zbandito wrote:The F-35 is unpopular with the press; less so with military procurement experts since it's supposed to be much cheaper to produce and maintain a single airframe for all service branches, compared to specific airframes for each service.
As a fully out-of-the-hangar Aerosexual, I'm familiar with the F-35 and the various opinions on it, which is probably more than President Trump is.
Is it good or bad his idea that NATO countries have to contribute more to Defence, that is at least 2% of their budget?
I understand that lots of people in the U.S. think Americans have been paying to much for Defence of others, and that it would be fair if Europe would pay its share and i understand their point of view.
Now, even if Trump tends to ignore it, the E.U. exhists. Traditionally it has been the UK who pushed for closer association with the U.S. There has been for quite a while an idea in Europe that the EU should be responsible for its own Defence. If each E.U. country is forced to contribute the 2% of their budget for the purpose in anyway it would be much easier to start putting that idea in practice.
I get the impression the Republican party is torn between people who want exactly the same thing as Obamacare except not done by a Democrat, and people who are rabid right wing libertarian lunatics who want the poor and the sick ground up and fed into the furnaces to fuel the coal mining industry or something.
Couple of things bumped into each other in my head, today...
Trump: Anti-vaccine, anti-EPA, pro-coal.
Coal contributes heavily to environmental lead and mercury, which are associated with permanent cognitive damage and theorised (far more credibly than vaccines, but still far from certain) to be linked to autism and ADHD.
I guess if measles kills everyone off we won't have to worry about brain damage.
