Rand Paul: Obama Cutting Tomahawk Missile Makes No Sense

[fr33]

Absolutely not. There would appear to be a blind spot in your perception here. "Begging the question" is the name of an informal fallacy in logic where the user presumes the conclusion as a component of their premises.

But it's you who have compared my support of cutting government funding to banning firearms. A fallacy in logic indeed.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

But it's you who have compared my support of cutting government funding to banning firearms. A fallacy in logic indeed.

Ending a DOD weapons program is effectively identical to banning that weapon from the DOD's use. That weapon will no longer exist. That weapon can no longer be used. Soldiers will not be allowed to deploy it. It is effectively banned.

And your statement of "cutting government funding" is disingenuous. Rand's proposal which I support and am herein defending cuts 40-fold more money from the DOD budget than Obama's plan, and you are defending Obama's plan over Rand's. Therefore it is I who am defending budget cuts, while you are defending the higher spending from Obama's plan in order to specifically eliminate the Tomahawk.

 

[phill4paul]

Oh no, you are mostly correct. Tomahawk is indeed past it's prime. But, at this point the kinds of nations that have an effective defense against it (Russia, China) are the kinds of countries that if we go to war with it's pretty much over for the planet, so it doesn't much matter which weapons systems are deployed. The one part that IS wrong is the idea that the money spent on future tomahawks will cover the development of the new system. That is probably the rhetoric that Lockheed Martin is spreading, and warhawk congress critters are parroting it, so it's reasonable to pick up, but that notion does not survive close scrutiny.

In order to develop a missile, you have to do lots of testing. Destructive testing. Just launching the things at nothing and letting them crash into the empty desert will cost more than the Tomahawk maintenance and replacements over the next 10-20 years, nevermind the development and engineering staff, facilities, R&D work.

Remember, Lockheed Martin is also responsible for the F-35 boondoggle. What are we at now, 100....times....the original cost estimate?

I have highlighted a piece of your post that I believe bears some consideration. The point being, what other country would threaten us enough that we would have a need for more Tomahawk missiles? I do not see a threat the scale of which we would need 3500 Tomahawks.
That said, given the planned upgrades to the Tomahawk, I believe, from additional research, that as far as the budget is concerned the Tomahawk would be the most conservative approach.
Interesting to note, also, is that I have yet to see a quote regarding the above mentioned next-gen cruise missiles is if they are submarine launch capable.

 

[Anti-Neocon]

Yawn... Rand going for "conservative" cred. He's powerless anyway so let him do it. As far as I know, the Tomahawk has been on the way out for a long time, and its no radical idea that originated with Obama.

 

[specsaregood]

Yawn... Rand going for "conservative" cred.

He is going for "conservative" cred by proposing auditing the pentagon, cutting $70billion immediately from the DOD budget, stopping policing the world and stopping nation building? Which conservatives are you speaking of?

 

[Christian Liberty]

I am a pretty extreme noninterventionist, but I am also a military veteran...and not just a "my own half acre" guy. Rand is right, Tomahawks and hellfires are pretty much the last projects you want to cut if you are a fiscal conservative. The ROI is enormous on these systems. If Obama cuts these, then he will be saving 1/100 of 1% just to later make a 5% increase to replace these weapons systems.

Just because you, individually, oppose aggression does not make it hypocritical for you, personally, to own a gun. Cutting the DOD budget is absolutely critical. Starting those cuts here is pretty stupid.

Either Obama wants to increase spending in the development of NEW missile systems, OR he is intentionally cutting programs that ought to be LAST on the list rather than FIRST, because he knows they won't pass and he ultimately doesn't actually want cuts, or in an attempt to distance people like Rand from his noninterventionist base on the (apparently correct) presumption that noninterventionists by and large will not have a working knowledge on system priorities.

As for me, I think DOD budget needs to be cut by about half. That's not a joke. And in that 50% cut, I would NOT touch tomahawks and hellfires. These programs are already paid for, and they fulfill roles that are not filled by other systems. If Obama gets his way it means we either lose certain capabilities, or ultimately increase spending to replace those systems.

I don't know, this sort of thing strikes me as a "the troops come before the rest of us" sort of thing. That said, I guess I can't really expect Rand to start mimicking Laurence Vance and Tom DiLorenzo on these issues.

 

[AuH20]

You've convinced me, Gunny. We need the Tomahawks. Now, if we could just find the next country to use them on!

Getting angry about inanimate objects isn't any way to go through life. The antis use the same reasoning to disparage gun ownership. With that said, you should save your ridicule for those selecting the targets.

 

[AuH20]

He is going for "conservative" cred by proposing auditing the pentagon, cutting $70billion immediately from the DOD budget, stopping policing the world and stopping nation building? Which conservatives are you speaking of?

The noise on both sides is deafening and entertaining. The neos state Rand is a hopeless peacenik that refuses to defend America from any threat and then we have some in our stead who are absolutely paranoid about some weapon programs and their function in our arsenal.

 

[erowe1]

What in the world?

Rand?!

 

[erowe1]

Here's what Rand should do: propose a compromise, where the federal government eliminates any allocation of tax dollars to the Tomahawk, and they set up a fund that people who want to keep the Tomahawk can donate their own money to for that purpose. And if the fund gets enough money, then they keep the Tomahawk and use that money for it.

 

[Christian Liberty]

What in the world?

Rand?!

Don't tell me you're actually surprised

 

[georgiaboy]

Are Tomahawks usable on drones?

 

[Anti-Neocon]

He is going for "conservative" cred by proposing auditing the pentagon, cutting $70billion immediately from the DOD budget, stopping policing the world and stopping nation building? Which conservatives are you speaking of?

The ones that don't think beyond FOX "News" headlines.

 

[mad cow]

Here's what Rand should do: propose a compromise, where the federal government eliminates any allocation of tax dollars to the Tomahawk, and they set up a fund that people who want to keep the Tomahawk can donate their own money to for that purpose. And if the fund gets enough money, then they keep the Tomahawk and use that money for it.

Yeah,and do the same for school funding,social security,the NSA,CIA,FBI,OSHA,EPA....That'll get him elected.

 

[specsaregood]

The ones that don't think beyond FOX "News" headlines.

I have found that Ron Paul supporters are often found to be in the not reading past the headlines group.

 

[Origanalist]

I have to go with Gunny (and Rand)on this. This is just going to cost more in the long run, there is no way in hell they aren't going to replace them with something much more expensive and unnecessary.

 

[erowe1]

Yeah,and do the same for school funding,social security,the NSA,CIA,FBI,OSHA,EPA....That'll get him elected.

The guy he's railing against, the one who apparently wants to cut the Tomahawk without the compromise I suggested... that guy got elected.

 

[MRK]

Sounds like Rand really wants to be president.

 

[mad cow]

The guy he's railing against, the one who apparently wants to cut the Tomahawk without the compromise I suggested... that guy got elected.

You should send Rand an email with your suggestion.

 

[phill4paul]

Are Tomahawks usable on drones?

I believe that would be the Hellfire that is used by drones. A Tomahawk is pretty much the size and double the weight of a drone.