F-35 - the ultimate money killing weapon

Do USA really needs the F-35 super-fighter-jet? Absolutely no. It is an instance of foolishness and wasting money. It is a symbol of the upcoming bankruptcy of USA.
Let me tell you an interesting story. The best tank during the WW2 was the German "Tiger". But the war was won by one of the worst tanks - the Russian T-34. Why?

The answer is very simple. The average lifetime of a tank in a battle was 3 days. So it was not worth to produce perfect tanks with a high quality that can work for the entire war. There were required cheap tanks to run 3-4 days. So Germans produced perfect and high quality tanks that were expensive, while Russians produced bad and low quality tanks that were cheap. The result was that Russia has produced much more tanks than Germany (may be 5:1 ratio) and has won the war.

So from a military point of view, having the best and most expensive weapons is not the right way to win. In fact the $130-160 million per unit price of F-35 means this is an useless weapon. It is just a tool for demonstrating power, but not to fight a real war. Imagine how much this plane must be used to destroy enemy armies, weapons and infrastructure worth $130 million? And then ask the question will this jet survive enough to make such a damage.

Of course if armed with nuclear weapons, it can destroy an entire city with just one shot. But in fact for this shot F-35 is not needed.

Every war is a war not of weapons, but of money. Wins the more effective and rational side. And the super expensively armed side is not the most effective.

At current moment some military expenses in USA are at a stake, due to spending cuts needs. But F-35 project looks invulnerable. Politicians from all sides are defending it, because it creates jobs in their states. So it looks like F-35 is more an economic, than a military project.

OK. Is F-35 a good business project?

Absolutely no. F-35 is a waste of money via government contracts and sub-contracts that contain much corruption and stealing of money. But even if there was no corruption, the important question is: "What is the final result of working?" When you work, you must create a final product that is useful. For instance, when you produce a TV, you can after that watch at it. And this benefit motivates the production and all the process of production. But what is the use of a $400 million war-plane? So it looks like it is just a social policy - spending money on doing an useless job, just to have jobs. But the money for this job was taken from taxpayers. So if they do not receive something in exchange, it is not a fair deal.

So obviously there is no economic arguments in favor of F-35.

So do we need it?

Theoretically there is a gain of it. It is the technological development and stimulating the military science, that can later be used in civil business. But if the purpose is to stimulate the science, you can do better by direct subsidizing it, and no passing via the war-machines production.
So finally, can anyone find an argument to continue the F-35 program?

I can't...

Feb 22nd 2013

Interesting sites: Добри Божилов