Who says it’s egotistical.

Then these morons would complain that it’s made out to look like the B-29's that were used to firebomb and nuked Japan.

You were going perfectly right up until the last sentence, in which you revealed yourself to be a moron with permanent TDS.

You are an idiot.

You think the livery for a nationa’s postal planes is somehow radically different from the livery used for the head of state from the same nation?

You’re saying that a paint scheme that looks like it was ordered for the crooks at the United Nations is appropriate for the President of the UNITED STATES?

The blue on the Russian flag is much paler than the Navy Blue of the U.S. Flag.

Yes, very well done for a retard who thinks that the flag of the United States is the same colors as the globalists and their United Nations flag.

Is it a United Nations (Powder Blue and White) plane, or a United States (Red, White and Blue, Baby) plane?

And if it wasn’t, you would be complaining that it’s too complicated and costs too much to do.

That right there should tell you that the thing is over-engineered and needlessly over-complicated. USAF pilots are no dummies. You’re talking 140+ IQ as a minimum, with ENGINEERING degrees, so, you know, they actually are capable of understanding a properly designed and engineered system.

More shameless propaganda.

How much $$$$ did Boeing execs deposit in anonymous Swiss Bank Accounts or Panamanian corporations for these evaluators?

Dog vomit would be more accurate.

YUP!

Yeah, sure. That same argument was what was used to field the F-4 Phantom without guns, “because our guys take out the enemy with missiles before they even see the friendlies, hurrrr durrr. And we all saw how well THAT turned out.”

And yet the B-52 has never been turned back from a bombing mission, EVER.

That just replaces one problem with two problems...or maybe three.

No, the F-35 is embarrassing.

This is why most of the USAF officers involved with this should be spending life in Leavenworth.