ScienceRocks
Democrat all the way!
- Banned
- #121
He should give them plastic body armor and sell the tanks to china.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Republicans always fuck over our vets. Democrats have a far far far better record of actually helping them & protecting them.It's laughable to think a bunch of liberals giving a shit about our servicemen.Trump is going to have our soldiers fight with the cheaper option.
And you assholes defend it.
My God
So, what is our intererest in allowing peipe to starve or get slaughtered by tyrants?no, it isn't. it is just another layer of "government".Should we insist on a security agreement with the UN, to lower costs?Really...? This is what you bring......
You really think that we are getting quality for the money we are paying these companies? That the cost over runs, the shoddy work can't be better dealt with than just continuing the same crappy system where they buy politicians, get the government contract then screw us over....you think that you are defending our troops by defending this system...
Please...try again....
Not to mention, that high tech jet fighters are NOT what is required for our current and likely wars. It's not like ISIS is going to contest our air superiority.
The UN is our enemy.
No, it is not.
It is an organization dominated by people who want to advance their interests at the cost of ours.
Actually, dick Cheney slashed our military as Sec of Defense under HW Bush far more than it was cut under Bill Clinton (6 years with Republican congresses).Let's remember why our military didn't have the equipment. Clinton was handed a strong military and cut spending big time. Then handed Bush a recession and 911.Oh how fasrt the right jumps down the military's throat to protect their Orange Leader. First the generals are all so stupid that Trump knew more about ISIS than they did, POWs aren't heroes, and now our military fights with junk.So, genius, how do they lower the cost?Hey Dave! Cheaper does not equal inferior. If you think about it, you would agree. If you don't like PEOTUS, find a legitimate reason to complain.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
1) fewer features?
2) cheaper materials
3) Pay all those working on the roject minimum wage?
I laugfh at you for defending Triump on this. You want to sendf our troops to war with inferior eq
They always have inferior equipment.......Trump might actually be able to fix this.
But hey, you are the same ones that said it was alright to send troops into Iraq without proper armor on vehicles & without protective gear for our soldiers.
Republicans always fuck over our vets. Democrats have a far far far better record of actually helping them & protecting them.It's laughable to think a bunch of liberals giving a shit about our servicemen.Trump is going to have our soldiers fight with the cheaper option.
And you assholes defend it.
My God
Reubliss like to talk about our vets then they elect a POW bashing POS.
Do some research. Become better informed.Republicans always fuck over our vets. Democrats have a far far far better record of actually helping them & protecting them.It's laughable to think a bunch of liberals giving a shit about our servicemen.Trump is going to have our soldiers fight with the cheaper option.
And you assholes defend it.
My God
Reubliss like to talk about our vets then they elect a POW bashing POS.
And that is a lie.........anyone who thinks that is either lying intentionally, or is just too stupid to know the truth.
You read all those bills, right? Problem is a LOT of shit gets tacked on to the bills so libs can cry evil when the Republicans refuse to go along with it. with Trump we'll have a better chance of actually getting more done.The rejected Bills are named:
yes, the entire right wing always fails to advance a second wave; to help secure the concept of natural rights, whenever it is not specifically about guns.equal protection of the law makes it easier for the poor, on an at-will basis.the poor don't invent social policy; they just play by those rules.It is weird how this draft dodger is surrounding himself with military men too, reminds one of that other coward, Dick Cheney.
Life in Post Truth America - Does anyone find it ironic that the man who will now travel on your taxes pays none.
He didn't invent the tax rules, he just played by them.
I'm well aware of that, and want to change the rules to make it easier for them.
Is anyone arguing against equal protection of the law?
Should we modularize our arms industry, and have the commanding heights of heavier industries, reserved to federal and State armories. Gains could be achieved from standardization of heavier parts, under direct government control.After spending 400 billion on the F35 design development, and production of the first plane for fight testing, the pentagon is not about to scrap the program for two reason. First, there are no other good alternatives for the Air Force and Marines and secondly the plane offers great promise despite the plane missing the mark during flight test. For the pentagon to cancel the contract and pay Lockheed cancellation costs and rebid would make no sense because Lockheed would very likely be the low bidder since no other manufacturer will know the plane as well as the company that designed and built it. Negotiating with Lockheed is probably the Pentagon's best bet.Faced with the possible loss of this huge contract, anyone think that the Military pulling out of the F-35 program might be a negotiation tactic to get costs down and production more efficient while saving taxpayers money?
Naw, couldn't be that at all.....
Republicans always fuck over our vets. Democrats have a far far far better record of actually helping them & protecting them.It's laughable to think a bunch of liberals giving a shit about our servicemen.Trump is going to have our soldiers fight with the cheaper option.
And you assholes defend it.
My God
Reubliss like to talk about our vets then they elect a POW bashing POS.
Nah you folks just don't understand that abortion, date rape drugs and butt f^&king are NOT natural rightsyes, the entire right wing always fails to advance a second wave; to help secure the concept of natural rights, whenever it is not specifically about guns.equal protection of the law makes it easier for the poor, on an at-will basis.the poor don't invent social policy; they just play by those rules.He didn't invent the tax rules, he just played by them.
I'm well aware of that, and want to change the rules to make it easier for them.
Is anyone arguing against equal protection of the law?
yes and no.........do land based air forces need multirole aircraft?
It is the right wing that enacted an alleged, Patriot Act.Nah you folks just don't understand that abortion, date rape drugs and butt f^&king are NOT natural rightsyes, the entire right wing always fails to advance a second wave; to help secure the concept of natural rights, whenever it is not specifically about guns.equal protection of the law makes it easier for the poor, on an at-will basis.the poor don't invent social policy; they just play by those rules.
I'm well aware of that, and want to change the rules to make it easier for them.
Is anyone arguing against equal protection of the law?
The point is, there are no space restrictions and thus, no multirole requirements for land based air forces; i assume full employment of resources in general scenarios.yes and no.........do land based air forces need multirole aircraft?
Imagine you are a pilot and are on a mission to attack enemy targets...........
That assumption has been squashed by requests from the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and etc...........Requesting and demanding the need for Multi Role Aircraft over single mission aircraft...........The point is, there are no space restrictions and thus, no multirole requirements for land based air forces; i assume full employment of resources in general scenarios.yes and no.........do land based air forces need multirole aircraft?
Imagine you are a pilot and are on a mission to attack enemy targets...........
we may just be quibbling over semantics. even bombers have self defense capabilities not just bombing capabilities.That assumption has been squashed by requests from the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and etc...........Requesting and demanding the need for Multi Role Aircraft over single mission aircraft...........The point is, there are no space restrictions and thus, no multirole requirements for land based air forces; i assume full employment of resources in general scenarios.yes and no.........do land based air forces need multirole aircraft?
Imagine you are a pilot and are on a mission to attack enemy targets...........
They want fighter Attack capabilities on the path finders into the conflict.......to destroy threats.......and then bring in the heavies...........B1's.....B52's and bring massive payloads to the enemy.
The U.S. Department of Defense responded by accelerating its Rapid Deployment Forces concept but suffered from major problems with airlift and sealift capability.[53] In order to slow an enemy invasion of other countries, air power was critical; however the key Iran-Afghanistan border was outside the range of the U.S. Navy's carrier-based attack aircraft, leaving this role to the U.S. Air Force. Although the B-52 had the range to support on-demand global missions, its long runway requirements limited the forward basing possibilities.[54]