Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

We're on the same page there, the issue arises out of the nature of our conflicts. Do we pursue absolute superiority for our pilots at the expense of the ground troops? I say no. The pilots are in far better shape comparatively speaking, than the boots on the ground guys. It would be nice to fund both to the hearts content of the big brass, but we cannot afford it. Big part of that is due to the cozy relationship of defense contractors to the Pentagon and Congress. If we could reign in the ludicrous costs of developing new weapons, we probably could have it all. In 2007, Lockheed-Martin paid their CEO over 30 million. The same company that is years behind schedule, and at least 5.1 billion over budget on the new VH-71