Why are we building a new bomber?

Henning

Henning

Taxi to Parking
Gone West
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
39,463
Location
Ft Lauderdale FL
Display Name
Display name:
iHenning
What is the purpose? The only reason given was it's supposed to be cheaper than the B-2, but that was the F-35 story as well, we needed it because it was 1/3rd of the price of an F-22, but it has ended up triple the price, and I suspect this new bomber will be similarly fated.

Besides, we lost the Cold War finally unless we want to execute MAD. The Chinese and Russians have taken the lead militarily and financially, and I say, "let them have it." We seriously can't afford this crap anymore. Eisenhower warned us, Kennedy warned us, but we ignored them, and now we are already impotent in our power. We cannot defeat the Chinese without going nuclear and they know it, and even in a nuclear exchange, China stands a better chance of survival. Wasting trillions of dollars on a new bomber program at this point is just throwing good money after bad. Time to find a new industry to spend money on, like urban agriculture.
 
Because in 10-15 years the B-2 will be old and tired.....and it will take 10-15 years to see a new design fly.
 
I flew over Whiteman AFB a few weeks ago and got to watch a B2 take off. Was very neat....
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
Because in 10-15 years the B-2 will be old and tired.....and it will take 10-15 years to see a new design fly.
Click to expand...

It will still be cheaper to build/refurb more B-2s than develop a new bomber that has no occupational advantage over the B-2. We don't need any of this crap anyway, get it? We just lost, all we have left is bluster and nukes, we don't need to waste money on new platforms when the ones we already have leave us impotent with power. Until we can accept and overcome the attrition that China can both cause and absorb, no new bomber will serve us. This is the new reality of the 21st Century, the US has failed to adapt and overcome therefor has slid into second place, and when we finally lose petrodollar reserve currency status (which is what their involvement in Syria and the South China Sea is all about) the US will slide fully into second tier state status, a has been.

We thought we won the Cold War with Peristroyka, but really, the Commies just changed the game book and played to the greedy, and have bested them for economic control.
 
Last edited:
Because the federal government believes it can spend its way out of debt.
 
Tom-D said:
Because the federal government believes it can spend its way out of debt.
Click to expand...

The job of the government as run by the Federal Reserve is to increase debt as well as currency in circulation, because that is how they make money off of making it up. America of the revolution is nothing but a fantasy anymore. The revolution was lost in 1913 and the country is back in the fold of Rothschild run central banks like the rest of the world except our current enemy list. This is why the Founders did not want a central bank or standing army, and forbade fiat currency.
 
Henning said:
Besides, we lost the Cold War finally unless we want to execute MAD. The Chinese and Russians have taken the lead militarily and financially, and I say, "let them have it."
Click to expand...

No insight on the bomber, but you might try getting some perspective on this extraordinary statement? The cold war ended with the disoloution of the USSR, and the Chinese embracing capitalism, quite a while back. Dude, you're on the winning side! The commies lost; all gone, except Cuba, and that's a death watch. Unless you count France, of course (just stealing the old joke about Fance being the only country where communism worked. And please, no flames on the diffrence between commies and socialists). . .

Russia is a hot mess, econimically and politically; the Chinese can't get a grip on corruption, their gruesome environmental issues, and couldn't (yet) project meaningful force much beyond their closest horizon.
 
Sundancer said:
No insight on the bomber, but you might try getting some perspective on this extraordinary statement? The cold war ended with the disoloution of the USSR, and the Chinese embracing capitalism, quite a while back. Dude, you're on the winning side! The commies lost; all gone, except Cuba, and that's a death watch. Unless you count France, of course (just stealing the old joke about Fance being the only country where communism worked. And please, no flames on the diffrence between commies and socialists). . .

Russia is a hot mess, econimically and politically; the Chinese can't get a grip on corruption, their gruesome environmental issues, and couldn't (yet) project meaningful force much beyond their closest horizon.
Click to expand...

No it didn't, the game just changed, they couldn't beat the greedy, so they let greedy beat themselves. The Chinese have never strayed from Communism for a moment, they are just letting the capitalists finance it. Putin is and always has been a communist. Even still he holds plant managers responsible to the people who work in the plant.

What we need to do is change our game from a consumption economy to a production economy, and since China has the industrial and economic lead now, but s under strong food and water need, it would behoove us to focus on urban agriculture since we have so much of the potential urban work force not participating. We need to something like this:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/urban-agriculture-and-energy--2/x/10003213#/
 
Henning said:
This is why the Founders did not want a central bank
Click to expand...
Factually incorrect. Clearly the so called "federalists" were of different mind, they wanted the central bank, etc. Hamilton or Adams are their primary representatives, Washington in fact was sympathetic to federalists' ideas though remained out of party politics. Lets not put all "founders" in the same basket. If someone uses the potent combination "the founders did that .." it is meant as an eternal truth and absolute, it ain't. The founders also owned slaves - how long did this idea survive?
 
Last edited:
Welcome to the warfare/welfare state.

1 out of every 4 hours you work funds it :lol:
 
B-52 is 50 years old and has very low survivability. B-1 is no longer nuclear capable. B-2 few in numbers and not capable of meeting all mission requirements of new long range bomber. We did not lose the Cold War and China's and Russia's military are both far less capable than our's unless we sit back and watch them catch up while we grow carrots.
 
Henning said:
The job of the government as run by the Federal Reserve is to increase debt as well as currency in circulation, because that is how they make money off of making it up. America of the revolution is nothing but a fantasy anymore. The revolution was lost in 1913 and the country is back in the fold of Rothschild run central banks like the rest of the world except our current enemy list. This is why the Founders did not want a central bank or standing army, and forbade fiat currency.
Click to expand...

You are so far out of the kitchen you can't smell the cookies.
 
Perezhr said:
B-52 is 50 years old and has very low survivability. B-1 is no longer nuclear capable. B-2 few in numbers and not capable of meeting all mission requirements of new long range bomber. We did not lose the Cold War and China's and Russia's military are both far less capable than our's unless we sit back and watch them catch up while we grow carrots.
Click to expand...

Unless you go nuclear it all comes down to having more bodies then the other side has bullets. Maybe that is why we have open borders, let em all in then draft them.:dunno:
 
Phoenix said:
Unless you go nuclear it all comes down to having more bodies then the other side has bullets. Maybe that is why we have open borders, let em all in then draft them.:dunno:
Click to expand...


True, nuclear would be the great equalizer.
 
Tom-D said:
You are so far out of the kitchen you can't smell the cookies.
Click to expand...

Nope, you are just so fully vested in the military industrial complex, you can't, or won't, see reality. You complain about it all, but it made you your living and pays your retirement. You are part of the national debt.
 
The B-52 at the Miramar airshow this year was built in 1960.
 
Perezhr said:
B-52 is 50 years old and has very low survivability. B-1 is no longer nuclear capable. B-2 few in numbers and not capable of meeting all mission requirements of new long range bomber. We did not lose the Cold War and China's and Russia's military are both far less capable than our's unless we sit back and watch them catch up while we grow carrots.
Click to expand...

A bomber isn't what we need. We need a weapon so drastic it will scare the rags off all the heads in the middle east.
The super death ray that melts iron in a nano second, from orbit.
 
Tom-D said:
A bomber isn't what we need. We need a weapon so drastic it will scare the rags off all the heads in the middle east.
Click to expand...

Like a bag of pork rinds flown under a child's kite? Send em all running to the caves. Too bad we aren't allowed to fight to win.
 
Henning said:
The job of the government as run by the Federal Reserve is to increase debt as well as currency in circulation, because that is how they make money off of making it up. America of the revolution is nothing but a fantasy anymore. The revolution was lost in 1913 and the country is back in the fold of Rothschild run central banks like the rest of the world except our current enemy list. This is why the Founders did not want a central bank or standing army, and forbade fiat currency.
Click to expand...

Henning, love talking to you and respect your opinion in many ways. But you are dead wrong here. I worked for the Federal Reserve. Saw how they operated. Knew what banks would be closed weeks before it occurred. Their job is not to increase debt. Sometimes they have to for monetary policy purposes-but not always. Sometimes they constrict. Sometimes they can change the contemporaneous reserve requirement calculations formula for long term change (but that is drastic). And any money "they make" is transferred back to the Treasure. Then there is regulation of banks, fedwire and other matters.
 
Tom-D said:
A bomber isn't what we need. We need a weapon so drastic it will scare the rags off all the heads in the middle east.
The super death ray that melts iron in a nano second, from orbit.
Click to expand...

In a sense a stealthy bomber is the big bad if you're a 3rd world potentate and are kicking around the idea of jerking on Superman's cape. Fear of the unknown is very strong.

Exactly how stealthy is a stealth bomber?

Could my defenses detect one?

If so, could we down it?

The US military is very good. I wonder if they know where I am 24/7?

Am I secure in my little bunker? I understand the US has bunker buster bombs.

Hmm, maybe I shouldn't do that really naughty thing I was considering...
 
kyleb said:
In a sense a stealthy bomber is the big bad if you're a 3rd world potentate and are kicking around the idea of jerking on Superman's cape. Fear of the unknown is very strong.

Exactly how stealthy is a stealth bomber?

Could my defenses detect one?

If so, could we down it?

The US military is very good. I wonder if they know where I am 24/7?

Am I secure in my little bunker? I understand the US has bunker buster bombs.

Hmm, maybe I shouldn't do that really naughty thing I was considering...
Click to expand...
Smoking people we suspect of thinking like that with drones has done what? If we stealthily bombed their whole village instead of just killing everyone in the same house with a missile would we make more friends? Less enemies? If there are so many of these types in the world that we need a new bomber program why are our borders open? Israel's border fence works great, why not one of those instead of a new bomber?
 
Tom-D said:
A bomber isn't what we need. We need a weapon so drastic it will scare the rags off all the heads in the middle east.
The super death ray that melts iron in a nano second, from orbit.
Click to expand...

:rofl: We already have a weapon that would do that if it was possible. But you see, they still have faith in God, and that means they are more than willing to succumb to that death trying to overthrow our financial system than accept its influence on their society which will cause God to abandon them as with us.

There's one simple rule we break that makes us infidels and subject to jihad, and that is the prohibition on usury, same for the problem with Jews for them. The funny thing is, if we gave up on usury, that frees up a lot of resources for the rest of the economy. We now have the technology to combine energy, water, and currency, to create a true 'open source' commodity backed trade currency that poses no issues to economic expansion, and even has a self regulating feature that follows economic demand through the correlated extra energy typically consumed. Combine that with an extra social benefit value in jobs and housing, cleaner, greener, energy, and a ****load of food, and suddenly you have a social system where everyone is productive in a positive manner, or at least has the opportunity to be, in the growing of food; and suddenly you have created a society that the Qu'ran mandates that Muslims live in peace with, not to mention we'll be better off as well.
 
We need something new to fly over the superbowl and airshows

B2 was so yesterday ....

But seriously, does anyone know exactly how many times a B2 aircraft was actually used in actual combat ? Divide that into the cost of the total project and ask yourself, was it worth it ?
 
Scrabo said:
We need something new to fly over the superbowl and airshows

B2 was so yesterday ....

But seriously, does anyone know exactly how many times a B2 aircraft was actually used in actual combat ? Divide that into the cost of the total project and ask yourself, was it worth it ?
Click to expand...

No, none of this was worth it, it's all protecting a huge lie and global Ponzi scheme that's collapsing as we speak. Eisenhower and Kennedy both warned us, but the ability to incite fear combined with the new medium of television made us buckle to fear, same as we are still controlled and fleeced today. It was all a huge bill of goods. We now have the most powerful Arsenal in the world, and we don't have the ability to stop the Chinese from taking us over, and using our own markets and greed to do it. Hell, let's face it, we can't even beat the Taliban with our multiple trillions of dollars of technology and muscle. We don't stand a chance against the Chinese because we will not use our nuclear weapons (or maybe we will be that stupid, there's plenty of people who would prefer to watch the world end in a nuclear inferno than admit they were duped into believing a lie.

With the same money spent since WWI, we could have fed everyone on the globe, developed safer, cleaner, Thorium nuclear power instead of Uranium, and we could be mining the asteroid belt right now sending materials back to orbit where 3D printers would be building ring worlds in orbit. But we would rather waste everything protecting the aristocracies right to own everything.
 
Last edited:
The cost of the new bomber is chump change compared to what has been spent on "green initiatives", and the bomber actually funds jobs here in the US, who knows where most of the "green" money goes.
 
PaulS said:
The cost of the new bomber is chump change compared to what has been spent on "green initiatives", and the bomber actually funds jobs here in the US, who knows where most of the "green" money goes.
Click to expand...

In companies that go bankrupt, after Obumer get's his share.
 
The cost of the bomber program will exceed a trillion dollars befor it is over. We have never spent anything near that on green energy initiatives, I doubt we have spent that on green energy infrastructure as a global total yet, and green energy infrastructure nets a useful product, and long term returns. A bomber produces nothing and provides on going financial liability. A wind farm can earn, a bomber cannot.
 
PaulS said:
The cost of the new bomber is chump change compared to what has been spent on "green initiatives", and the bomber actually funds jobs here in the US, who knows where most of the "green" money goes.
Click to expand...

It doesn't really fund jobs because the money to pay those people is taken from taxpayers. When the bomber is finished we are not selling it to anyone to actually make a profit on the development costs.
 
Scrabo said:
But seriously, does anyone know exactly how many times a B2 aircraft was actually used in actual combat ?
Click to expand...
Sorry but this is a silly question to ask, this is the same as argument that you don't need a car insurance (or other) insurance since you only keep paying and never drawing any benefits out of it. The military is the 'insurance', when you ever need it it will be too late to ask do we have enough assets, etc. It would have been way too late to start building aircraft carriers in 1941. By the way both B-52, B-1 and B-2 were used in combat, I simply can't provide figure right now but you can look it up.
 
Last edited:
DesertNomad said:
It doesn't really fund jobs because the money to pay those people is taken from taxpayers. When the bomber is finished we are not selling it to anyone to actually make a profit on the development costs.
Click to expand...

You are right about the money being taken from taxpayers, but the jobs are real, the people who have the jobs make money, and the corps that build them make profits. I'm more ok with programs that produce something useful versus green programs where the money is used to fund companies that go bankrupt and produce nothing. Also, many of these weapon systems are sold to other countries, which is not funded by the US taxpayers.
 
Henning said:
Nope, you are just so fully vested in the military industrial complex, you can't, or won't, see reality. You complain about it all, but it made you your living and pays your retirement. You are part of the national debt.
Click to expand...

Every military member that draws a retainer...... earned it.
Just as every worker paid FICA with holding earned what they draw as SS.

Those checks are not entitlements they were earned and paid for with blood sweat and tears.

And shame on you for believing those who gave you your freedom are part of the problem.
 
Henning said:
The cost of the bomber program will exceed a trillion dollars befor it is over. We have never spent anything near that on green energy initiatives, I doubt we have spent that on green energy infrastructure as a global total yet, and green energy infrastructure nets a useful product, and long term returns. A bomber produces nothing and provides on going financial liability. A wind farm can earn, a bomber cannot.
Click to expand...

Obama has spent $140 billion on his initiatives so far.

The new bomber is projected to cost $21.4 billion for engineering, the estimated cost of each bomber will be $511 million each and there will be about 100 built. Add that up and the program is at $75 billion.
 
All must remember that every dime the government spends is your money, and those who spend it, you voted for.

When you don't like that change your vote
 
Phoenix said:
Smoking people we suspect of thinking like that with drones has done what? If we stealthily bombed their whole village instead of just killing everyone in the same house with a missile would we make more friends? Less enemies? If there are so many of these types in the world that we need a new bomber program why are our borders open? Israel's border fence works great, why not one of those instead of a new bomber?
Click to expand...
^^^The man has a point.
Henning isn't half crazy, either.
 
Tom-D said:
And shame on you for believing those who gave you your freedom are part of the problem.
Click to expand...

Perhaps prior to 1990 the military did help protect our freedom, but since then it has done nothing like that. All we are doing now is wasting taxpayer money on pointless adventures in the Mid East. Our military did not prevent 9/11 and a new bomber will do nothing positive for us either.
 
DesertNomad said:
Perhaps prior to 1990 the military did help protect our freedom, but since then it has done nothing like that. All we are doing now is wasting taxpayer money on pointless adventures in the Mid East. Our military did not prevent 9/11 and a new bomber will do nothing positive for us either.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't bring your political view into a discussion about the military purpose.

would you rather they were fought on your property or theirs?

The mismanagement of the military is not the military's fault they do what is asked. When you do not agree with what they have one, blame the head guy.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
All must remember that every dime the government spends is your money, and those who spend it, you voted for.

When you don't like that change your vote
Click to expand...

I have voted in every election possible... Even when I paid $120 to send my ballot DHL from overseas. Nobody I voted for has won office.
 
Tom-D said:
You shouldn't bring your political view into a discussion about the military purpose.

would you rather they were fought on your property or theirs?
Click to expand...

I was commenting on your view that the military protects our freedom. Granted, it is supposed to, but lately is not doing that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top