Like The F-35, US’ Latest And Most Expensive Aircraft Carrier Doesn’t Work – OpEd


Why does the US spend more on its military than the next largest several countries combined? One reason is that the military budget has far less to do with protecting the United States than it does to further enriching well-connected military contractors. Politicians are under pressure to push weapons systems, that in turn produce “jobs” for their districts. Remember, the disastrous F-35 fighter is built in 45 states and several foreign countries. This doesn’t happen by accident.

As former Pentagon analyst and keen observer Chuck Spinney points out, when it comes to the military budget, it’s all about enormously expensive, high-tech weapons systems that don’t usually work. Little things like readiness and force strength take a back-seat. High-tech pays off well, with shiny things and bells and whistles impressing those who sign off on big contracts. Actually giving troops useful tools to win wars is much less exciting (and profitable).

Well “Spinney’s rule” has struck again. The USS Gerald R. Ford, supposed to be the Pentagon’s largest and most advanced aircraft carrier, is two years late for delivery, $2.9 billion over budget, and is “not fit for combat.” It is the most expensive warship ever built, coming in at $12.9 billion (so far). But it can’t launch and recover aircraft, can’t mount a defense, and can’t transport bombs around the ship. In other words, the core functions of an aircraft carrier cannot be met by this particular, gold-plated monstrosity.

The Pentagon is hoping that it will be fixed and delivered before this November, but it is probably not wise to hold one’s breath.

Beltway think tanks drive policy toward engaging in more foreign conflicts and in turn they are lavishly funded by the military contractors. Those who object to the massive spending are called “soft on defense.” But spending thirteen billion dollars on a ship that does not work undermines US national security far more than all the antiwar activists put together. The money runs out and we are left holding the bag with a totally useless gold-plated military and the rest of the world angry and seeking revenge over the chaos sown by decades of US interventionism.

Maybe if they hadn’t named the ship after Gerald Ford…?

This article was published by RonPaul Institute.

5 thoughts on “Like The F-35, US’ Latest And Most Expensive Aircraft Carrier Doesn’t Work – OpEd

  • July 25, 2016 at 8:57 pm

    The F-35 doesn’t work?? So strap yourself into any foreign airplane and you will be blown out of the sky before you know the F-35 is anywhere around.

  • July 26, 2016 at 3:27 am

    ” …enormously expensive, high-tech weapons systems usually don’t work.” Tell that to the Iraqi military which had no option but to spray anti-aircraft fire willy-nilly over their capitol city as we dropped laser-guided smart bombs from F-111s they could not see. And let’s not forget the Abrams fighting vehicle which, we assured by opponents, would be an aluminum vapor-filled coffin for American soldiers. And the F-35 fighter? Yes, all of those tests revealed failures–as they were supposed to…that is the point of testing. It may be over budget and late on delivery, but that doesn’t seem to deter our Allies from purchasing it or the Chinese from trying to steal the plans.

    I wish there were an inexpensive solution to remaining a superpower, but I do not see it. The Iraqi army can attest. It was the third largest army in the world (if memory serves) prior to its annihilation.

    Examples? If you are referring to the “failures” of the F-35, then

  • July 26, 2016 at 5:17 am

    Ask the combat troops about the V-22…

    Ask the troops which airframe they want to be transported in, to the nearest aid facility…

    We did not like the CH-46E @ 1st, but the conversion extended the airframe serviceability for 2+Decades…

  • July 26, 2016 at 5:41 am

    has the F35 flown in combat


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *