The first two of 12 US Air Force F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets arrived in Okinawa on Monday. The aircraft will soon begin a six-month deployment in Japan as part of Pacific Command’s “theater security” program.
Is this a red flag for war with North Korea? Suspicions run high as tensions in the area continue to stiffen. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the most expensive and one of the most controversial weapons systems in United States history, is dubbed “the cornerstone” of US defense in the Pacific. But what exactly are we “defending” against?
According to CNN, approximately 300 airmen from Hill Air Force Base, Utah’s 34th Fighter Squadron will accompany the fifth-generation fighters to Kadena Air Base, Japan. The remaining 10 jets are expected to arrive in Okinawa this week, according to Air Force spokesperson Victoria Hight.
This deployment marks the first time that the Air Force’s version of the F-35 has been sent to the region and is meant “to demonstrate the continuing US commitment to stability and security,” according to the service. “The F-35A gives the joint warfighter unprecedented global precision attack capability against current and emerging threats while complementing our air superiority fleet,” said Gen. Terrence J. O’Shaughnessy, Pacific Air Forces commander, earlier this month. “The airframe is ideally suited to meet our command’s obligations, and we look forward to integrating it into our training and operations.”
While the Air Force said its F-35 deployment has been “long-planned,” their arrival comes as President Donald Trump prepares for his first official visit to Japan and amid simmering tensions with North Korea. The coincidences are just a bit much to miss this time.
Perhaps this means a war is imminent, or at the very least, tensions will certainly increase between the US and Pyongyang.
There is always another $27 billion or so lying around, it seems, when Lockheed Martin needs more money for an expensive weapons system.
(COMMONDREAMS) — The nation’s most expensive weapons program isn’t done showing U.S. taxpayers how much it will ultimately cost them, with Bloombergreporting Monday that the F-35 fighter jet budget is now predicted to jump by a cool $27 billion.
Though the estimated future cost of the program had previously hovered at a mind-boggling $379 billion, an updated draft that could be submitted to Congress as early as today will reportedly exceed $406 billion—a nearly 7 percent increase.
The new cost increases may come as a hit to President Donald Trump, who has bragged about his ability to get weapons manufacturers to offer the Pentagon “better deals.”
Rob Garver, national correspondent for the Fiscal Times, made the point this way:
Others simply pointed out how ridiculous it is that a weapons program so fraught with failures is allowed to receive such outlandish funding when lawmakers—mostly Republicans, but also many Democrats—continue to argue that the nation is “too broke” to increase spending on social programs that improve education or healthcare.
We got fucking liberals out here saying single-payer is impossible but remaining pretty quiet on the F-35 being a money pit.
Even if you’ve never heard of the sunk cost fallacy, you’ve definitely been guilty of it at one time or another. We all have. It’s what happens when you spend money or effort on something that doesn’t pay off. However, instead of cutting your losses, you double down and keep flushing your money down the drain because you’re emotionally attached to the project or investment. It’s clearly a waste of money, but because you’ve already spent so much, it feels like it would be a waste to just stop and let it go.
If you’ve ever bought a run down used car, and spent far more in repairs than the original cost of the vehicle, then you know what I’m talking about. We’re all guilty of this, but the sunk cost fallacy becomes especially problematic and wasteful when governments are guilty of it. Then the waste is no longer measured in thousands of dollars.
Though our government has produced plenty of examples of the sunk cost fallacy (the drug war, war on terror, war on poverty, etc), perhaps the most perfect example is the F-35 project. This is a fighter jet that has cost over a trillion dollars to develop since 2001. It was significantly delayed and was completed well over budget. And yet, the aircraft has been mired in technical problems every step of the way.
‘Despite being among the most technologically advanced low-observable warplanes on the planet, the Lockheed Martin F-35 has one significant shortcoming,’ it wrote.
‘The Joint Strike Fighter cannot strike moving ground targets using the targeting system and weapons loadout delivered in its final combat Lightning II configuration, Block 3F.’
The jet has gone through dozens of updates to its software, with the Block 3F being the most recent.
The issue means the aircraft is limited to striking fixed or slow-moving objects such as surface-to-air missiles.
Every time there is a problem with this aircraft, it presents our government with an opportunity to cut its losses and scrap the whole project. But when you’ve spent enough money to bribe god, giving up feels like such a waste. Even if it’s the smart thing to do.
Click here to subscribe: Join over one million monthly readers and receive breaking news, strategies, ideas and commentary.
Please Spread The Word And Share This Post
Author: Daniel Lang Views: Read by 114 people Date: March 2nd, 2017 Website:http://www.SHTFplan.com
Copyright Information: This content has been contributed to SHTFplan by a third-party or has been republished with permission from the author. Please contact the author directly for republishing information.
The Senate Armed Services Committee is currently hearing the testimony of retired Marine General James Mattis, picked by Donald Trump to take over the Department of Defense.
Mattis retired from the US Marine Corps in 2013 after serving as the 11th commander of US Central Command, replacing General David Petraeus as the overseer of US operations in the Middle East and Afghanistan. His appointment requires a congressional waiver because federal law states that service members must wait seven years after retiring from active duty before they can hold senior civilian defense positions.
As the WSJ notes, "so far, there is no sign that he will face any resistance on for his Senate confirmation. He"s winning a fair amount of praise from Democrats. It this continues to hold, he could have one of the smoothest confirmation votes of any Trump administration nominee."
“Our Armed Forces must remain the best led, best equipped, and most ready force in the world,” Mattis told the Senate. “We must also embrace our international alliances and security partnerships. History is clear: nations with strong allies thrive and those without them wither.”
“My watchwords will be solvency and security in providing for the protection of our people and the survival of our freedoms,” Mattis said. “America has two fundamental powers. One is intimidation,” Mattis told Senator Gary Peters (D-Michigan). “The other power, which we’ve used less in the last 20 years, is the power of inspiration.” The US should not be turning to military power as the answer to all of its concerns around the world, the retired Marine general added.
Here are some of the key highlights so far:
Russia Is "Principal Threat" To US Security
While much of the hearing has so far been without controveries, in the most striking moment so far, Mattis told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Russia stands as the "principal threat" to the United States"s security. He said this is because of its actions and efforts to "intimidate" other countries.
Senator John McCain questioned Mattis to get his opinion on how much of a threat Russia represents. Mattis response was that "the world order is “under biggest attacks since WW2, from Russia, terrorist groups, and China’s actions in the South China Sea,”, agreeing with the neocon senator that Russia is trying to break up NATO.
“I’m all for engagement” with Russia, “but we also have to recognize the reality of what Russia is up to,” Mattis told Senator Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island).
Senator Martin Heinrich (D-New Mexico) questioned if Mattis would stand up to generals, citing the Cuban missile crisis and bringing up the general’s moniker of ‘Mad Dog.’ “That nickname was given to me by the press,” Mattis said, adding his approach would be “Peace through strength” established by the first US president, George Washington – and often invoked by Trump.
Asked by Heinrich to list the principal threats to the US, Mattis said he “would start with Russia,” and continue with aggressive states and terrorist groups.
* * *
Defense Spending And the F-35
Mattis was probed on issues of defense budget cuts due to the legislation introduced by President Barack Obama in 2011. “I don’t have a solution for… the self-inflicted wound of the Budget Control Act,” Mattis told Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri), but promised he would spend the Pentagon’s budget on what it should be spent on.
“If I can’t make an argument to you for why we need a military program, I am willing to lose it,” Mattis told Senator Mike Rounds (R-South Dakota), explaining that the sequester takes away that decision from the Congress and mandates across-the-board cuts.
Mattis also defended the construction of F-35 fighter jet that Trump criticized as expensive and ineffective.“Many of our allies have bet their air superiority on the F-35 program,” Mattis acknowledged to Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut).
Trump’s tweets about military acquisitions “show he’s serious” about getting the best value for the defense dollars spent, Mattis said, disagreeing with Hirono that such actions were inappropriate. He also backed the president-elect’s position about US allies needing to contribute their fair share. Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) brought up her prior military service to criticize “outdated small arms and ammunition,” singling out the M9 pistol and the M-16 assault rifle.
As the WSJ adds, Mattis throws his support behind President-elect Donald Trump"s approach to chastising defense contractors about their costs. Gen. Mattis says this shows Mr. Trump is "serious about getting the best bang for the dollar when it comes to defense dollars."
* * *
US Friends and Allies
First and foremost, Mattis listed Israel as one of US" top allies: “Israel is a fellow democracy and I think Israel’s security is very important to the US,” Mattis told Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi).
“Are there any other democracies in the Middle East?” Wicker asked. “No,” Mattis said.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-New Hampshire) asked about the US troops in Poland in the context of US “reassuring” NATO allies. “NATO is the most successful military alliance probably in modern world history, maybe ever,” Mattis said, but mistakenly argued that “the first time NATO went into combat” was after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
“The Pacific theatre remains a priority in my mind,” the retired Marine general reassured Senator Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii). “We have worldwide responsibilities and certainly the Pacific looms large in that.”
* * *
On the US National Debt
In one of the more notable exchanges, Sen. David Perdue asked Mattis to weigh in on the national debt, and Gen. Mattis says the debt is the primary challenge facing the United States. "We cannot solve this debt problems on the backs of our military alone," Gen. Mattis said. He said Congress must "prioritize where this money is being spent." He said there should not be a transfer "of a debt of this size to our children."
