Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
RavenKrows
May 29, 2008

KillHour posted:

This made sense when our "enemies" were superpowers with massive standing armies and R&D budgets. Now they're some just some random dudes with cold war leftovers. I'm not saying stop all military R&D, I'm saying "Why the gently caress do we need ICBM interceptors and billion-dollar air superiority fighters?"

As for your second point, it's not like we have to burn the money if it's not being used for bigger explosions. We can fund non-military R&D directly.

Have you not been paying attention for the past decade? Russia and China aren't napping when it comes to military technology. Our spending process is hosed up so we have definite unnecessary losses but you can't nap on this poo poo or else you play even more expensive catch up if you actually need a new system (expensive in lives and financial costs).

Our ICBM interceptors could always use more work by the way. It's not like their success ratio is particularly in our favor, it would sure be nice if we had a hope in hell of stopping more missiles in a nuclear exchange.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • Locked thread