This should be no surprise to those following the years of this national embarrassment. Yes the "potential future war" use case does justify high risk expenditu

This should be no surprise to those following the years of this national embarrassment. Yes the "potential future war" use case does justify high risk expenditures, but this crossed over into pork barrel fraud long ago. That is also on top of the antics of bidding process in the first place. I can't help but speculate as a laymen that the entire joint strike fighter concept is flawed. Part of the reason for having separate branches of armed forces is, or at least should be, strategic and technical diversity. If you consider that it is a form of investing, it becomes clearer to not put all the eggs in one basket. Cost is most damn sure a factor in warfare. Functioning fighter jets is also pretty high on the list.