dishwalla]

Can't say I like it too much, considering the retention factor. Now it's going to be even harder to stay in, even though I just want to reenlist long enough to do a few years of shore duty and then get out.

lmao at considering scrapping the George Washington. It was only finished in 1990 you dumb fucks.

And the Navy only has 10 carriers not 11. Enterprise was sent for decom

And at least two of them, the Ike and the Lincoln, are not battle ready at the present time, both are in an extended yard period.

 

[Necrovex]

A little bit funny, I was going through the hoops of becoming an officer in the Army. I even had the physical taken care of before I decided that route wasn't for me. If I hadn't made that decision a week back, and decided with Peace Corps, I would be possibly sad by this news. But now, I can say hell yeah, a lesser force is a wiser choice.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

I'm not confusing it, I'm saying it's not as good as something made for that role.

The F15 is not made for that role, though.

Are you confusing with the modified F15E Strike Eagle?

Edit:

Oh you noticed. Well a modified F22 for multirole missions was on the table at one point.

 

[Alienous]

Now execute phase 2. We build a fleet of robot soldiers made from nuclear missiles.

Unstoppable.

 

[DarkFlow]

The F15 is not made for that role, though.

Are you confusing with the modified F15E Strike Eagle?

Yeah I fixed it, when I think f-15 I think of the Strike Eagle because I used them in Iraq to call in Air strikes.

 

[Fenderputty]

It has nothing to do with what we should be spending on, it's all about we spend way too much money on military. Our Government is driving the value of our money into the ground, the rest of the world wants to pull the dollar away from being the world currency for exchange because of its continual decline. Government is not spending money it has, it's spending more than it has, it's just printing money and taking loans, all while murdering the value of it all. Military is a huge source of over spending.

It has everything to do with what we should be spending money on. The rest of you comment is a hyperbolic mess. Do you even know what the current rate of inflation is?

 

[Cimeas]

Now shift all that money to NASA

And America might be respected by the world again.

 

[layzie1989]

Isn't an important part of this that if nothing is changed that sequestration will happen and force even more cuts to the defense budget? Seems like the pro-defense people are screwed either way...

 

[FStop7]

We'll just outsource to more contractors.

 

[Prinz Eugn]

There was a thread about the A-10 cuts a couple months ago: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=733687

Congress will always interfere in proposed military cuts because what makes sense at a national scale isn't necessarily what's best for your district's willingness to vote for you.

 

[Octavion Rex]

Bet conservatives crying salty tears. They love their little military.

This has nothing to do with party line. This is about cutting off the dead meat of the military and making it more effective and stream line. The way I see it, the battlefield is changing, a large force in country, is good for conflict with a standard military and not an enemy who hides and uses guerrilla tactics. Disadvantage....draft during war time will be more likely (maybe) among the other obvious disadvantages.
The Navy is our true power.

 

[Epsilon-delta]

Can't say I like it too much, considering the retention factor. Now it's going to be even harder to stay in, even though I just want to reenlist long enough to do a few years of shore duty and then get out.


And at least two of them, the Ike and the Lincoln, are not battle ready at the present time, both are in an extended yard period.

Yes, reenlist for a few years and buckle down on saving as much as you can. When you get out, you'll have your Post 9/11 GI Bill waiting for you.

Civilian life is not as bad as the lifers in the military tell you. As long as you have a plan and some savings, the transition from military to civilian life is easily doable.

 

[TacticalFox88]

This has nothing to do with party line. This is about cutting off the dead meat of the military and making it more effective and stream line. The way I see it, the battlefield is changing, a large force in country, is good for conflict with a standard military and not an enemy who hides and uses guerrilla tactics. Disadvantage....draft during war time will be more likely (maybe) among the other obvious disadvantages.
The Navy is our true power.

No its not.

It's the Air Force.

 

[Ravek]

Oh I know the F-22 COULD do it, but it's not as good at it as say a F-15. As for the F-35, they stretched that thing too thin trying to get it to fit different branches needs. If they had focused on one thing, say a Navel F-35 and none of the VTOL bullshit it would have came out just fine I think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(CVN-80)

As you've noted, the F-15E is a beast. As far as the A,B,C models for the F-35... there are still weight and avionics issues. Actually, I think the UK is getting their own version too.
Regardless its a piece of shit that no command really wants.

Back on topic: a lot of you are down for smaller military. I get that, makes sense. Please remember the "grunts" though. The guys on the flightline, in the field, on the other side of the wire, in the middle of old blue. The ones who take orders and not give them. They aren't the problem. What military members make and cost to train is pennies in the overall defense budget.

 

[speculawyer]

Sounds like we are largely firing inexpensive soldiers to protect a lot of fancy weapons.

I guess that is fine. We can always rehire soldiers.