Plenty stupid, apparently. They've taken to arguing that the US Navy and Army are enemy forces. And they're calling the budget battle a "zero-sum gain". Two things here, aside from my contention that it's properly called a "zero-sum game"...
1) A zero-sum game makes no sense in a context of a generally growing resource. If the US military budget grows, as it has every year for more than a decade, and the USAF's budget grows, but doesn't grow quite as fast as the US Army's, this is not a zero-sum game as conventionally defined.
2) Next time the USAF argues it needs F-22 Raptors to shoot down Chinese MiGs, can we now say that "even the US Air Force" admits that the real purpose of these fighters is to fiscally sink US Navy vessels and budgetarily destroy advanced tanks and infantry fighting vehicles?
