f-16adf wrote:Remember the context of that time.
GOP had a gigantic defeat in Nov. 2006 (lost House and Senate, because of Iraq.)
December 2007 ushered in the beginning of the "Great Recession".
Neither Bush or Obama were going to ask for, or give their approval to X number of F-22's or NGB when our economy was shedding over +300,000 jobs a month and people's homes were going into foreclosure. Not to mention fighting 2 wars, one of which was extremely unpopular.
That would have been political suicide-
They suicided anyway
So they spent a trillion dollars on a stimulus everyone agreed failed, killed
actual jobs with the F-22 production, doubled down in Afghanistan, Withdrew prematurely from Iraq setting the rise of ISIS, introduced a massively divisive and deceptive healthcare plan and lost the Democrat Super Majority within just 2 years.
Obama was re-elected in 2012 they held the white house at least, with yet more republicans moving into both houses, and by 2016 the democratic golden girl lost to Donald Trump. The Republicans had more power than they had since the 1920s.
If that isn't suicide I don't know what is. The entireity of Obama's first term should have been nothing but jobs and the economy but that Super Majority was just too much fun to let go to waste so they engaged in stupid crap.
You'll never get anyone on the Obama dream team to admit to it easily but they screwed it up badly when they had blank check basically. Even at the time congress critters from F-22 manufacturing districts were asking why we were killing jobs on the F-22 assembly to "create" jobs with the stimulus at the cost of trillions. And why on earth couldn't F-22 production simply be rolled into there somehow. But it was important we gave all this money for "shovel ready" jobs in the near future rather than jobs we already had going, but wanted to kill off. Government will always government. The stimulus failed hard. Turns out just unleashing a trillion dollars in fun money lead to a lot of waste and make work projects without much effect (shocking I know)
But lets use the context argument. I don't really agree with the notion of this "horse trade" for B-21s thats kind of ridiculous. (didn't we horse trade it for the F-35 back then? thats what I was told)
The biggest issue at the time was that the F-22 was taking a bunch of heat for huge cost and you had unarmored humvees and other gear that was seemingly defenseless against the latest in haji technology leading to more casualties. Rumsfield was "cavalier" about all this and seen as an uncaring monster. Gates was the breath of fresh air to ge things back on track but seems just as cocksure and pigheaded for other reasons. So its not like we "traded" F-22s for MRAPs directly but the F-22 was the white elephant.
However, even at the time people who could think beyond election cycles were pointing out that it would not be RPGs and IEDs forever, and F-22s were going to take us into the next 50 years, and in wars that you had to win, rather than just get bored with and leave eventually. Theres no getting the F-22s back, and its telling as had been said how many times bringing them back comes up, and not just in internet land.
The B-21 had better deliver, I would hate see the F-22 "traded" for the A-12 Avenger II