Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

foxnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 112 posts

Re: Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

#101

Post by [deleted] »

rayiner wrote: post #96
anigbrowl wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do conservatives hate doing anything for children so much? WTF. He gave you a clear answer which you just ignored so you could repeat your ideal of how things should work instead of addressing the realities of how they do. You are smart enough to understand the difference, but chose to give a BS reply.

It’s not liberal versus conservative. I’m a liberal on this. I support SNAP. It’s a generous benefit and that’s okay with me. We should give parents plenty of money to make sure their kids can eat. Your position isn’t just liberal, it’s post-liberal. You’re saying that it’s not enough to have cash benefits that gives parents reasonable choices in feeding their kids. It’s not about having broad-based policies that wor…

[deleted]

Re: Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

#102

Post by GerryAdamsSF »

tim-tday wrote: post #82
GerryAdamsSF wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You are misreading the science. The parental effect only shows up for the immediate parents not grandparents. Hereditary causes would result in persistent effects. The cause is therefore not genetics but rather family environment. (See studies of children of immigrants) Successful and wealthy parents support their children, giving them a calm and supportive environment in which to excel. (Poor parents who do that hav…

No, this is what twin studies are.

One twin raised in rich environment performs similarly to those in poor environments academically.

Re: Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

#103

Post by red-iron-pine »

b3ing wrote: post #74
canucker2016 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the book "Skunk Works" by Ben Rich (former head of Lockheed's Skunk Works), the authour talks about the behaviour of the military officers. Spy planes weren't seen as valuable/important to the typical officer who was looking to get promoted to higher levels versus the typical sexy fighter jets or bombers. Just as in any group, there are certain positions that are more prestigious/desired than other positions. Typi…

I'm sure the defense contractors wanted to sell the expensive planes that require more maintenance rather than drones

jet planes require fancy R&D groups and custom builds

drones are commodity manufacturing

Re: Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

#104

Post by red-iron-pine »

GerryAdamsSF wrote: post #27
scottyah wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It didn't make sense to physically stock up on them before. It was mostly research, prototyping, comms infrastructure, software for swarms, AI piloting, ground control, etc. The next phase of building factories and manufacturing tooling/capabilities is a little bit concerning.

Simple DJI style drones employed en masse in Afghanistan would have been helpful for a variety of tasks. I cannot see any reason, over than oversight and a lack of imagination, why something useful in Ukraine in 2022 was not feasible or useful in 2017 by the USA. We already used drones quite handily well before that time frame but in a much more limited manner in a different form factor.

i mean mon ami drones were employed heavily in Afghanistan

just not DJI suicide drones, and not on the squad level

in 2006 those would have been great but the tech wasn't there the way it is in 2026.

but in 2016 the US had eyes on everything. the difference is that the US had an occupation -- hearts & minds -- and couldn't just JDAM everything that moves, which is the SOP in Ukraine

Re: Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

#105

Post by angry_octet »

dmix wrote: post #45
cco wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The same reason Iran is using a lot of drones now. It doesn't seem like the US would be in a conflict where they don't have air superiority. Hmmm, this sentence appears to be a paradox? Is the US not fighting Iran right now? Iran has a very weak air force and the US claims air superiority, yet Iran is using a lot of drones. I think your comment proves GP's point, regardless of traditional air power, drones will fea…

Iran launched around 2k drones over the war. Ukraine uses around 200k/m. https://www.kyivpost.com/post/55897 Either way the US needs way more drones instead of just expensive missiles/jets/boats/armor if they are going to face anyone serious like China.

Right conclusion, but tho drones used are very different. Most of the drones Ukraine uses along the line of control are very short range.

Re: Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

#106

Post by angry_octet »

hnthrow0287345 wrote: post #13

Misleading title: this article says it is seeking a budget increase, not that it's been approved >The funding request, a dramatic surge from roughly $225 million a year earlier, signals a major shift in how the U.S. military plans to fight future wars, accelerating a move toward large numbers of lower-cost, AI-enabled systems. The merits of this ask within this insane administration basically means nothing IMO. Hegse…

Yes it's totally insane to jump $500B, and no they cannot spend it in one year. Most of the money will go towards systems development and production spanning years. And lining the pockets of Trump bros.

We're seeing the total dissolution of Congressional control of spending and oversight. They'll get the money and spend it as they please.

Re: Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

#107

Post by [deleted] »

none2585 wrote: post #87
tim-tday wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We had no need to fight Iran to begin with. We just did it as a bro move to support a buddy. And it isn’t over oil it’s over Israel being sick of Iran funding groups that continuously launch rockets at their cities. (Which, frankly I get, but maybe not enough to crash the global economy)

Because the money is the most important thing being lost?

[deleted]

Re: Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

#108

Post by [deleted] »

rayiner wrote: post #96
anigbrowl wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do conservatives hate doing anything for children so much? WTF. He gave you a clear answer which you just ignored so you could repeat your ideal of how things should work instead of addressing the realities of how they do. You are smart enough to understand the difference, but chose to give a BS reply.

It’s not liberal versus conservative. I’m a liberal on this. I support SNAP. It’s a generous benefit and that’s okay with me. We should give parents plenty of money to make sure their kids can eat. Your position isn’t just liberal, it’s post-liberal. You’re saying that it’s not enough to have cash benefits that gives parents reasonable choices in feeding their kids. It’s not about having broad-based policies that wor…

[deleted]

Re: Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

#109

Post by rayiner »

nullocator wrote: post #95
rayiner wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to have a Japan-style universal lunch program. But this point is an empty appeal to emotion. Kids are being fed. The U.S. spends $100 billion a year on SNAP and $18 billion a year on the National School Lunch Program. We just focus most of the money on cash benefits to parents of children rather than feeding kids at school.

Not sure whether you're intentionally spreading misinformation on this subject or not, but based on who I'm responding to it probably is intentional. Anyways in contrast to "Kids are being fed". Almost 14% of children in the U.S. face food insecurity according to the U.S. government. There is real evidence this improved during covid when the government did offer additional funding for school provided meals. The numbe…

> Almost 14% of children in the U.S. face food insecurity according to the U.S. government

What does that term mean? My dad spent his career working in maternal and child health internationally. The way experts define this in the field of child nutrition is based on objective numbers. How many calories are kids eating? What macronutrients are they getting?

Are you saying 14% of kids can’t afford to get the calories and nutrients that nutrition experts say they need? Because if that were true that would be shocking and would certainly justify your position. But I haven’t seen any data to support that.

Re: Pentagon spending on drones jumps from $225M to $55B in one year

#110

Post by ASalazarMX »

chung8123 wrote: post #78
ASalazarMX wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine has shown that a drone factory can be made on any old building, it's not like they need huge machines. Would you carpet bomb all usable buildings? Cheap drones as a defensive weapon make war way more costly to the aggressor.

Cheap drones have made war more expensive for people that care about where they inflict the damage.

No, they made war expensive for people that are used to overwhelmingly superior but expensive military force. Drones are perfectly capable (even excel at) surgical strikes, and if the enemy destroys a $1,000 drone with a $100,000 missile, it's still a win for the drone.
Post reply on HN