|
|
recent comments
Ellis flip-flop: Doesn't change much of anything...Rep. Ellis to pay his own way to Denver...Childers: Regardless the national races, he looks hard to beatWhat's happened to Speaker McCoy? There go Abkhazia and South OssetiaWell, so much for that fire truckUm . . . reckon Taos is ready for this?“I’m not fixing to testify. I don’t know nothing.” Daily Journal editorial on tax reformCoast leaders protest Bush visitVP Speculation"21 Drink, 18 to Party" may be on it's way out Another reason to drink Sobieski VodkaNeed a drink? SobieskiTry the Snooty Pooch in Madison.Homeland Security: a Joke. |
|
©2005-2008 Jackson New Media, Inc. All rights reserved.
|
Hmmm, the Air Force goes with the tanker that they feel suits their needs best. Boeing wants them to buy their tanker regardless of what the airmen need. Boeing knew what Northrup Grumman was coming up with, a bigger tanker than theirs that would be more versatile; so why didn’t they develop a bigger tanker themselves instead of just putting a gas pump on the back of an existing airframe? This is just like making your soldiers use an inferior rifle to make some corporation happy, or the bureau of ordnance happy, which is what has happened time and time again in our military. Just ask the submariners in WWII about the early torpedoes that would not explode on direct or magnetic contact with an enemy ship.