Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
June 27, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

Truthdig Bazaar more items

Email this item Print this item

Weapons ‘R’ Us: Making Warbirds Instead of Thunderbirds

Posted on Jan 26, 2012
titanium22 (CC-BY)

By William Astore, TomDispatch

(Page 2)

As one U.S. Air Force officer who served as an advisor to the fledging Iraqi Air Force, or IqAF, recently worried:

“Will the IqAF be able to refuel its own aircraft? Can the Iraqi military offer adequate force protection and security for its bases? Can the IqAF provide airfield management services at its bases as they return to Iraqi control after eight years under US direction? Can the IqAF ensure simple power generation to keep facilities operating? Will the IqAF be able to develop and retain its airmen?... Only time will tell if we left [Iraq] too early; nevertheless, even without a renewed security agreement, the USAF can continue to stand alongside the IqAF.”

Put bluntly: We doubt the Iraqis are ready to field and fly American-built F-16s, but we’re going to sell them to them anyway.  And if past history is a guide, if the Iraqis ever turn these planes against us, we’ll blow them up or shoot them down—and then (hopefully) sell them some more.

Our Best Arms Customer


Square, Site wide, Desktop


Square, Site wide, Mobile
Let’s face it: the weapons we sell to others pale in comparison to the weapons we sell to ourselves.  In the market for deadly weapons, we are our own best customer.  Americans have a love affair with them, the more high-tech and expensive, the better.  I should know.  After all, I’m a recovering weapons addict.

Well into my teen years, I was fascinated by military hardware.  I built models of what were then the latest U.S. warplanes: the A-10, the F-4, the F-14, -15, and -16, the B-1, and many others.  I read Aviation Week and Space Technology at my local library to keep track of the newest developments in military technology.  Not surprisingly, perhaps, I went on to major in mechanical engineering in college and entered the Air Force as a developmental engineer.

Enamored as I was by roaring afterburners and sleek weaponry, I also began to read books like James Fallows’s National Defense (1981) among other early critiques of the Carter and Reagan defense buildup, as well as the slyly subversive and always insightful Augustine’s Laws (1986) by Norman Augustine, later the CEO of Martin Marietta and Lockheed Martin.  That and my own experience in the Air Force alerted me to the billions of dollars we were devoting to high-tech weaponry with ever-ballooning price tags but questionable utility.

Perhaps the best example of the persistence of this phenomenon is the F-35 Lightning II.  Produced by Lockheed Martin, the F-35 was intended to be an “affordable” fighter-bomber (at roughly $50 million per copy), a perfect complement to the much more expensive F-22 “air superiority” Raptor.  But the usual delays, cost overruns, technical glitches, and changes in requirements have driven the price tag of the F-35 up to $160 million per plane, assuming the U.S. military persists in its plans to buy 2,400 of them.  (If the Pentagon decides to buy fewer, the cost-per-plane will soar into the F-22 range.)  By recent estimates the F-35 will now cost U.S. taxpayers (you and me, that is) at least $382 billion for its development and production run.  Such a sum for a single weapons system is vast enough to be hard to fathom.  It would, for instance, easily fund all federal government spending on education for the next five years.

The escalating cost of the F-35 recalls the most famous of Norman Augustine’s irreverent laws: “In the year 2054,” he wrote back in the early 1980s, “the entire defense budget will [suffice to] purchase just one aircraft.”  But the deeper question is whether our military even needs the F-35, a question that’s rarely asked and never seriously entertained, at least by Congress, whose philosophy on weaponry is much like King Lear’s: “O, reason not the need.”

But let’s reason the need in purely military terms.  These days, the Air Force is turning increasingly to unmanned drones.  Meanwhile, plenty of perfectly good and serviceable “platforms” remain for attack and close air support missions, from F-16s and F-18s in the Air Force and Navy to Apache helicopters in the Army.  And while many of our existing combat jets may be nearing the limits of airframe integrity, there’s nothing stopping the U.S. military from producing updated versions of the same.  Heck, this is precisely what we’re hawking to the Saudis—updated versions of the F-15, developed in the 1970s.

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments
LocalHero's avatar

By LocalHero, January 29, 2012 at 4:17 pm Link to this comment

Unfortunately, even Astore never gets around to what really needs to be said.

The fact is, we don’t need ANY of this horrendous, death-dealing junk. We’ll never grow up as a species until the very idea of being a “soldier” is the equivalent of aspiring to be a pedophile. In my view, they are morally equivalent. Well, ok, soldier is worse.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, January 28, 2012 at 4:33 am Link to this comment

“The very image of decay and death-by-fire.”

How very accurate.
Also, looks like the Obamagon and the Zionists are planning a repeat of the USS
Liberty, this time in the Arabian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman.  Sending the USS Enterprise
into the area, just prior to retirement, suggests that it and its several thousand, American
crew will be presently expended.  Having Israeli jets, this time with Iranian or Syrian
markings sink the Enterprise, as they tried with the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967,  in
international waters 15 miles off the Sinai Peninsula, would be misused as grounds to
attack Iran.  Also, sinking the humongous Enterprise, with its five nuclear reactors,
would pollute the area, and restrict usage considerably, a long-term punitive action
against Arabs.  Actions typical of Hitler-types. 

With a few more trumped up fairy tales about Iranian and Moslem terrorists in the US
invented by the FBI, the Obama entourage might even declare martial law in the US. 
Of course, in order to “protect” Americans.  After which, patriotic Americans would
begin to be hauled off as were the innocent Jewish folk by the Hitler NAZI
administration in Germany, 1930s-1940s..  All of which would pre-empt the need for a
2012 US presidential election.

If you think these ideas are simply dreaming, you have not read “Extreme Prejudice” by
the CIA Whistle-Blower, Ms. Susan Lindauer.  She reveals the plans of the George H. W.
Bush Sr. entourage from prior to the CIA destruction of the Pan American Boeing 747
over Lockerbie, Scotland, 21 December 1988, through the planned destruction of Libya
and Muammar Al Gadhaffi, which occurred Oct, 2011.  The book is available at your
local bookstore at a reasonable price.

Insiders and associates sometimes wonder whatever happened to the patriotism of the
American soldier who was “ colonel for one day”  ???

Report this

By gerard, January 26, 2012 at 12:20 pm Link to this comment

Quote-unquote: “By recent estimates the F-35 will now cost U.S. taxpayers (you and me, that is) at least $382 billion for its development and production run.  Such a sum for a single weapons system is vast enough to be hard to fathom.  It would, for instance, easily fund all federal government spending on education for the next five years.”

The very image of decay and death-by-fire. And Obama tries to tell us that “those who say that America is in decline, don’t know what they are talking about!” (or words to that effect in the recent SOU speech.)

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide