The topic formerly about the YF-23
- Thread starter donnage99
- Start date
Being a foreigner might permit me offering a neutral , though maybe not an unbiased , opinion.
First of all , where are the experts that should have come forward and underlined that Martians are not chimps ? One is accustomed to see references to overall American superiority , but this was IMHO an unnecessary analogy . The world can produce enough competition for America ; lack of need should not be confused with lack of capability or , even worse , lack of will . And of course for the unwary , the genetic relatives can still cause enough surprise ...
Americans should spend a little more effort convincing world that the current phase is not merely a whitewash to allow some rest and recuparation to uniletarilism . If not , the next 911 could be far more professional and talking of mutual economic interests don't carry much weight either .The reputed existance of business ties didn't stop the original hijackers back that September . And the Raptor force didn't do much to stop the Russians before they trampled the Georgians . And poor Saakashvili had to waste a good tie chewing it on TV . It is really doubtful if even 300 F-22s could have saved the tie . Well , USA can still beat anyone , but when the question is asked with will instead of can , it becomes a new game . Proxy warfare is thousands of years old and even in places where Americans operated without any hindrance , the going is not that smooth . Quite a few in Afghanistan expect the Allied troops out by the end of 2011 with or without McChrystal's possible "mission failure within 12 months ".
Respect for United States is a far better weapon , when compared to F-22 or anything Raptor is compared to . It should not be squandered with some futile belief that love / liking will be coerced out of people . The other option makes sure of use and inevitable decay of weaponry .
Raptor is dead , hopefully its death will allow a "better" American mindset regarding use of power .
First of all , where are the experts that should have come forward and underlined that Martians are not chimps ? One is accustomed to see references to overall American superiority , but this was IMHO an unnecessary analogy . The world can produce enough competition for America ; lack of need should not be confused with lack of capability or , even worse , lack of will . And of course for the unwary , the genetic relatives can still cause enough surprise ...
Americans should spend a little more effort convincing world that the current phase is not merely a whitewash to allow some rest and recuparation to uniletarilism . If not , the next 911 could be far more professional and talking of mutual economic interests don't carry much weight either .The reputed existance of business ties didn't stop the original hijackers back that September . And the Raptor force didn't do much to stop the Russians before they trampled the Georgians . And poor Saakashvili had to waste a good tie chewing it on TV . It is really doubtful if even 300 F-22s could have saved the tie . Well , USA can still beat anyone , but when the question is asked with will instead of can , it becomes a new game . Proxy warfare is thousands of years old and even in places where Americans operated without any hindrance , the going is not that smooth . Quite a few in Afghanistan expect the Allied troops out by the end of 2011 with or without McChrystal's possible "mission failure within 12 months ".
Respect for United States is a far better weapon , when compared to F-22 or anything Raptor is compared to . It should not be squandered with some futile belief that love / liking will be coerced out of people . The other option makes sure of use and inevitable decay of weaponry .
Raptor is dead , hopefully its death will allow a "better" American mindset regarding use of power .
donnage99
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 16 June 2008
- Messages
- 1,300
- Reaction score
- 678
The argument is not whether we will forever have american superiority by default, but that without additional raptors, can we maintain air superiority. If it's about the blind faith in american superiority, than I would have suggested cancelling both raptors and f-35. We can't just dump billions of dollars based on unfounded and vague comments like "but we don't know what will happen" or "genetic relatives can still cause surprise." I don't know what will happen exactly, but I know that native intelligence dictates that no country can jump leap decades of technological advancements that are keys to build 5th generation aircraft with a portion of our budget and a far weaker industrial base. In the link that links to my post, I demonstrated how the f-35 achieves its affordability, neither the pak-fa nor j-xx have these characteristics.mkurt said:
As for saying that economic ties didn't stop the 911 hijackers. That's completely irrelevant. First of all, we don't have any economic ties with Afganistan, much less to the point of china. Secondly of all, the hijackers and their planners are driven by religious extreme ideals. Even if we do have economic ties with Afgan to the point of china, these religious extremists still wouldn't give a damn. And yes, f-22 doesn't do much to help giving russia the second thought. I don't think even 700 more raptors would have stopped them from attacking Georgia. So the argument that f-22 can give us some nuclear deterrent like capability is whacked.
donnage99 said:
I will not challenge the first .
Bin Laden turned against USA at the time when Americans were talking far too much about bringing stability to the Horn of Africa , causing some growing powers with aspirations in the area to have some doubts about Washington . Considering Al Queda arrived in Somalia only as mercenaries paid by goverments or the long winded talks about reforming the Arab world after 911 , I think , the second point is undiscussible in this forum ; just like their so called ideals . However vauge it may be ...
The third is no contest either . The general tone has been against the F-22's continued production , isn't it so ?
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,937
- Reaction score
- 11,130
mkurt said:
No, it isn't so. Have you actually read anything on the topic? Obama and his yes-man Gates are the only ones who want to kill it. Everybody else says we need to buy more of them. The USAF, the think tanks, the pilots, basically anybody who has anything to do with planning the future of airpower in the US says we need more. The whole "the F-22 hasn't bombed camels in Afghanistan" line of reasoning is so . . .well to be polite "uninformed/misguided" that it hardly deserves commenting on.
Hammer Birchgrove
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 13 May 2009
- Messages
- 583
- Reaction score
- 43
Well, lots of Congressmen and Jon Stewart (sferrin said:
) are against the F-22 too.Demon Lord Razgriz
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 31 October 2008
- Messages
- 188
- Reaction score
- 12
Hammer Birchgrove said:Well, lots of Congressmen and Jon Stewart (sferrin said:
Don't know about Steward's position, but Congressmen are not good examples of how to determine how many planes we need. They're only looking out for their states. I think like 95% of Congressmen are lawyers who's never really looked futher than the dollar signs.
There's more I'd say, but it'd likely get me banned.
- Joined
- 18 March 2008
- Messages
- 3,529
- Reaction score
- 897
donnage99 said:
I'm impressed. I've found someone on the internet that is more willing than I am to argue points with the great trollish masses of the uninformed and opinionated.
Congratulations donage99; your commitment to fair and reasonable knowledge does you credit though no doubt no reward.
Demon Lord Razgriz
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 31 October 2008
- Messages
- 188
- Reaction score
- 12
You two talking about my comment? ???
- Joined
- 27 December 2005
- Messages
- 17,066
- Reaction score
- 22,577
I think it was mainly direct at this comment:
If studying aeronautical history has taught me anything, it has cured me of the notion that an armed service ever agreed unanimously on anything. Like any group of people, there are always dissenters, and no aircraft project is ever completely supported except in hindsight.
To talk of the USAF as if they are a single mind is just wrong. Do all USAF transport pilots support the F-22, even if it costs the USAF much needed airlift capability? I don't think so. Even in the fighter community there will be those who think the F-35 might be a more flexible weapons system.
If studying aeronautical history has taught me anything, it has cured me of the notion that an armed service ever agreed unanimously on anything. Like any group of people, there are always dissenters, and no aircraft project is ever completely supported except in hindsight.
To talk of the USAF as if they are a single mind is just wrong. Do all USAF transport pilots support the F-22, even if it costs the USAF much needed airlift capability? I don't think so. Even in the fighter community there will be those who think the F-35 might be a more flexible weapons system.
- Joined
- 18 March 2008
- Messages
- 3,529
- Reaction score
- 897
Demon Lord Razgriz said:
I'm not talking about anyone's specific comments, though I think virtually all of them in this thread are wrong, simplistic and no good for nothing. I'm just amazed that donage99 has stayed with this thread from its early days and responded to all the posts saying the end is nigh and so on...
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,937
- Reaction score
- 11,130
overscan said:
True, transport pilots and others had differing opinions, but then transport pilots weren't the ones called on to make that decision, nor should they have been. And while my saying "everyone" was an exaggeration that should have been obvious, and perhaps I should have written "pretty much everybody who MATTERED" instead, it doesn't change the fact that the final number was determined by a politician who had no idea what the actual USAF requirement was. That is also obvious. As for others implying that this is a much more complicated subject warranting discussion by only the most high-brow "intellectuals", boiled down it's not exactly a mystery to even Joe Blow on the street. The people who are paid to know the requirement, and indeed DO know the requirement, have been ignored and told in essence "keep your mouth shut unless we tell you what to say or get fired", and the final number was determined by a politcian based on matters OTHER than the actual requirement.
Lampshade111
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 5 October 2008
- Messages
- 151
- Reaction score
- 17
Abraham Gubler said:
He hasn't exactly provided an optimistic response to the "end is nigh" discussion. It is still a sad indication of where our country is heading in my opinion. He was simply saying we can't afford more due to it's cost, which I strongly disagree with, but that discussion will just go in circles.
sferrin said:
And who sets the criteria by which the requirement is determined? You can't just quote some random requirement without also quoting the circumstances surrounding it and who came up with it and why. There's also the fact that those requirements must fit into other requirements and if they don't, then what happens is what fits the most constrictive set of final requirements.
