2 nuclear subs = children's health care

[annm4peace]

I just heard on Democracy Now that 2 nuclear subs cost the same as funding coverage for all the children in the US.

[Solon]

1. A single Virginia class submarine costs about 2.3 billion dollars...

So yeah, I believe it.

[taterguy]

15. I wouldn't pay a nickel over 1.9 billion for this

Do we at least get to take it out for a test drive?

[NutmegYankee]

18. They are dropping in cost. One of the few programs that can stay in budget.

We are building them because they are designed for more asymmetrical warfare, spying, and special forces missions. They are the first generation of submarines designed for not sinking the Soviet fleet. In addition, they replace older classes of submarines that are being retired after extensive usage.

As can be clearly seen on this thread, few know what they do, and it's the silent part of the "silent service" that hurts the submarine force as well as make it the US Navy's most powerful force.



Pick something else to cry about for Children's Health care. The Navy is the only force that is to be maintained at all times in the US Constitution, and is critical to maintaining our security and protecting the trade we rely on. Submarines do cost a lot of money, but a lot of it has been inflation in metal prices. The systems are state of the art, and the Navy will not cut costs to save a few million here or there that would risk losing the entire vessel with all personnel on board. Everytime men are sent into the depths of the ocean it's like launching men into space, but few notice because they don't have big blazing rockets strapped to their asses. But the mission is just as dangerous. Remember that.

[Orrex]

2. Where the hell are your priorities?

We need those subs to defend us against the Soviets. Didn't you see The Hunt for Red October, for crying out loud?

[EFerrari]

4. Robert Scheer pointed out that al Qaida doesn't have a navy.

Embarrassing!

[Orrex]

8. Sure, if you buy the official story

They probably have a whole fleet submerged in Baltimore's inner harbor, just waiting to torpedo a liquid natural gas tanker or two.

[onethatcares]

38. don't forget "Red Dawn"

sheesh, the cubans took the entire heartland without a submarine. I guess the rivers just weren't deep enough.

[Poll_Blind]

3. Man that's a hard kick in a balls. I hate what our government does with...

...OUR money. I mean, if we only had like a hundred ways to blow up the whole world and pock-scar a few of the neighboring planets I could see needing more of these things. But really.

  They're not stupid, they're complicit.

PB

[Captain Angry]

5. Oh come on, there's no comparison.

After one year of children's care, what do you got? Nothing. But next year, we'd still have two subs.

.

.

.

I'M KIDDING. You'd think that the Republicans would be all for child care. It would provide strong healthy soldiers down the line.

Our priorities are so screwed up.

[BlooInBloo]

6. But the 2 subs could KILL all of those children! Hence no health care problem....

So it's really 6 on one hand, 1/2 dozen on the other.

[NutmegYankee]

20. How? These are not Nuclear Missile Submarines.

They are nuclear as in Nuclear Power Plant.

[taterguy]

24. Cruise Missiles can carry nuclear warheads

I can't believe someone as knowledgeable about defense issues as you are didn't know that

I guess we could quibble about whether or not a nuke equipped cruise missile could take out every child in the US though.

[NutmegYankee]

25. I know they can. Not enough to do what you said though. nt

[taterguy]

26. "These are not Nuclear Missile Submarines."

There's plenty of posts that I forget making but I can usually remember posts that I make on the same day.

:shrug:

I guess a missile with a nuclear warhead isn't a nuclear missile.

Right?

[NutmegYankee]

27. You misunderstand.

A ballistic Missile Submarine is designed to carry large Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, each packed with warheads. Attack submarines are not primarily designed to carry nuclear payloads. While they could have some placed on board, that is not their primary purpose.

And spare me the attitude.

[taterguy]

28. You're posting in GD and you're complaining about attitude?

Welcome to DU!

:toast:

Attitude is what it's all about here.

I'm aware of the different missions of nuke subs.

I'm also aware that you're being very sloppy and careless with language, which is one of my pet peeves.

Think before you post, unless you're as drunk as I am right now.

[NutmegYankee]

29. It's not carelessness with language, it's convention.

Attack subs are not considered nuke warhead subs by convention.

[taterguy]

30. My point exactly

You wrote

"Attack subs are considered nuke warhead subs by convention."

I suspect you meant to type that attack subs aren't considered nuke warhead subs.

But you got careless and left out a few letters.

Of course I could be wrong.

:shrug:

[NutmegYankee]

32. No.

I had to post quickly because I have a real life beyond this board and had only a few seconds to post. That does not excuse the fact that you presumed that all "ATTACK" subs carry nuclear tipped missiles that can kill all the children in the US, a presumption that is incorrect.

[taterguy]

33. You composed and typed a reply in just a few seconds?

Yeah
Right

[NutmegYankee]

34. You can't type two sentences in 10 seconds?

bummer.

[taterguy]

35. This discussion is just like an arms race

It's not serving any useful purpose.

It's just a couple arrogant SOBs squandering resources and energy because they're too damn stubborn to call it quits even though it's long past time to let it go and just give it up.

[NutmegYankee]

36. You have a point. It's like International Politics.

Take care.

[wtmusic]

7. Or a month in Iraq.

Next time your neighborhood 'pubbie whines about Democrat "handouts" remind him/her they pale in comparison to defense handouts. And help people instead of kill them.

[johnnycatt]

9. for how long?

2 billion will cover children for how long?

What do we do when that time elapses? Not build another sub?

[wtmusic]

10. 1 year

And yes, skip building the sub next year too. We're getting good at this!

[johnnycatt]

11. So, are we scheduled to build a sub every year for eterinty...

And with population growth, I would assume there would be more children 10 years from now than we have today, so we'd need to get rid of two sub a year then.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. I agree - let the kids die

fuck 'em if they can't afford healthcare. WE NEED MORE SUBS TO FIGHT THE COMMIES. Actually we need more commies so that we can build MORE SUBS, and COWBELLS.

[wtmusic]

19. The defense budget would build 40 of them -- every year, for eternity

They can keep their precious sub if they stop invading countries for no legit reason.

That would be a bargain.

[Snarkoleptic]

12. Classic example of - Guns vs. Butter.

Fuck the future, we need armageddon.
Gag....

[Skidmore]

14. And McCain-Bush-Lieberman will be hellbent on ensuring that we get

armageddon. This is a point that needs to be driven home very pointedly during the GE by our candidate. You get the results your policy is set up to deliver, as we have seen for the past decade.

[Bosso 63]

16. Anyone notice when a B2 Bomber crashed in Guam?

It happened a couple months a go. The two crew members ejected safely, but that was a billion+ dollars up in smoke.

[annm4peace]

17. Is there a simple website with cost and item

Maybe I could make some posters with Picture and price tag. and then what we could have bought with the money.

Im in Minneapolis.. so need to get signs ready for the Republican Convention here.

[NutmegYankee]

21. Robert Scheer doesn't know what he was talking about.

Starting with we actually only build one a year. Second, they are not only used to fight another navy. Virginia Class has been designed to get close to land, gather intelligence and capture enemy communications and deploy seals for missions. They cannot be seen from shore, aircraft and cannot be heard. If needed, they can sail to any ocean without fuel and can hit most of the world's surface with a non-nuclear guided missile.

They are actually very useful for anti-terror and asymmetric warfare. These are not the subs from "The Hunt for Red October". They currently replace those subs, which are decommissioned faster than we build replacements. As for subs, almost every ocean bordering country in the world has at least one. Even South America has them. Hell, Brazil is building a Nuclear one.

[taterguy]

22. We're using these for military purposes now?

:wtf:

[NutmegYankee]

23. LOL. The human kind...

Special Forces, like the Navy Seals

[Phred42]

31. Here's the Story in one Graph

[galledgoblin]

37. Oreos

http://www.truemajority.org/oreos/

this is an older video, but I fully expect the figures to be the same- maybe even more skewed now that we're in year 5 of this Goddamned war...