• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • NYT Celebrates Death of F-22

    The New York Times ran a gleeful obituary for the F-22 today in which Congress was commended for allowing President Obama and Secretary Gates to end production of the fighter at 187 frames—even though the military requirement is for 243 of these fifth-generation fighters. The Times applauds President Obama for his staunch fiscal conservatism on matters of national security and his commitment to only “spend precious tax dollars on essential equipment,” not “glitzy, self-indulgent toys.”

    However, the editorial fails to mention even once the rapidly deteriorating condition and graying age of our fighter force today or the impending shortfall in American fighter fleets (detailed in a recent Heritage paper). This decision will only further erode the U.S. Air Force that has ensured the safety of American ground forces against enemy air power for the past 60 years. According to the military leaders, there will be a fighter gap of over 800 fighters by 2024 for the Air Force and 125 for the Navy. But the Times even criticizes the Senate’s decision to fund a whopping nine extra F/A-18s for the Navy, even though the average service life of the F-18 has been extended from its original limit of 6,000 to 10,000 flight hours. Extending hours can prove dangerous. In 2007, the Air Force grounded over 300 aged F-15s after one of them “broke in half” during a training mission in St. Louis, Missouri.

    The truth is that artificial budgetary restraints—not national security needs—determined the fate of the F-22. According to the Air Force’s top leadership, General Norton Schwartz and Secretary Michael Donley, a “zero-sum game” has been imposed on an Air Force operating with a “fixed” defense budget such that “buying more F-22s means doing less of something else.” Game over.

    For the moment, the United States seems committed to stripping itself of its six-decade record of unrivaled air dominance, content to field aging aircraft 20, 30, and in some cases 40 years old—planes our pilots’ grandfathers could have flown in the Cold War. And it appears The New York Times couldn’t be happier.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    4 Responses to NYT Celebrates Death of F-22

    1. Tom Utley, Charlesto says:

      What did we expect the NYT to do? I mean these are the people who blasted the Apollo 11 mission as being a "waste of technology" for chasing after the stars instead of feeding the needy.

      (refer to "Apollo and Dionysis" for further illustration)

    2. Michele Kennedy, Tuc says:

      Not surprised by the NYT stance considering it's a liberal rag that is firmly on the "Messiah Obama" bandwagon! My daughter is stationed at Holloman AFB and is a structual mechanic on the Raptor. Guess they'll be trying to hold the older planes together with duct tape and a prayer.

    3. Dan Dennis, Fort Wor says:

      The liberals in Congress and the media would like nothing better than for everyone to hold hands and sing "Kumbaya" in a grand, global alliance. The reality is, we must protect ourselves against threats to our national security, and I am willing to spend my tax dollars to do it. I am not willing to spend my tax dollars on a program that lets someone else buy a new car, or on a program that will essentially destroy the health care system in this country. Cash for Raptors, not cash for clunkers. Thank you, Heritage Foundation, for standing up for America.

    4. Jason, Chicago says:

      I'm sorry can the author of this article tell me what country is even remotely close to matching our air superiority?

      This organization is in deep with the military industrial complex.

      Are you expecting a new era of dogfights in the air?

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×