Trump Doesn't Care About Future Presidents: Air Force One Loses Key Feature

[radical right]

Swatting a plane, is no different than swatting a fly. It's almost impossible in mid air, but as soon as it lands, it's an easy target. Why would you want to make Airforce One an easy target?

 

[TNHarley]

I understand him wanting to cut costs but that makes the entire point seem redundant.

I disagree. What says a president should be less likely a nuke victim then you or I?

I understand your POV. However, what is the point of AF1 if they cant supply in the air? Makes the whole thing seem redundant.

 

[jon_berzerk]

true plus in such an event

the refuels are going to be busy

keeping the fighting forces in the air

Yes! The refueling planes are going to care more about refueling a fighter plane than Air Force One.

yes they would because the prezbo is going to be scrambled to a underground bunker

just lke what happened on 9/11 with bush

 

[AntonToo]

Trump could literally hand out food to starving people in Africa, and you would still hate him.

This thread is bullshit.

You are bullshit.

Instead of addressing the topic you are deflecting to bitching about liberals. As if that will somehow address the issue of saving a few bucks on Presdent's plane being able to refuel in air.

 

[DJT for Life]

I have a question for all those in a panic over not being able to refuel in the
air.

Where do y'all think the tankers are gonna come from to refuel AF1?

I'm not in charge of the Russian Strategic Forces, but I have a hunch they will
hit all of our Air Bases from the get-go.

Now unless we keep our tankers at some unknown installation located high in
the Green Mountain of Vermont...All the tankers are gonna either be destroyed within
the first hour or have no place to land at the start of the 2nd hour.

I'm just wondering, is all...Maybe someone can ask a Lib.

You're right, you are not in charge of the Russian Strategic Forces... though you could be a paid Russian troll. Who knows?

Now, who says it has to be Russia that causes the U.S. to use protocol to keep the President in the air? Do you have any idea how many places the U.S. has military bases?

Yep. We have a bunch. And you're correct, it doesn't have to be Russia
that forces us to keep the President in the air. Hell, we could be invaded
by the Zulu's. That would keep the Prez in the air. HOWEVER, he would
be able to land and refuel per our defense plans.

We would play the National Anthem, thus causing the Zulu's to have a reaction and to kneel and
allow a window for the Prez to touch down.

There could be reasons for him NOT to be able to land... for reasons that past administrations have analyzed with information not available to you or I, that made them feel it was important to be able to refuel in the air... and the sad fact is, Trump is only cutting it out because of cost, and it isn't something he will have to deal with, because the plane he flies on can still do it.

That could very well be, but whenever the President travels, the fuel
that will be used to refuel AF1 at the next stop precedes the Prez.

Tanker Trucks, loaded with the fuel sealed by the Secret Service
are loaded onto a C5-A and head for the destination. AF1, doesn't
just pull up to a pump and say..."fill 'er up!" So what do we do with
airborne tankers. Do we keep them in the sky 24 hours a day filled
with the fuel designed for AF1?

We already know in a Nuke War, our bases will be destroyed, thus
no new tankers will be able to launch and the one's in the air will have
no place to land.

EMP will be a world-wide issue.

Now with EMP, I may not be able to start my truck or you yours
but I would bet a dollar against a donut, that our missiles will be able
to launch. Our planes able to fly. Our tanks able to roll.

There won't be any modern Red Dawn. Our Military is paid to protect
us. Some rogue country is not going to be able to shut out military
down by exploding some nuke above the continent.

I would venture to say our cyber people have the ability to take out
any foreign electrical grid and interfere with the guidance system of
any rocket headed our way. We're just not going to advertise it.

Not being able to refuel AF1 in the air is no big deal.

 

[Syriusly]

Wow, if Trump cured the lepers, made the blind see, and raised the dead, you guys would still crucify him.

Wow, if Trump handed the 'football' directly to Putin- you guys would still be kissing his ass.

The OP may have been overdramatic- but raises a serious point- that of course you ignore.

Trump didn't cure the lepers, he didn't make the blind see, and he didn't raise the dead- he made a decision to make Air Force One less operationally functional than the current models.

But for Trumpsters any criticism of their Dear Leader is tantamount to criticizing him for curing lepers....

 

[HenryBHough]

If any president hasn't ended a war within the hours a 747 can keep flying without refueling that is a failed president who deserves to fall out of the sky.

 

[CowboyTed]

According to the article no President has used the mid air refueling capability so you have to wonder how vital it is and if a future President wants that capability the plane can be modified to provide it.

Probably never used the air masks or the life vests either... Time to go...

 

[bodecea]

If anything is vital for an airborne command center, it's inflight refueling capability.

 

[Unkotare]

Swatting a plane, is no different than swatting a fly. It's almost impossible in mid air, but as soon as it lands, it's an easy target. Why would you want to make Airforce One an easy target?

Swatting a fly in midair isn't so hard.

 

[Dschrute3]

Really? Is this the Democrat manufactured-outrage flavor of the week? Incredibly lame.

 

[Lewdog]

Really? Is this the Democrat manufactured-outrage flavor of the week? Incredibly lame.

Senator Tom Cotton is a Democrat?