Quote:There is nothing wrong with that. I agree with you, and also support those kind of things. Where I draw the line is if the expenditures for those items takes away from necessary military equipment. I'm not going to leave a soldier without a gun just so his barrack can have solar panels.

 

There is certainly a happy medium somewhere, and if the military finds and utilizes it, more power to them.

 

Absolutely.  One HUGE mistake that the 0bama regime made was getting rid of the F-22 program.  Sure, they do cost more, but the effectiveness of the weapon was worth it.  Just 1 F-22 can take out 5 enemy fighters before they even know that it's there.  Why was Desert Storm such a success?  It was because we engaged with superior firepower and technology.  Much of the Iraqi forces were defeated before a single troop set foot in the country.

 

The big mistake is the F-35 program.  While it is far more advanced technically, it wasn't ready for production and still isn't.  While the F-35 takes advantage of the latest technology and innovation, it wasn't ready for full production when it came out, and still isn't.

 

As it relates to the subject of this thread regarding "green energy", the thing is that the job of the military is a dirty business.  Priority should be to use the "best" method to do something rather than the "greener" method.  I could say more about it, but I would be approaching a line that I don't even want to get close to.

---