Sun editorial:

Threatened veto is justified

Obama correct to argue against additional fighter jets that aren’t needed

Thursday, July 16, 2009 | 2:05 a.m.

The F-22 Raptor fighter jets made by Lockheed Martin are responsible for 25,000 manufacturing jobs throughout the country, which is one reason why the program has the vigorous support of many members of Congress.

There’s just one problem. The Defense Department says it doesn’t need seven new jets that would cost a combined $1.75 billion, an expenditure contained in a proposed military spending bill before the Senate. The Pentagon says the 187 jets funded by Congress are enough.

That doesn’t seem to bother several senators who continue to support the new F-22s. Yet it is that way of thinking that has led to a chronically bloated U.S. military-industrial complex, one in which billions of taxpayer dollars have been squandered on weapons that no longer fit the needs of our armed forces.

That is why we would encourage President Barack Obama to follow through on his threat to veto the spending bill if the unnecessary F-22s are included. Obama reiterated that threat Monday in a letter to Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, and the committee’s ranking Republican, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, both of whom support the president’s position. Both senators were on the losing end of a 13-11 committee vote to fund the seven jets.

As reported Tuesday by The New York Times, the Pentagon would rather spend the money on intelligence-gathering unmanned aircraft for use in Afghanistan and for testing aircraft designed to attack ground targets.

It’s tough to persuade members of Congress to accept possible job cuts in their districts, particularly in this slumping economy. But it’s far worse to waste money on one type of military aircraft or weapon when others would be of more use to soldiers in the field.

Afghanistan, in particular, demands specialized intelligence-gathering and firepower capabilities because of its challenging landscape.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has the right idea by attempting to shed the military of certain conventional weapons that are outdated or overstocked. He recognizes that modern warfare requires new battlefield technology. We hope Congress comes to the same realization.

Discussion: 3 comments so far…

By Future

7/16/09 at 6:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Just another case of Obama following John McCain's leadership.

Good move
By boftx

7/16/09 at 10:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

The F-22 Raptor is the most sophisticated weapon to ever be designed and the author of this editorial implies it is convential and outdated? Please, that is just plain untrue. Other arguments might be valid, but that one is not only mis-leading but ignorant as well.
By GunslingerA10

7/17/09 at 12:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Not a very coherent article, it fails to distinguish the context in which these three issues were based upon and then rolled into as one bill.

Pres. B.H.O. would do well to use a line item veto, which, would in effect, correct this spending bill's rider (PORK) and allow only the necessary spending to be appropriated.

The Defense Secretary, is well aware (more than most) of what the war planners advise as being enough (187) F-22s, for the DOD. The concern is that those monies can be better utilized on more essential equipment ("Gargoyle") rather than buying seven more F-22s.

While the F-22s is note worthy for preserving America's edge over the newer Su-30 Russian, now Chineese built fighter for sale in the Mid-East, the argument remains valid 187 is enough to support Americas security, being the F-22 is about 1-6 over the Su-30, with its stealth abilities.

Unless, these seven F-22s are part of a hidden agenda to give them to Isreal, or to later sell to Japan; both have requested and shown a desire to operate these new platforms. Japan is even willing to pay double the US procurment cost, 300 mil per.

The only challenge to our present advantage is that Isreal is marketing radar technoligy used in the Sa-20 packages for the SAM, which gives increased abilities to unfreindlies, this may then reduce the advantage of the stealth technoligy.

All this information is internet public domain, and anyone with half a notion to investigate, who has what, who is selling what, is there for all to read.

Lastly, it is mute, to say that US Forces need the F-22 in Afganastan or any other technologicly deprived theater of engagement, it is simply over-kill, and not rational to risk such an unwarrented asset.