@ISIDEWITHQuestionsForeign policyStarted 8yrs agoActive 22hrs ago

Should the government cancel production of the F-35 fighter?

The F-35 fighter is a stealth fighter jet being produced for the U.S. military by The Lockheed Martin corporation. Three variations of the single seat stealth fighter jet are being produced for the Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. By 2037 2,457 F-35’s will be delivered to the military and will fly until they retire from service in 2070. The research, development and construction of the F-35 will be the most expensive military weapons program in the history of the U.S. When the F-35 retires in 2070 analysts estimate that the cost of the program will have exceeded $1.5 trillion. Oppone…  

Read more
+
Expand
+ Settings x  District of Columbia (Washington D.C.)

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Informed Voters

These active users have achieved an understanding of common concepts and the history regarding the topic of F-35

@9TDWP3P
#1 Informed Voter
Test Your Knowledge

Answer Overview

Response rates from 1k District of Columbia voters.

36%
Yes
64%
No
36%
Yes
64%
No

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 1k District of Columbia voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 1k District of Columbia voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from District of Columbia voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @8JCJLWV from Texas  answered…4yrs4Y

Listen to military experts on this

 @8D2PMVD from Indiana  answered…4yrs4Y

Not unless needed.

 @7PTCG38 from Wisconsin  answered…2yrs2Y

No, the program is too far into production and service to cancel, but revise procurement procedures to avoid out of control and mismanaged costs with future military weapons programs

 @9RXTZK8 from Arizona  answered…4mos4MO

yes. i’m sure the military can find some other non functional military equipment to squander our taxes on.

 @98HKVLP from Pennsylvania  answered…2yrs2Y

No, but dramatically decrease production

 @9CD7JJ3 from Virginia  answered…2yrs2Y

Yes but first fund development of a better replacement aircraft and only discontinue when the new planes are ready.

 @9THSWNG from Colorado  answered…3mos3MO

i dont even know what that is it is probably a fighter jet so it does not really matter to me so they can continue or stop

 @9VKRC4Z from California  answered…2mos2MO

Decrease funding to weapons systems that have a primary function that won’t be regularly used. IE air to air (dog fighting) vs air to ground support.

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “F-35” news articles, updated frequently.

 @GnuJimfrom Georgia  submitted…10mos10MO

Biden Slashes F-35 Jet Order 18%

U.S. President Joe Biden wants an 18% cut in the number of F-35 jets the Pentagon buys next year after Congress' cap on the size of the upcoming defense budget compelled the administration to find savings, two sources familiar with the situation said.The Pentagon order for Lockheed Martin's (LMT.N), opens new tab stealthy fighter will drop to below 70, down from an expected order of 83, for an estimated $1.6 billion drop in spending on jets.The drop in F-35 orders could impact the big defense contractor, which earns about a quarter of its revenue from the jet program. International demand for the jets, which cost somewhere between $80 million to about $120 million each depending on the type, remains strong.Biden's overall defense and national security budget request is expected to be $895 billion, the sources said, compelling deep cuts in a wide range of programs, delays to existing programs and slowing efforts to build weapons stocks depleted by wars in Ukraine and Israel.Budget negotiations between Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and the White House's Office of Management and Budget have largely concluded, but the final amount could change before the budget request is expected to be unveiled on March 11, the sources added.The Pentagon's comptroller declined to comment, and the Joint Program office, which runs the F-35 program, also declined to comment.Last year, the Pentagon projected it would buy 83 of the stealthy F-35 fighter jets from Lockheed Martin for $9.8 billion.

▲  53 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…8mos8MO

Cost of Sustaining Lockheed’s F-35 Jet Now Forecast to Exceed $1.5 Trillion

The world’s costliest weapons program, Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35 fighter jet, is getting even more expensive, according to a government watchdog.Nine years after the Marine Corps declared its first F-35s operational, the Pentagon now projects that the cost of operating and maintaining the jet through 2088 will be $1.58 trillion, 44% higher than originally forecast in 2018, the Government Accountability Office said Monday in a new assessment.It’s another troubling sign for the F-35, which is billed as the stealthiest and most advanced fighter jet ever and sits at the center of US war planning. Despite its high price tag and maintenance issues, the US and several allied governments — including Israel — already fly hundreds of F-35’s, and it played an important role in helping repel a barrage of Iranian missiles and drones aimed at Israel over the weekend.The GAO report paints a troubling picture of the plane’s readiness, saying that inadequate training, a lack of spare parts and support equipment and a heavy reliance on contractors mean all three services that deploy the jet — the Air Force, Marines and Navy — project they will be able to fly the F-35 less often than originally hoped.One major driver of maintenance costs is the Pentagon’s heavy reliance on Lockheed for support, the GAO said. The sustaining support cost element, which captures most sustainment costs associated with the contractor, is a large portion of the F-35. The Pentagon “is seeking expanded government control over the program to reduce program costs and improve program performance,” it said.

▲  2919 replies

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3wks3W

Donald Trump nominates Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General

Former President and 2024 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has announced his intention to nominate former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General of the United States, should he reclaim the presidency in the upcoming election.Bondi, a prominent figure in Republican politics, served as Florida's Attorney General from 2011 to 2019. She gained national attention for her legal battles on issues such as health care reform, consumer protection, and opioid abuse litigation. Known for her steadfast support of Trump during his presidency, Bondi also served as a key adviser during his first impeachment trial, where she defended his administration against accusations of abuse of power.In a statement released by his campaign, Trump praised Bondi’s “unwavering commitment to justice” and her “track record of standing up for everyday Americans against the abuses of Washington’s elites.”“Pam Bondi has been a fearless advocate for the people, and she embodies the principles of fairness, accountability, and the rule of law that are sorely needed to restore trust in our justice system,” Trump said. “She is the right person to lead the Department of Justice into a new era of integrity and excellence.”While Bondi’s nomination has been met with applause from conservative circles, it has also reignited criticism from Democrats and ethics watchdogs. Her acceptance of a $25,000 donation from the Trump Foundation in 2013, which coincided with her decision not to pursue an investigation into Trump University, has drawn scrutiny in the past and resurfaced following the announcement.Democratic leaders have already voiced opposition, questioning Bondi’s ability to lead the Department of Justice independently. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) called the nomination “a political power play” and urged a focus on “restoring integrity, not entrenching partisanship.”

▲  2317 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3 days3D

US Jewish Groups Oppose Resettling Gaza

JTA — A number of major centrist and liberal American Jewish groups say they oppose the re-establishment of Israeli settlements in Gaza.The statements by some of the largest Jewish organizations in the country, made in response to press inquiries, come amid accusations that Israel has cleared out portions of northern Gaza, which Jerusalem has denied, and as far-right government ministers have called for resettling the Palestinian enclave. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir have also repeatedly called for Israel to encourage Palestinians to leave Gaza, drawing condemnation from the Biden administration.For several American Jewish groups — including some that have vocally defended Israel’s prosecution of its war in Gaza against Hamas — the idea of Israeli settlements in Gaza is a non-starter. Groups opposed to the idea include the Jewish Federations of North America, the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League. Also opposed are bodies representing the Reform and Conservative movements, which together can claim to represent the majority of American Jews.“The land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, indigenous to both Jews and Arabs, cannot be the exclusive domain of one people, but must be shared,” Jason Isaacson, AJC’s chief policy and political affairs officer, said. “Like the vast majority of Israelis, AJC believes that the re-establishment of Israeli settlements in Gaza, or a program of displacing Palestinians from Gaza or the West Bank, would be contrary to Israel’s interests.”Israel evacuated its Gaza settlements in 2005, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly ruled out the idea of re-establishing them after the war. But while most Israelis oppose the idea, more than a third — including 42% of Israeli Jews — support it, according to a recent poll by the Israel Democracy Institute. That includes nearly 60% of Israeli Jewish right-wingers, the current government’s voter base.“Ideas like settlement in Gaza are welcome, we need to remember that, in the end, that’s the biggest punishment for what they did to us on October 7,” Ben-Gvir said in an interview on Israeli radio this month, referencing the Hamas terror onslaught in southern Israel, in which some 1,200 people were slaughtered and 251 were seized as hostages, sparking the war in the enclave.

▲  158 replies

Active 2 days ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3wks3W

Kamala Harris is considering running for president again in 2028

Kamala Harris has been lying low since her defeat in the presidential race, unwinding with family and senior aides in Hawaii before heading back to the nation’s capital.But privately, the vice president has been instructing advisers and allies to keep her options open — whether for a possible 2028 presidential run, or even to run for governor in her home state of California in two years. As Harris has repeated in phone calls, “I am staying in the fight.”She is expected to explore those and other possible paths forward with family members over the winter holiday season, according to five people in the Harris inner circle, who were granted anonymity to discuss internal dynamics. Her deliberations follow an extraordinary four months in which Harris went from President Joe Biden’s running mate to the top of the ticket, reenergizing Democrats before ultimately crashing on election night.“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”Harris concedes: 'We must accept the results of this election'SharePlay VideoMost immediately, Harris and her advisers are working to define how and when she will speak out against Donald Trump and reassert her own role in the Democratic Party. Closing out her term as vice president, she’s set to preside over certifying the November election she lost to Trump, and then appear at the once-and-future president’s inauguration on Jan. 20.“There will be a desire to hear her voice, and there won’t be a vacuum for long,” a person close to Harris said.At the same time, Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, will have a long checklist to plow through before they leave the Naval Observatory for good.They have to decide whether they’ll take up permanent residence at their home in Los Angeles, or establish a base elsewhere. No matter where Harris and her family live, some around her have expressed concerns about safety, as her Secret Service protection expires six months after stepping away.

▲  1023 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2 days2D

Elizabeth Warren Walks Back Murder Comments

Congressional Democrats broadly denounced the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson Friday morning, after Republicans started accusing Sen. Elizabeth Warren of excusing violence.“No one's condoning this,” said Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.). “Violence never is the right answer for anything. And it was a horrible murder, a tragic loss for his family.” Warren this week condemned the shooting, but added that people “can be pushed only so far.”"We'll say it over and over," Warren said on MSNBC’S “The ReidOut.” " Violence is never the answer. This guy [Luigi Mangione] gets a trial who's allegedly killed the CEO of UnitedHealth, but you can only push people so far, and then they start to take matters into their own hands."In a statement to POLITICO, Warren said, “Violence is never the answer. Period. I should have been much clearer that there is never a justification for murder.” Top Republicans denounced Warren's comments and the walked-back rhetoric, with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) calling it “inappropriate and dangerous.”Some House Democrats asked about the incident on Thursday pivoted the conversation to discuss policy options on health care or gun safety.“I don't really know that this is really a space that Congress normally weighs in on,” said Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). “But at the end of the day, I think it’s an opportunity, because now people are talking about health care and to talk about the fact that this industry has honestly not been as helpful as it could be.”“Violence is never the answer,” said Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.). “We know that there are people suffering, there’s great challenges in healthcare. There's great challenges, and people have, in fact, been wronged, but a process of governance is the way to address that, not violence.”And Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) who denounced the murder, said the killer should be prosecuted and that “I do know that allegedly a ghost gun was used, and we should also ban ghost guns. There's no reason for them beyond the streets.”

▲  1614 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3 days3D

Israel Sinks Syria's Navy

Israel said Tuesday that it had destroyed Syria’s navy in overnight airstrikes, as it continued to pound targets in Syria despite warnings that its operations there could ignite new conflict and jeopardize the transition of power to an interim government.Israel’s defense minister, Israel Katz, said that the Israeli military had “destroyed Syria’s navy overnight, and with great success.” His remarks appeared to confirm Israel’s responsibility for the destruction documented in the Syrian port city of Latakia, where photos showed the smoldering remains of ships sunk at their dock.Mr. Katz said that Israel’s military “has been operating in Syria in recent days to hit and destroy strategic capabilities that pose a threat to Israel,” although he did not indicate what new or immediate risk Syria’s navy presented to Israel, which has the most powerful military in the Middle East.Israeli warplanes have conducted hundreds of strikes in Syria since the fall of President Bashar al-Assad on Sunday, according to war monitors. Israel has characterized its operations as defensive, saying its military was striking suspected chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria to prevent them from falling “into the hands of extremists.”“From here, I warn the rebel leaders in Syria: Those who follow Assad’s path will end like Assad,” Mr. Katz said.As the Assad government fell to the rebels over the weekend, Israeli ground forces advanced beyond the demilitarized zone on the Israel-Syria border, marking their first overt entry into Syrian territory in more than 50 years. An Israeli military spokesman on Tuesday denied reports that the military was advancing on Damascus. The spokesman, Avichay Adraee, said the military was inside a buffer zone between Israel and Syria and at other points “in order to protect the Israeli border.”Earlier Tuesday, Geir Pedersen, the United Nations special envoy for Syria, called on Israel to halt its “very troubling” military operations there, and said de-escalation was needed. “We are continuing to see Israeli movements and bombardments into Syrian territory. This needs to stop,” Mr. Pedersen told reporters in Geneva.

▲  1513 replies