Between 1952 and 1962, Boeing built more than 740 of these planes. Not a one since.
In the Post 9-11-01 era, would a responsible President and Congress not be replacing 50-year-old aircraft with faster, higher-flying, more fuel-efficient aircraft? No, I’m not talking about UAVs. Video-guided missiles and unmanned powered kites are not the same thing as a national defense strategy. Whoops. Neither is the war in Iraq. Sorry ’bout that, chief. But you can’t go on forever, even spending money borrowed from the Chinese, on piddly little $1,500 hammers and $1,200 toilet seats. Bush has, apparently, even failed to recognize that the military/industrial complex needs new contracts to survive. Ultimately, that may be what brings impeachment to his door.
Front page
The B-70 Valkyrie was supposed to replace the B-52
but funding for the project was gutted in th ’60s. prototypes flew in the mid 60s…
we, that is the usofa, don’t really need a new intercontinental bomber, though. who we gonna bomb, fro 50,000 feet? no nation on earth—indeed not ALL the other nations on earth—can challenge US superiority anywhere on the planet, or off it.
The human face of war is what makes it undesirable.
Humans flying airplanes whose bombs destroy cities have values of some sort and might forestall the Apocalypse.
Robots don’t. They follow orders. And thus are far more desirable to the Beasts who would rule us.
And to gently correct you, Sarah, Boeing still makes a helluva lot of money from its buddies at the D.o’D. and Congress. The shift to UAVs, among other technological nightmares, if anything has been accompanied by a great increase in defense expenditures to the corporate arm of the iron triangle. What’s more remarkable is that the older machines were engineered to last.
That was an error that has since been corrected…
No Hell below us
Above us, only sky
See, the market for the UAVs is much, much bigger...
Why, I’m sure every city and town in America will want one. Why, several!
We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan
As a self-loathing liberal
As a self-loathing liberal cog in the military-industrial complex, I’d just like to point out that UAVs (I used to do research on control interfaces) aren’t robots. While they are working on making them more autonomous, fire/no-fire decisions are and always will be at the discretion of a human. I would be shocked if that policy changed.
We haven’t replaced the B52 because we haven’t needed to, and I think that’s a great thing. Our technological superiority on the battlefield is a great thing for reducing conflict intensity and length, and protecting the lives our our soldiers. That said, we spend way too much money on “defense” (aka Department of War, a name that never should have been changed). I’d be happy to see those expenditures plummet, even if that meant I needed to go find another job.
Terrific picture, BTW.
self loathing liberal:
thanks for stopping by, i don’t think we get too many of your kind here often. you say:
here’s a crazy thought: keeping them home, cleaning up after things like Katrina and otherwise in peaceful domestic missions saves lives too!
almost all of them, in fact!
it’s long past time we admit the many, many failures of american military adventurism abroad, as well as the true price we pay for the ever-larger and hungry for taxdollars MIC (you know what that is, right? ;-)
that true price includes: univeral health care, education for all, innovation in industry from which all, and not a few, can benefit, and of course, lots of happily living and alive and not dead soldiers. and brown people, but hey- forget about them.
anyway, i’m an Overton Window Pusher, Esq. so i want you to understand that to me (and i’m glad you’d be happy to change jobs) what you do is immoral, and must end. not just you, of course, but everyone who particpates in the Industrial Complex of Death. more people are dying because of it than just soldiers. many. america has to stop believing that it needs to be concerned with “technological superiority on the battlefield.” we’ve got nukes, plenty, and that’s all the defense we really need*. let’s accept that it’s time for us to retire from the world stage for a little while, turn swords to plowshares, and fix what’s broken right here.
*the dissolution and reorganization of intel is a separate discussion, and would include a complete reimagining of the true mission of “intelligence” as a gov’t service. and it goes without saying, it would be smaller.