Manly Fucking Weapons

[Dr. X]

Although somewhat secondary to the power of the GAU-8, the F-22 is still fucking awesome. Just look at it, and tell me it's not beautiful.



I still can't believe Obama is in favor of cutting the funding to produce more of these babies to add to our current 187 (already greatly reduced from the original 550 projected to be necessary to replace our current F/A-18's and F-16's), slashing thousands of jobs (not to mention sheer amounts of badass) in the process just to save three-tenths of one percent of the amount of money spent on the stimulus. I've always agreed with him on nearly every other issue so far, but this is one area where I just can't see where he's coming from.

[Bluehawk2000]

The R.P.O.T.C(Rocket Propelled Orange Transparent Chainsaw), does it really need explaining?

[IVhorseman]

I still can't believe Obama is in favor of cutting the funding to produce more of these babies to add to our current 187 (already greatly reduced from the original 550 projected to be necessary to replace our current F/A-18's and F-16's), slashing thousands of jobs (not to mention sheer amounts of badass) in the process just to save three-tenths of one percent of the amount of money spent on the stimulus. I've always agreed with him on nearly every other issue so far, but this is one area where I just can't see where he's coming from.

My friend did a calculation, and with the amount of money it takes to even OPERATE the current number of F-22s we have for one year is equivalent to the amount of money earned yearly by the average american household three hundred and fifty thousand times over. There's nothing wrong with F/A-18s or F-16s, and they're both cheaper and more reliable.

In fact, the FA-22 is sortof a crappy plane. It was designed in the early ninties to be "THE PLANE OF THE FUTURE!!!", with tons of holes in the technology where they decided "we don't have this yet, but by 2004 we'll have invented that". The technology is now here, but it's still a plane designed in the early ninties, and is therefore outdated. If we want new planes, we have to start from the ground up, not just arbitrarily guess what we'll have invented by 2020.

EDIT: Normally, I try to stay out of the political conversations, because I recognize the fact that I know nothing about politics and neither do any of you. In this particular case however, my friend JUST RECENTLY spent the better part of an hour explaining this to me. However he also thinks that Aircraft carriers are useless since everyone important has nukes, which I disagree on.

[Zahru II]

[Dr. X]

My post was actually almost sarcastic in a kind of half-assed way, as I'm completely biased being a huge military aircraft nerd. Whatever other people say, I think the F-22 is awesome as shit, and even the most logical arguments against producing more of them bounce off of me. I went through the same thing when I was a kid and read that the A-10 might be retired from service.

If my views weren't so extreme I would probably agree that the Hornet and F-16 are more than sufficient and that the F-35 has nearly the same performance compared to the F-22 while being somewhat cheaper and more modern (although it is slower and less suited for air-to-air combat, and is also less awesome).

[IVhorseman]

There's also no reason to get rid of the A-10 either.

See, all of these arguments of "air-to-air superiority" would be fine and dandy if any of the countries we go to war with had airforces. Sure maybe in the future that'd be an issue, but the 18s and 16s are still the best fighter planes in the world.

[Almighty Benny]

I agree that F-22s are the shit, but how badass is an airplane that can't fly in the fucking rain?

[muffinman42]

you want a manly plane, the Hercules is what you want!, no more sissy flieing in and firing your missiles then running away in your fighter jets!
they are the largest airplane able to land on a aircraft carrier!

they are badarse, anyone whos had one fly right over them low enought that they could see the RAF logo clearly knows it.

[Dr. X]

This helicopter is so manly it even has it's own penis.

[Leprechaun]

The Apache. The ugliest helicopter, and the deadliest. Its ugly, Its deadly, Its manly. No more to be said.
http://www.minihelicopter.net/AH64Apach ... Apache.jpg

[Tuefish]

[Dr. X]

We need a new thread for Manly Vehicles.

[Nitewatchman]

I still can't believe Obama is in favor of cutting the funding to produce more of these babies to add to our current 187 (already greatly reduced from the original 550 projected to be necessary to replace our current F/A-18's and F-16's), slashing thousands of jobs (not to mention sheer amounts of badass) in the process just to save three-tenths of one percent of the amount of money spent on the stimulus. I've always agreed with him on nearly every other issue so far, but this is one area where I just can't see where he's coming from.

It's because he's from Illinois. Nothing good comes from Illinois.

In fact, the FA-22 is sortof a crappy plane. It was designed in the early ninties to be "THE PLANE OF THE FUTURE!!!", with tons of holes* in the technology where they decided "we don't have this yet, but by 2004 we'll have invented that". The technology is now here, but it's still a plane designed in the early ninties, and is therefore outdated. If we want new planes, we have to start from the ground up, not just arbitrarily guess what we'll have invented by 2020.

EDIT: Normally, I try to stay out of the political conversations, because I recognize the fact that I know nothing about politics and neither do any of you. In this particular case however, my friend JUST RECENTLY spent the better part of an hour explaining this to me. However he also thinks that Aircraft carriers are useless since everyone important has nukes, which I disagree on.*

*Point #1

Rly, tho, Obama is making a bunch of cuts to military spending. I semi-agree that the F-22 is an inefficient fighting machine, but you need to remember; most of the new options people are presenting cost loads and loads more. The F-22 can get the job done and keep us looking manly in the sky, so I like it and have no problem paying tax dollars to watch it blow crap up on foreign soil.



*Point #2
Pffft. Getting rid of aircraft carriers would DECREASE our MANLINESS.

*Personally, I'm an all-American boy. I believe in the simple equation of Military_Spending=National_Manliness_Increase=Superiority. The fact that Obama wants to cut military spending and take away our personal assault rifles means that he's making us less manly, which means Obama=Less_Manly=Un-American.

Regardless of what I believe(or even know) about President Obama's policies, the fact that he is decreasing our manliness is a concern to me, and should be a concern to all other men.

What happens when FRANCE surpasses our MANLINESS!? What then!?

I would also like to display a pie chart that I found in a very serious news article, which I find incredibly hilarious.

That, there, is some REAL American Pie!





*The star'd paragraph was written without any serious political talkitivness, and is intended to speak only of MANLINESS and TESTOSTERONE. Don't turn this thread into a political discussion over it( Please. ;_; ). That is not manly, and would counteract the manly effects of this forum.

[IVhorseman]

Hey, I have no problem with our military being clearly the best. I in fact support that a lot! I just also think our military shouldn't piss money away on crap that we don't need and doesn't work.

most of the new options people are presenting cost loads and loads more.

You didn't base this information on any reasearch at all and completely pulled that out of your asshole. However, I didn't research anything to disprove that, so I'm not going to try to. Instead, I'm going to prove me right by proving you right: the new options are horrible. But what about our old options? Our technology is leaps and bounds ahead of the competition as is. You can keep things simple and cheap and still be retardedly effective militarily, which we are. As the saying goes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

I personally agree with this lowering of military spending, because instead of making planes that can't fly in the rain, we can do the simple effective crap, like actually putting armor on our armored vehicles, or using reliable weapons instead of "look at this gun that shoots a million grenades in just the right conditions". And as an added bonus, there's more money to spend on manly things like motorcycles, highways, and piles of meat.


EDIT: Abe Lincoln was from Illinois.

[Tiny Tank Rannon]

for $500, it's worth every penny for a game based off a nerdy game to improve your manliness.