I try to keep out of the specualtion business, but I imagine there will be tons of armchair quarterbacks talking about getting '16s out of mothballs or biting the bullet and making the repairs on the Eagles. I don't wish to really dig into the nitty gritty there. I'm sure there are better experts on that subject on this board than me.
If we need those jets for the fight tomorrow, building F-22s might have some issues. It isn't like they can magically going to roll a hundred+ of those things off the assembly line in the next few months. They would need to seriously beef up the supply chain (for a lot of pieces) to meet that huge overflow demand. So we will still be lacking assets for a long time, but now we will spend more money. Saying you need those F-22s is one thing. Saying they are the ONLY option is politicing. And saying, "You can't put a price on..." is tugging at the ol' heart strings. The AF is very good at lobbying for money. I will give them that, for sure. And make no mistake, when they start talking about why they need expensive programs (and using soundbites like that) it is lobbying. I'm certainly not faulting the General. His job is at least partially to help procure those funds. He is doing that.
However-ever-ever, all the while, this huge increase of spending for the F-22 is going to come from somewhere. And it ain't welfare, it ain't the congressional salaries...it might be from the same pool that NAVAIR is hoping to get a slice of.
