The military is paying for it. Lockheed makes like 90% of its profit from the US military. The same military that has guaranteed your freedom for the last 75 years.

Really, So lets hold off on the name calling. $23,850 is a far cry from $2.50 a day. Besides that how may social programs are available for poor in the US.

American Poor is rarely world poor. If you have enough money for Cell Phones, Cable TV, Cigarets, Alcohol, a car, a TV you are not poor. Instead of spending money on the list above how about you stick to essentials Food, Shelter, Clothing and Warmth. Then once the basics are met spend the rest of your money on…

I was a crew chief on AH-64 and a CH-47 and I served in both theaters also. When Beau Bergdahl disappeared we did most of the heavy lifting looking for him and trust me we moved a lot of people and did a lot of direct insertion missions. The whole time I was in RC East I never saw a Osprey maybe down south but not in…

Wrong do some research

Ever flow in one in a canyon they are awfully hard to where they are and where they are going I would call that stealthy.

There are no AH-64 in the US Army Aviation special operations community.

So you have access to classified Intel that backs up your opinion or did you just read that somewhere just asking

No problem I completely understand I have been in your shoes many times. You loose a lot of the nuance of the debate in a text format. Sometimes we can read things into the written word that we would dismiss standing face to face due to body language or facial expressions. Sadly though this probably the only way you…

I will certainly grant you that. I think you and I are very close to in our thoughts on the issue I think our biggest point of contention is how much blame to assign where. I feel more blame should be placed on crew and the people that supported them than the airlines itself. Could the airline have taken more…

Ok so you fly in a high risk fly zone why? Why is it a futile discussion you and I have different ideas that we debating on a forum. Now going back to what you said even if they captured a Ukrainian system they have to be taught or some with knowledge of how the systems works has to operate it. As far as flying in a…

Wrong analogy it was not considered war zone above 33,000 feet. Because it takes a very sophisticated system to shoot down an airliner at or above that altitude. Normally those type of systems are tightly controlled by a nations military. Most of the time a nation does not want to be responsible for shooting down a…

"They are nothing but big targets you can't defend from neither missiles nor torpedoes this day and age." You may want to do some research on carrier defense before you make your uninformed statement.

The Airline is not at fault for being shot down that is a stupid assertion. That is like saying its your fault for being robbed because you were carrying money.

I read your quote and you still did not address my accusation you place more blame on the airlines than the responsible party operating the SAM sight.

Ask the Airlines this would not have even been discussed if nothing happened. They would have continued to do business as usual. The problem with your argument is you are trying to put the blame on the airline or aviation in general and it user of the SAM system that's at fault.

Maybe but it costs more to fly around the restricted airspace. Airlines run on razor thin margins now as it is. I guess the airlines felt the risk was small enough to keep flying though the area.

The FAA has been in an awkward position since the CAA and CAB was disbanded. The FAA is tasked with both the promotion of aviation and the safety of aviation and sometime those ideas work counter to each other.

Before the shoot down the subscribed altitude of no lower that 33,000 feet was prudent since it takes a SAM system to take down an aircraft that high. Most likely the though was no one was stupid enough to take down a civilian airliner. I guess the Russians or Ukrainian Separatists proved that wrong. Every civilian…

That's because politicians severely limited what the military was allowed to do. If they were taken off the leash we would have new allies like Germany and Japan at the end of WWII.