Mr. Chairman, we do have a very important choice to make tonight, and it is a choice between a policy that shortchanges the men and women that risk their lives in defense of our Nation or it is a policy that will provide those men and women with equipment and the tools that they need to ensure that our Nation remains the protector of democracy and freedom around the world. Now we live in an age where when dictators are alive and well, they are busy stockpiling nuclear biological chemical weapons; and as leaders, we have to make sure that we send American soldiers into combat against these tyrants with the best possible chance of success. And as Cap Weinberger noted, the Air Force has estimated that a B-2 with two crewmembers could conduct an attack normally involving 75 tactical aircraft and 147 crewmembers. The procurement and lifecycle costs of 75 tactical aircraft approaches $7.5 billion and the comparable costs for one B-2 is $1.1 billion. Now clearly the B-2 provides us with the best opportunity to protect U.S. interests at the lowest costs with the best possible technology, and I just hope that my colleagues will make the right choice tonight.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing military funding and the importance of the B-2 bomber during a House floor debate.
Share
More from Andrew P. Hunter
I respect the gentleman who just made the statement who has been in Iraq. But my son was in Iraq, also, and on two missions, two tours, and Afghanistan. And one important fact that I think comes out when you talk to folks who have been…
once again, these Status of Forces Agreements, which are pretty run of the mill, do not manifest security commitments by the United States to protect the countries that they are made with. They talk about the treatment and describe the…
I rise, Mr. Speaker, to talk about duty, honor, and country. Many times, Members of this great body rise to talk about those who wear the uniform of the United States who have fallen in the Iraq or the Afghanistan theater and to recount…





