Cost of a single B-2 Bomber: $2.2 billion dollars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-2_bomber (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-2_bomber)
What's your thoughts of how much this stuff costs and if it's going to waste. AND WHERE IS THIS MONEY COMING FROM ANYWAYS- TAXES?!
im no hippy i'm pro meaningful wars, but also we shouldn't be in war now, we should be improving the US.
They should just get B-52's.
BAAAAAANG BAAAAAANG!
BAAAAAANG BAAAAAANG!
BAAAAAANG BAAAAAANG!
WHERE THE FUCK DOES THE US GET THAT MUCH MONEY FROM? :|
Quote from: WIIGAMER24 on January 11, 2008, 07:25:10 PM
WHERE THE f*** DOES THE US GET THAT MUCH MONEY FROM? :|
Taxes.
Quote from: Helios on January 11, 2008, 07:27:00 PM
Quote from: WIIGAMER24 on January 11, 2008, 07:25:10 PM
WHERE THE f*** DOES THE US GET THAT MUCH MONEY FROM? :|
Taxes.
too many people in the US :|
and why can't we just borrow canada's planes, they don't need them at all
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Yeah, and I'll repeat what I said- it's cheaper and easier to use B-52's.
ROCK LOBSTAH!
ROCK LOBSTAH!
ROCK LOBSTAH!
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
Dumbass. B-2's are stealth bombers. Emphasis on STEALTH. B-52's are incredibility to detect, seeing how they're huge and round. Learn about a subject before you try and argue it.
Quote from: WIIGAMER24 on January 11, 2008, 07:25:10 PM
WHERE THE FUCK DOES THE US GET THAT MUCH MONEY FROM? :|
drug deals with the cartels
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
not really, even I expected them to only have 10 of them or less. misleading? bah, i got the fact from a random source and Call of Duty 4 (yah i is noob i died) and found it to be interesting.
i still don't think we need stealth bombers. im just saying war is gosh darn expensive.
and no im not an anti-military loser, I'll likely take ROTC courses and possibly join the military later on.
Thats why we don't have any new guns...
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
HAY GUYZ WE HAD MASTA CHEF YA NO!
WI CN SEND HIM IN TO KICK ASS
yeah
No.
Anyway.
Why don't we just build a Bomb Launcher?
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:36:17 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
Dumbass. B-2's are stealth bombers. Emphasis on STEALTH. B-52's are incredibility to detect, seeing how they're huge and round. Learn about a subject before you try and argue it.
you got served.
Quote from: Kilroy on January 11, 2008, 07:37:43 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
HAY GUYZ WE HAD MASTA CHEF YA NO!
WI CN SEND HIM IN TO KICK ASS
yeah
No.
Anyway.
Why don't we just build a Bomb Launcher?
why the intercourse would you want someone in the navy to go in in air force field?
Cost of a single Tomahawk Cruise Missle: $350,000.
Yay for Call of Duty 4.
Quote from: Pokesamrus on January 11, 2008, 07:39:05 PM
Quote from: Kilroy on January 11, 2008, 07:37:43 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
HAY GUYZ WE HAD MASTA CHEF YA NO!
WI CN SEND HIM IN TO KICK ASS
yeah
No.
Anyway.
Why don't we just build a Bomb Launcher?
why the intercourse would you want someone in the navy to go in in air force field?
BECAUSE HE'S FUCKING AWESOME AND CAN DO ANYTHING
YEAH
No.
Quote from: Kilroy on January 11, 2008, 07:37:43 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
HAY GUYZ WE HAD MASTA CHEF YA NO!
WI CN SEND HIM IN TO KICK ASS
yeah
No.
Anyway.
Why don't we just build a Bomb Launcher?
Yeah, lets use a sling-shot to send bombs overseas!
Quote from: Pokesamrus on January 11, 2008, 07:37:16 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
not really, even I expected them to only have 10 of them or less. misleading? bah, i got the fact from a random source and Call of Duty 4 (yah i is noob i died) and found it to be interesting.
i still don't think we need stealth bombers. im just saying war is gosh darn expensive.
and no im not an anti-military loser, I'll likely take ROTC courses and possibly join the military later on.
Why ten or less?
The B-2 is one of the most effective bombers we have. It can avoid detection by radar, has a very effective payload, and can go at super-sonic speeds. Most planes have one of those three.
why did totla call himself a dumbass earlier?
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:45:37 PM
Quote from: Kilroy on January 11, 2008, 07:37:43 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
HAY GUYZ WE HAD MASTA CHEF YA NO!
WI CN SEND HIM IN TO KICK ASS
yeah
No.
Anyway.
Why don't we just build a Bomb Launcher?
Yeah, lets use a sling-shot to send bombs overseas!
Fuck yeah.
Can you just imagine that?
/fwoosh
"Bomb launched, sir!"
"Good! Let's wait!"
Appx. 2 hours later, somewhere in Iran...
translated into English"What the hell is that little black spot in the air?"
"I dunno, it's getting bigger though..."
And so it got bigger...
And bigger...
AND BIGGER...
"Holy poop, it's a bomb!"
"OH SHI-"
/boom
Quote from: JMV290 on January 11, 2008, 07:47:05 PM
why did totla call himself a dumbass earlier?
misquote.
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:45:37 PM
Quote from: Kilroy on January 11, 2008, 07:37:43 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
HAY GUYZ WE HAD MASTA CHEF YA NO!
WI CN SEND HIM IN TO KICK ASS
yeah
No.
Anyway.
Why don't we just build a Bomb Launcher?
Yeah, lets use a sling-shot to send bombs overseas! Quote from: Pokesamrus on January 11, 2008, 07:37:16 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
not really, even I expected them to only have 10 of them or less. misleading? bah, i got the fact from a random source and Call of Duty 4 (yah i is noob i died) and found it to be interesting.
i still don't think we need stealth bombers. im just saying war is gosh darn expensive.
and no im not an anti-military loser, I'll likely take ROTC courses and possibly join the military later on.
Why ten or less?
The B-2 is one of the most effective bombers we have. It can avoid detection by radar, has a very effective payload, and can go at super-sonic speeds. Most planes have one of those three.
I just thought for a plane so expensive we would only need ten or less in reserve. Just an estimate
Quote from: Kilroy on January 11, 2008, 07:43:55 PM
Quote from: Pokesamrus on January 11, 2008, 07:39:05 PM
Quote from: Kilroy on January 11, 2008, 07:37:43 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: bluaki on January 11, 2008, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: Totla on January 11, 2008, 07:28:52 PM
They only made 21 of those. And it's the best stealth bomber we have, what do you expect?
They haven't made any more in years, too. Good job being misleading.
46.2 billion dollars on 21 planes? still WAY too much.
Would you rather we send over a poopty stealth bomber that gets blown up every time it's sent on a mission?
HAY GUYZ WE HAD MASTA CHEF YA NO!
WI CN SEND HIM IN TO KICK ASS
yeah
No.
Anyway.
Why don't we just build a Bomb Launcher?
why the intercourse would you want someone in the navy to go in in air force field?
BECAUSE HE'S FUCKING AWESOME AND CAN DO ANYTHING
YEAH
No.
MASTER CHIEF IS A RANK IN THE NAVY EQUIVALENT TO GENERAL I BELIEVE, IF YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE CHARACTER IN THE FICTIONAL HALO UNIVERSE THEN PLEASE USE THE FULL NAME MASTER CHIEF PETTY OFFICER JOHN-117.
B-52s were used in like... WW2. :|
Quote from: Jono2 on January 11, 2008, 07:54:24 PM
B-52s were used in like... WW2. :|
They still are workhorses.
Usually big bombers like that just get upgraded and not replaced.
It's fighter jets that are replaced like every 20 years.
Quote from: Jono2 on January 11, 2008, 07:54:24 PM
B-52s were used in like... WW2. :|
Wow, you guys need to get your facts straight.
The B-52's started in the mid 70's.
Quote from: Co-Z on January 11, 2008, 08:01:52 PM
Quote from: Jono2 on January 11, 2008, 07:54:24 PM
B-52s were used in like... WW2. :|
Wow, you guys need to get your facts straight.
The B-52's started in the mid 70's.
really? oh...
Civ 4 mods aren't that accurate then. >_>
Quote from: Jono2 on January 11, 2008, 08:14:39 PM
really? oh...
Civ 4 mods aren't that accurate then. >_>
Yeah, seriously.
Who the Hell would think Love Shack was made any time before the 80s?
Quote from: Co-Z on January 11, 2008, 08:33:20 PM
Quote from: Jono2 on January 11, 2008, 08:14:39 PM
really? oh...
Civ 4 mods aren't that accurate then. >_>
Yeah, seriously.
Who the Hell would think Love Shack was made any time before the 80s?
I'm gonna listen to that song now...
Either you have a ton of free time on your hands to look up pries of war amentites, or you've died in Call of Duty 4 a ton.
Anyway, yes, it's shameful really.
A Javelin missle costs $90,000 - A naval carrier like the USS Arizona casts in excess of $70 billion, depending on the size and contents, but it runs on nuclear energy and only has to be refueled every 20 years.
Quote from: MJA on January 12, 2008, 12:54:50 AM
Either you have a ton of free time on your hands to look up pries of war amentites, or you've died in Call of Duty 4 a ton.
Anyway, yes, it's shameful really.
A Javelin missle costs $90,000 - A naval carrier like the USS Arizona casts in excess of $70 billion, depending on the size and contents, but it runs on nuclear energy and only has to be refueled every 20 years.
I've only died 4 times in COD: 4 lol
just use 1 atomic bomb....