Pentagon Unveils $400,000 helmets for F-35 Fighter. General: Here, try it on, Congressman... Congressman: Wow! My head's in the clouds! Lobbyist: Bend over more and it works even better!
We need that money to go to helmets, not infrastructure or our citizens, what do you think we are over there fighting for?If there were a cost to war, the people would think twice about sending our kids over there. A draft, rationing, tax increases, something that makes the cost of pouring money in to the military while under equipping our troops for preemptive wars. The VA is a problem because we keep making more wounded warriors. But we have enough to come up with new helmets for 400 K a pop. How many kids could eat for that much money?
Turning pilots into no more than drones, with over-reliance on tech, is getting more dangerous. Too bad we can’t get computers and drones to work together to wage peace, instead of “war fighting”. A greater waste of money and lives at the behest of the MIC.
^NIght-Guant 49: one thing I saw some time ago was that they were converting the A-10 Warthogs to take decision making AWAY FROM THE PILOT! In Iraq, a classic was our “boots on the ground guys” pointed out to the commander back in Nevada that four folks they wanted to kill were little girls collecting firewood and do NOT fire on them. Sending a drone to do the shot, so our forward people do not have to reveal their position, is not a bad thing, but NOT having them there to confirm the target, is. Just like in the first Iraq war when an Apache pilot didn’t want to fire because he thought the APC was OURS, but the guy calling the shots ordered him to fire. Yes, the on scene pilot was right, and Americans died because an idiot thought remote technology was “smarter”.
Godfreydaniel about 8 years ago
Actually, for most members of Congress, their heads aren’t in the clouds so much as up their…….never mind.
Happy Two Shoes about 8 years ago
Hey! That’s my money they’re pulling out of his…
Mr. Blawt about 8 years ago
We need that money to go to helmets, not infrastructure or our citizens, what do you think we are over there fighting for?If there were a cost to war, the people would think twice about sending our kids over there. A draft, rationing, tax increases, something that makes the cost of pouring money in to the military while under equipping our troops for preemptive wars. The VA is a problem because we keep making more wounded warriors. But we have enough to come up with new helmets for 400 K a pop. How many kids could eat for that much money?
superposition about 8 years ago
Youtube demo;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0btzIvlScIhttp://www.wired.com/2015/09/helmet-will-make-f-35-pilots-missile-slinging-cyborgs/
Dtroutma about 8 years ago
Turning pilots into no more than drones, with over-reliance on tech, is getting more dangerous. Too bad we can’t get computers and drones to work together to wage peace, instead of “war fighting”. A greater waste of money and lives at the behest of the MIC.
Zev about 8 years ago
As is 395,000 of that isn’t going into some one-percenter’s pocket.
Dtroutma about 8 years ago
^NIght-Guant 49: one thing I saw some time ago was that they were converting the A-10 Warthogs to take decision making AWAY FROM THE PILOT! In Iraq, a classic was our “boots on the ground guys” pointed out to the commander back in Nevada that four folks they wanted to kill were little girls collecting firewood and do NOT fire on them. Sending a drone to do the shot, so our forward people do not have to reveal their position, is not a bad thing, but NOT having them there to confirm the target, is. Just like in the first Iraq war when an Apache pilot didn’t want to fire because he thought the APC was OURS, but the guy calling the shots ordered him to fire. Yes, the on scene pilot was right, and Americans died because an idiot thought remote technology was “smarter”.