Originally appeared at Washington’s Blog
Imagine if a local business in your town invented a brand new tool that was intended to have an almost magical effect thousands of miles away. However, where the tool was kept and used locally became an area unsafe for children. Children who got near this tool tended to have increased blood pressure and increased stress hormones, lower reading skills, poorer memories, impaired auditory and speech perception, and impaired academic performance.
Most of us would find this situation at least a little concerning, unless the new invention was designed to murder lots of people. Then it’d be just fine.
Now, imagine if this same new tool ruined neighborhoods because people couldn’t safely live near it. Imagine if the government had to compensate people but kick them out of living near the location of this tool. Again, I think, we might find that troubling if mass murder were not the mission.
Imagine also that this tool fairly frequently explodes, emitting highly toxic chemicals, particles, and fibers unsafe to breathe into the air for miles around. Normally, that’d be a problem. But if this tool is needed for killing lots of people, we’ll work with its flaws, won’t we?
Now, what if this new gadget was expected to cost at least $1,400,000,000,000 over 50 years?And what if that money had to be taken away from numerous other expenses more beneficial for the economy and the world?
What if the $1.4 trillion was drained out of the economy causing a loss of jobs and a radical diminution of resources for education, healthcare, housing, environmental protection, or humanitarian aid? Wouldn’t that be a worry in some cases, I mean in those cases where the ability to kill tons of human beings wasn’t at stake?
What if this product, even when working perfectly, was a leading destroyer of the earth’s natural environment?
What if this high-tech toy wasn’t even designed to do what was expected of it and wasn’t even able to do what it was designed for?
Amazingly, even those shortcomings do not matter as long as the intention is massive murder and destruction. Then, all is forgiven.
The tool I’m describing is called the F-35 Fighter Lightening II by Lockheed Martin. At RootsAction.org you can find a new petition launched by locally-minded people acting globally in places where the F-35 is intended to be based. Also at that link you’ll find explanations of how the tool I’ve been decribing is the F-35.
The petition is directed to the United States Congress and the governments of Australia, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Turkey, the United Kingdom, Israel, Japan and South Korea from the world and from the people of Burlington, Vermont, and Fairbanks, Alaska, where the F-35 is to be based. This effort is being initiated by Vermont Stop the F35 Coalition, Save Our Skies Vermont, Western Maine Matters, Alaska Peace Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks Peace Club, North Star Chapter 146 Veterans For Peace, World Beyond War, RootsAction.org, Code Pink, and Ben Cohen.
The petition reads:
The F-35 is a weapon of offensive war, serving no defensive purpose. It is planned to cost the U.S. $1.4 trillion over 50 years. Because starvation on earth could be ended for $30 billion and the lack of clean drinking water for $11 billion per year, it is first and foremost through the wasting of resources that this airplane will kill. Military spending, contrary to popular misconception, also hurts the U.S. economy (see here) and other economies. The F-35 causes negative health impacts and cognitive impairment in children living near its bases. It renders housing near airports unsuitable for residential use. It has a high crash rate and horrible consequences to those living in the area of its crashes. Its emissions are a major environmental polluter.
Wars are endangering the United States and other participating nations rather than protecting them. Nonviolent tools of law, diplomacy, aid, crisis prevention, and verifiable nuclear disarmament should be substituted for continuing counterproductive wars. Therefore, we, the undersigned, call for the immediate cancellation of the F-35 program as a whole, and the immediate cancellation of plans to base any such dangerous and noisy jets near populated areas. We oppose replacing the F-35 with any other weapon or basing the F-35 in any other locations. We further demand redirection of the money for the F-35 back into taxpayers’ pockets, and into environmental and human needs in the U.S., other F-35 customer nations, and around the world, including to fight climate change, pay off student debt, rebuild crumbling infrastructure, and improve education, healthcare, and housing.
Very reasonable stance if you care about the Government of the United States and the US as a viable Republic !! And if you are a smart anti Empire of Evil agitator, you shuld call for the continuation of the greatest ripoff of the century called the “F35, F22 and Littoral Frigatte” programs !! Because it keeps the quagmire going !!
No chance it will be cancelled. The US war monger nation will only end in one way. In it’s destruction. Either economic and social collapse or an insane war.
luxurious US F35 = flying dollars for a cheap Russian SU-27 family and S-400.
let them keep wasting their money.
Truth be told, Israel will not allow it to be canceled. Americans are enslaved mentally and socially and politically by Tel Aviv. Israel needs their F-35’s cause without them Turkey and Iran and Russian and Syria are going to have superior air forces soon unless Israel the brat is given more free next gen tech in which to kill more Palestinians and Syrians with.
Ha! It won’t do that, and that’s not why they are buying them. First, as you will not be surprised to hear, they are only ‘buying’ them with American military assistance funds. Also, they are only buying 20 in the initial purchase, with the option to get 75 more. They will mostly be assembled in Israel, unlike everyone else’s, and they will be, as usual, ripping out the avionics and ECM in favour of their own better products. Even then, the aircraft are slated to replace their oldest, 2nd line F-16As. The elite of their force is to remain their highly customised F-15I and F-16Is (both generally superior to USAF equivalents), and possibly some new F-15SEs and/or Eurofighters. Given the repeated delays in getting even the basic US weapons set functioning, the odds of them buying past the initial 20 are dropping fast.
Since the F-35 has the basic manoeuvre performance of an ancient MiG-21, and ironically, a fuel system just as dangerous as original model MiG-15/17/19/21s, it won’t be helping Israel compete with anyone. Also, IAF pilots are going to hate it. US pilots don’t really have the reflexes, reactions or training to be strongly aware of the manoeuvre deficiencies of this thing. The US doesn’t test for these qualities in pilots, and training is typically lowest-common-denominator, with an unrealisticly strong emphasis on BVR. By contrast, the IAF, who have been know to beat USN pilots 200-0 in wargames, select rigorously for specific physical and mental aptitude in their pilots, and train them to push the limits of themselves and their airframes to a much greater degree, so I can guarantee you this is going to be the least popular aircraft in their inventory, and probably a short-lived component at that. You’ll probably be able to buy one at an IAF garage sale at bargain prices in a few years. China will probably end up grabbing them, just to compare and see how well their hacking and copying went.
At this point, it’s more of a pity buy the Israelis can loot for a few high-tech components, to reverse engineer and create better versions of at IAI. The USAF were practically begging them to buy a few, as a way to sell them to all the other gullible defence ministries, because they Israelis have a reputation for buying good equipment That’s why they and LM caved in on letting the Israelis put in their own electronics, something they flat out refused to the British, Australians and even the Japanese(!).
It certainly won’t improve their ability to bomb Palestinians, as it’s payload is pitiful compared to the F-16s they do that with now.
The thing is finally out of development, its entering service. As all its major flaws have allready been ironed out it would financial madness to cancel it at this time, not to say it would completely leave the US without a next gen fighter(The F22 er too few), and in an extention of that would cost the US aircraft industry their grip on NATO orders. Its a lot more of a challenge when you have to develop something new, not just copy(russia) or hack the needed data(China). Thats still not a good excuse for the extreme price and long development cycle, but I find it worthwhile to point out the USA does something no one else do with aircraft,They innovate.
False. You’ve been fooled by LM and US military propaganda. In it’s “Initial Operational Capability” status, it is still incapable of using it’s autocannon, it can use exactly one air-to-air missile (AIM-120), and 2 laser-guided bombs, and that’s it. It still can’t be used in it’s full flight profile, due to problems with it’s controls, sensors and computer. It can’t fly (it’s computer won’t let it!) without a datalink connection to the LM factory in Texas where they do software updates. It is ridiculously maintenance intensive, with a typical aircraft managing around 5 flight hours a month. It’s fuel line is still dangerously unstable. It’s not even aloud to taxi across a runway within 25 miles of a lightning storm!
And, it’s got the flight profile of a MiG-21. No, it’s madness to keep the project going, because all the other aircraft in the US inventory that it was supposed to replace are dropping to under 50% operational status, because no spare parts are being ordered. Aircrews are very literally looting air museums to keep F-15s and F-18s in the air, all so they can have an F035 which, despite being declared ‘operational,’ can’t fight anyone.
Well as customers are starting recieve their planes, without making much fuss one should surmise that all the allegations are just conspiracy nonsense. We will have a definitive answer next year as mos customers will have multiple planes each by then.
Ever considered that this is because there are military and political carers and major political embarrassment on the line for all parties concerned?
How many other equipment scandals do militaries regularly cover up? For example, equipment readiness rates.
Here, this is the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation report for January 2016. Read it for yourself and see what I am taking about. And look at the development progress over the last several years, and you will readily see they won’t have made much progress since then. http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2015/pdf/dod/2015f35jsf.pdf
If you belive that the political establishment in western european democracies are capable of such a cover up. You are simply deluded.
These nations view the military as unnessicary, and the large peace lobby would likely jump upon such a scandal to prevent any 5th gen fighter being bought. The respective airforces would cease to exist, they wouldnt be able to amend their purchase with something else. No sane person would risk it.
Learn how the world works!
I’m sure some nice bribes from L-M have taken care of that. I know how the world reads. Read that report.
Who should they bribe then? The proscess today is way too open to pull of the old “starfighter” trick. The power to decide are spread to thin, it would be to expensive, and wayy too risky. One official going to the media with proof of attempted bribery, and its all over.
Well, how about Ine Eriksen Søreide, for example? In Norway, she has been the driving force behind the purchase, pushing it even as she neglects the army, for which she has received no small amount of criticism.
You seem to forget that most of the purchasers of the aircraft have some nearby nation to drum up fear with to push the buy: Russia, for the European countries, China, for Japan.
Your argument makes no sense, anyway. If there are so many European politicians waiting for any hint of scandal to cut their militaries further, tell me, why haven’t they jumped all over the cost overruns of the F-35? Why haven’t they been waving this very report I linked to you angrily in parliament? Even if the F-35 was very bit as wonderful as L-M’s marketing team said it was, wouldn’t the mere existence of such a report, even if exaggerated, be sufficient for such a determinedly pacifistic parliamentarian to launch their attack? One can only surmise that European politicians are less eager to cut their forces back than you claim. Norway provides a perfect example: Søreide is being criticised about the F-35’s price, not because people say the air force is unnecessary, but rather, because she isn’t funding the land forces correctly! That runs a little contrary to the picture you try to paint.
Søreide was just a junior member of parliament , the desition to buy the f35 have now spanned 4 defence ministers, ech with its own staff, numerous parliamentary comittees, not to mention a untold number of military officers etc. Just here i Norway.
As for the missile and amunition, its how defence contracts post marshall plan have been working. If we spend x on buying from you. Then you need pledge to buy for the same ammount from us. It brings to mind the G3 rifle wich was adopted after the Germans had to produce 200 000 rifles for the BW in Norway.
No military contract without a buyback clause would ever be considered in peacetimr conditions, in any west european country
Seems the real problem with F35 is not all the advanced technology, that naturally needs ironing out as part of development process, rather there is a fundamental old fashioned engineering/ industrial design flaw. It’s the rear end packaging of the power-plant. As it is multi service air and navy design there are compromises in fuselage, to do different tasks. To get fuselage cross section reduced they went with one engine and shoe horned it into narrowest frame they could. Turns out it may be too tight at rear, because the radiant heat from engine at rear of fuselage is cooking the other adjacent parts – cabling, hydraulics – at best drastically reducing these parts lifespan, and at worst leading to fires and failures. This is no easy fix – the fuselage is a fixed design and cannot be simply altered. The logical solution is also a disastrous one, adding extra air-inflow apertures, because that would destroy the low radar visibility signatures, As any more openings in those sleek surfaces will show up on radar. So at present they tinkering around problem, opening bomb bay doors inflight every 20 min or so to flush out radiant heat and using fuel that is stored in cool tankers painted white to reduce heat inputs, but these are not long term solutions. This packaging problem may end up being ‘managed’ by replacing affected parts regularly but that is very expensive compromise and dictates lot of grounded schedule time, and is potentially very dangerous for any fleet not rigorously policed by maintenance inspections.
“including to fight climate change” – You lost me right there. What happened to “Global Warming”? Oh…that’s right…it never happened. So now we’re supposed to believe in “Climate Change” and that carbon-dioxide is a poison? A single volcano can produce more carbon-dioxide than the accumulated production of the human race from the beginning of time. Carbon-dioxide is “PLANT FOOD”. The last time there was “Global Warming” it was called “The Age of Enlightenment”. “Global Warming” & “Climate Change” are simply a scam by the Progressive Globalists to TAX us into SLAVERY.
I see some of MIC/NATO money are now spent on paid to post, as seen from “Peter Magnus”. His voice does not represent the view of the Norwegians, but its the voice of the salesman.
The admin should just delete his posts as it makes no sense what he says and its to obvious in his language, that its pure American and not the “Norwegian American”.
Just delete his posts as he does not represent Norways view more than Obama.