Leaderboard

He should've been there when they ran out of chicken breasts for three weeks. And now you're probably thinking to yourself, "if only there was an organization that flew large cargo airplanes..."

I'm not going to be put on the defensive "answering your questions." Hey, you won or are winning. You, and those like you, or following you, will have to figure out how to accommodate this .000X percentage. Accommodate = -dress and grooming standards -hygiene and billeting requiremets -dealing with the loss of capability should someone decide mid-tour to switch uniforms -dealing with the inevitable friction that develops from such an integration - from counseling to UCMJ actions And these issues are just off the top of my skull. They may be non-issues to you in the interests of "inclusion" or "equality." But some poor company commander, some squadron commander, some senior NCO sure as sh1t is going to have to devote a helluva lot of time in learning about all this, then executing it. Never mind the actual mission of whatever unit. Taking the time to deal with this tiny fraction of a percentage of the overall population has to take priority. Because it will. Getting fired over this buffoonery will be a higher threat than not accomplishing the mission due to lack of attention on it or preparing for it. Again, you win the argument. It's gonna happen. Enjoy it.

Today several news sources are reporting that ISIS beheaded 4 Christian children for failing to convert to Islam. Waterboarding KSM 183 times is *not* "stooping" to their level. Their level is in a different universe of depravity. I'm not saying that the ends justify the means. I do believe, however, that KSM an his ilk should have been killed in combat like Bin Laden was. If we didn't get any actionable intel from these guys, then we should have just put lead in their heads and taken their laptops.

Yep - not for torture or EITs as an SOP for any run of the PUC but the biggest problem is that we know about it. I have no doubt that during WWII which is generally the least morally ambiguous conflict we reflect on, intel was gathered in tactical and controlled environments in ways that then and now we would find distasteful but was necessary, like bombing civilian population centers, it is an unfortunate aspect of conflict to be kept to a minimum and used with great discretion and then to not be discussed openly. Not to subvert democracy or the general principle that as a rule we should treat others, even our enemies with some restraint, but some of our enemies by their actions have foregone that restraint. Torture, coercive interrogation, EITs, whatever you want to call it can be justified not against uniformed military personnel nor the average jihadist but when it is determined by people we trust with knowledge and access that there are prisoners that don't wear a uniform, who don't conform their operations to recognized LOACs, and/or do not make ANY attempt to not target non-combatants then the limits of treatment are pretty much void as they have no limits on their behavior. We don't lose our values by fighting with seldom used tools/methods/weapons against those who have no values.

...because people don't fake injuries to get out of a PT test/event that they know they're going to fail. Give people an out, and there are always people that will take it. Will it matter? Depends on what kind of a force we want, pretty simple. That can be argued by both sides, by the way. I have no problem with people arguing the point on what the country should do with this issue based off their desires for 'equality' or our American values (even if I agree or disagree), but don't try to tell me that this change is needed to make the military operationally stronger/more efficient (cost/risk vs reward). If that is your argument, then there shouldn't be cutoff ages for UPT (I'm sure there are plenty of people in the mid 40's could make it through UPT), we shouldn't be kicking people out who continuously fail their PT test by only a minute/10 sit-ups, kicking people out of programs/the military who continuously fail academic tests by a few points, etc. Why does the AF require certain ASVAB scores/a HS diploma to serve?--I'm sure there are people who don't make the entrance criteria who would make great Airman. Why aren't we letting guys wear nail polish or earrings right now?--what does it hurt? As for tellng the CC "Iidentify with gender X"...will this need to be confirmed by medical/psych personnel at all? Will people be able to one day say they are gender X and the next day tht they are gender Y? Will there be any repercussions if it is suspected that people might say this to have different PT standards (just one example)? Will the military now pay for active duty folks to get gender realignment (or whatever it is) surgery? Who will make the call on whether the surgery is warranted/approved? What if special prescriptions are needed for hormones, etc? What if Dave says he wants to start wearing earrings tomorrow and gives the reason that he's identifying with the female gender...does he have to get a wig or is he allowed to keep his high and tight, but can also have the ear rings? Again man, it's cool if you support this idea/proposal based off your morals/ideology, just don't tell me that it's needed to make us a stronger fighting force or to make us more efficient. This is all about ideologues changing the culture of the country, and as more often than not, it starts on the large scale with the military since its done by fiat and not by the culture changing on its own. Is this a good thing--do the end justify the means? I oubt it, but i guess time will eventually tell. Oh, and a horrible argument comparing this to desegregation (see two paragraphs above). I'm not aware of black Americans needing anything special to serve (hormones, different PT standards, surgery), other than for people to get over their bigotry. Learn to make a better argument if you want to convince people who are on the fence/think differently than you do. I'm all ears if you want to make that argument by the way.

I wish I lived in your world where everything was so black and white and there were never shades of gray.

I'll start by saying I don't cover Oil & Gas so this is just based on discussions with people who know it better than I do. This is really a war against US domestic production. The Saudis have always been the swing producer and the main controller of supply/pricing as they have massive reserves and a cost of production closer to $25/barrel. They are feeling pain but nowhere near the pain of others at current prices and they want to squeeze out the massive growth in US production at a higher cost. When looking at Shale most people give a range of $60-$80 as the "cost of production" but that is the life-cycle cost including amortized cost of exploration and drilling. The marginal cost to keep pumping in places where drilling is already happening is much lower. This is where my expertise breaks down but I would guess it is closer to $45-$50 before they actually start shutting down wells. The people who get hit first and hardest are exploration folks. At current prices Exxon can't pay both its dividend and its planned capex and they already stated publicly that the dividend won't be cut. I think this will be a common trend across the industry as exploration for new wells at current prices isn't economic. The last plunge in oil prices brought the ROE on oil companies down to the low single digits. The problem with the Saudi's plan is we are increasingly more efficient in all of our uses of oil which is putting a long-term damper on demand. All that said, everybody knows all of this already and it is baked in to many of the prices. Stocks are down and vol has been bid way up(60%-90% IV on many of the shakier names) so buying puts is pretty expensive. You could short calls to take in the premium if you have strong conviction that oil will stay depressed for a while but the negative gamma could kill you if there is a snap-back in prices. Over the last few years banks seemed to forget that oil prices can go down and these companies were able to pile on lots of cov-light debt that could end up in bankruptcies or at least highly distressed restructuring. Overall I doubt there is much long or short that an average person should be investing in right now unless you have a huge amount of time to commit to researching the space and figuring out the marginal production costs for various wells and companies.

Good ol' First Amendment. Allowing the words and ideas of even ones you don't like or agree with to be out in the world. Interesting how those on the new "correct" side of the fence forget that little aspect of life. Seems like only yesterday that your ideological group were on the other side and embraced the idea of diversity. My bad... As for "dress and grooming standards," what prevents someone with inappropriate plumbing who feels they are in the wrong body from wearing the uniform of the gender of their choice? If none, then how much time and effort will have to be devoted to rewriting, retraining, and then enforcing these new standards? And this is just one relatively minor area that will have to be addressed.

I added to the previous post before I saw your response, but I would argue that you would be surprised with what and who will provide info on issues like this. With the advent of those pesky cell phones and cell phone cameras/ videos it is much easier to get corroboration that breaks the he said/ she said problem down. People tend to do really stupid things when told they can't do something. Telling the fat kid to not eat candy is easily violated in private; motorcycles are driven on roadways that are very public.

Nah, I think you are ignoring more basic information in the AFI. 1.1.2. Applicability: 1.1.2.1. All AF military personnel any time, on or off a Department of Defense (DoD) installation. 1.3 Responsibilities: 1.3.4. Commanders and functional managers below wing level will: 1.3.4.2. Take actions as needed to intervene when unsafe behaviors are identified. Direct problem drivers and at-risk personnel to attend driver improvement training. (T-0) 1.3.4.7. Ensure personnel complete training as required by this AFI. Take appropriate administrative or disciplinary actions for personnel who fail to attend scheduled training including restricting operation of the motorcycle for military personnel. (T-2) Read that however you like, but I don't think I am interpreting the rules wrong at all. It is fairly straight forward. I won't get hung up on the "approval" piece as you are right that a commander has little leeway to keep you from riding as long as you have met the rules and are operating safely and IAW the AFI...but you can be restricted from riding by your commander and your original post that it only applies on base or that a commander cannot effect your motorcycle riding off base is still not correct.

I told my flight doc that I generally cry myself to sleep and wet the bed every night due to the horrors I've seen at the Al Udeid DFAC. He didn't find it funny.

Of course they aren't cutting slack. That would imply that someone admitted they were wrong.

Not gonna lie... When I clicked on this thread, I was expecting more sentiments along the lines of "fuck 'em" than the "evil/immoral" comments I'm seeing.

Is there anything that clinically proves that someone considering harming themselves/others will answer those questions honestly and potentially break the chain?

how can you justify lower PT standards for women? Im not saying women shouldn't serve but how is it fair to disqualify a dude who maybe just barely missed the PT standards and let a women pass with lower standards, shouldn't the content of their character and their skill set in their chosen position outweigh different PT standards? if anything the PT standards need to be like the fighter aircrew with things based on a common weight multiplier i want to clarify im not being antagonistic, im just trying to honestly ask the question to foster discussion

How fitting that she, like the vibrator, was charged with battery

I'm not sure U.S. hostages are treated humanely anywhere anymore. Count me among those who don't care that KSM was waterboarded 183 times. If it were up to me I would hold more in-the-field trials and executions of the enemy. The rules of Geneva just don't apply like they used to. I guess I just don't consider sleep deprivation and writing fake letters saying family members have been captured to be torture. No, I wouldn't like it if the enemy did that to me. But the enemy is more like to just cut my head off with a dull knife anyway.

More like a bunch of Colonels became O-6s.

Alright, I'm going to revive this thread with some good and informative news: At the time of this writing I have made the following progress: -I was granted a Conditional Release (DD 368). This had to be signed by the Aviation Branch Chief, a LTC position at HRC (I'm AD). To my understanding, for guard/reserve, it only has to be the first LTC in your CoC (don't quote me on that, it's just what I've heard). -I was selected by the 187th FW, Alabama ANG!!!!! This was after I had a signed Conditional Release. It was most likely necessary to have this DD 368 pre-approved, for a unit to even select me. Also, to restate: there is no more Air Force Fixed Wing Qualification Course. UPT is the only way to get in, and you must be in UPT before your 30th Birthday. -I have submitted my resignation to the Army This is in the form of an Unqualified Resignation. Again, having the DD368 already signed is a huge deal. This will be my last post for a while. Please send me specific questions through the PM feature. The last thing the Army Aviation Branch chief wants is a bunch of Army Aviators asking for a DD 368. Keep in mind that I had already spoken about my intentions to my entire Battalion chain of command and my air-frame branch chief before I email the Aviation Branch Chief. I firmly believe that this was instrumental in my success in getting a DD 368, as was the fact that the Army is currently downsizing. Just emailing the Branch Chief alone will most likely result in failure, as well as the burning of any bridges you previously had, in addition to destroying any chances you might have had at transferring to the Air Force. Be respectful, you can't guarantee that you'll be transferred. I will update this thread about my progress one I'm officially out of the Army and into the Air Force. Until then, thank you to everyone who helped me get this far - to pursue my dreams and expand on my military aviation career. I am in debt to many!

So to summarize...you're a cadet and you have not yet been to field training, yet you feel confident enough in your vast experience to comment on what it takes to succeed at field training, the purpose of field training, how to prepare appropriately for field training, the appropriate length of field training, who should apply to field training, the true purpose of the GMC program, and what constitutes a "high stress" environment. Did I miss anything?

Looking forward to it with trepidation..only because I know it is going to be very upsetting to watch for me. My Dad was a B-24 pilot, and crash-landed twice. Once while he was an IP in a B-24J with a propeller overspeed and another in combat in the Pacific. I think that the stateside training accident contributed to my father's early death, because 4 of his crew were killed and I don't think he ever truly got over it. He committed suicide in 1979 when I was just 19, so I have always held the USAAF "Bomber boys" in very high esteem, and it amazes me how young they all were. How complex and difficult their tasks were considering the time period and the amount technology being transferred to literally the kids off the farm or ethnic neighborhoods in the cities. My Dad was the son of Irish immigrants and put himself through Temple University and enlisted in the Air Corps February 1942 after being rejected by the Navy for having one leg slightly shorter than the other. I never knew about this until I read his retirement physical.

i think more of us would have sided that way if the torturing actually led to anything usefull other then furthering some peoples careers running the program

Honest question: what is your position on black people?

Thanks for the response; despite your anger towards me for pointing out your bigotry, you almost made sense. Couple more questions for you: - How are we expending "attention, funds, and asspain" to accommodate said individuals besides just allowing them to serve? - Are you also against females serving since their PT standards are different? - What standards were changed after the repeal of DADT? Also, crews get hand-picked for missions all the time, so not real sure what your point is there.