Leaderboard

The point is Obama is no longer president. The election is over and Hillary is back to giving speeches, probably at exorbitant rates. Yet Republicans continue to lash out against them. For fucks sake, the POTUS thinks the only way he could've possibly lost the popular vote is because the largest voter fraud conspiracy in the history of the U.S. has taken place. It seems the only coherent conservative strategy these days is to be against whatever liberals are for. That is pathetic. This used to be a party run by statesmen with real, achievable policy goals, and the intention of constructively governing. Now it's put a president in power who'd rather listen to Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly than his daily intelligence brief. Just step back and think about that for a minute. The man would rather be consumed by outlandish conspiracy theories than deal with the real day to day crises that regularly come up. And the most outlandish conspiracy theorist of them all now sits at the head of the NSC. Quit whining about Obama. His term is up. Forget Hillary. She lost. Trump won and we should all be watching him like hawks. It may not be end times, but if you are not at least slightly disturbed by a man with Trump's disposition and character in the White House then you are looking in the wrong direction.

With this dude pouring millions into keeping things stirred up to foment hate and discontent so he can profit off the pain and suffering, I don't think we are going to see the end of this for some time. https://www.city-journal.org/html/connoisseur-chaos-14954.html

You can be sure I am going to ask all of these questions.

oooh... so close;

David Frum, the author of the Atlantic article is a well known and respected conservative thinker. He was no friend to the Obama administration and has been highly critical of Hillary Clinton. Neither of those two individuals is president right now though. I find it curious how those who defend the Trump administration are so quick to point out that Trumps actions are simply an extension of the precedent set by the previous administration. Obama was highly criticised for what his critics described as an overreach of executive power. A lot of that criticism had merit. So why are Republicans suddenly ok with their guy doing the same thing? Is this the new Republican party? Abandon your principals to put a man who is a Republican only in name into office and hopefully advance your congressional agenda on his coattails? That seems to me to be a potentially treacherous strategy. Isn't it more consistent to be equally critical of the Trump administration for committing the same transgressions as his predecessors, regardless of party affiliation? Democrats could be equally chided for their (unsurprising) adoption of an obstructionist strategy after bashing Republicans for doing the same thing for the past eight years.

A slightly better way of stating the cost...during WW II we lost more aircraft and people to training accidents than we did to combat operations...staggering. I also disagree with the "go do this and come back alive construct", losses of 25% in a single raid would be unacceptable in today's world. The second raid on Schweinfurt is a great illustration of the cost...Of the 291 B-17's sent on the mission, 60 were lost outright, another 17 damaged so heavily that they had to be scrapped, and another 121 had varying degrees of battle damage. Outright losses represented over 26% of the attacking force. Losses in aircrew were equally heavy, with 650 men lost of 2,900, 22% of the bomber crews.

Absolute truth....sickeningly true. During my two sentences in the building my trips to the Hill were the least favorite experiences because of the inept and generally "what can you do for me and my district" attitude. We repeatedly tried to explain complex issues that needed attention, serious thought, action and funding now to prevent future catastrophes. More often than not the staffers (you rarely get to the elected official), looked at you with a blank stare. McCain was one of the worst, anytime the Air Force proposed a basing action, regardless of where it was, he wanted to know why that function, unit, aircraft wasn't being moved to Arizona. I feel like I need a shower just remembering it.

Not Friday yet, but here's a quick history lesson: The AAF graduated over 193,000 pilots (just pilots, not bombardiers, navs, flt engineers, gunners, etc.) in 6 years, between Jul '39 and Aug '45. There were only 966 student pilots in training in Sep 39. By Dec 43, there were 74,000 pilots in stateside training alone. Bottom line, Of course there was little to no briefing. The instructors were barely more qualified than their students. They had comparatively little knowledge to offer, and minimal time to impart what wisdom they did have. Wartime flying "training" was less training than Darwinian survival of the fittest, because it was the blind leading the blind. Consequently, there were 136,000 flying training eliminees and fatalities in stateside training alone. Over 65,000 aircraft were lost in the CONUS alone during the war (15,000 of them were heavy & very heavy bombers). My point--Wanna get people killed or injured? Fight wars without effective planning, briefing and postmission debriefing. WW II sounds really awesome, until you realize the human carnage and piles of bent metal that went along with it. TT

Don't put words in my mouth bro. It's entirely possible to think the Dems are a bunch of pussified apologists AND be extremely weary of a Donald Trump presidency.

Every time a Republican excuses something Trump does with "but Obama did it too/first/last/etc." Reagan loses another memory cell.

I don't care if he's Reagan's long lost son... his article is nonsensical. It contradicts itself at all the major talking points. I'm not blindly supporting Trump, and I'm not a big fan of a lazy Congress. But this author has some deep-seated issues that he obviously took care of with a good old internet rant... And he used the oldest argument in the book:

I would argue that "we" do not do a great job of advertising our contributions even now. Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums

@ViperMan Challenge accepted. I like 1984 just as much as the next guy, but that article made some ludicrous assumptions... "The media have grown noticeably more friendly to Trump as well. The proposed merger of AT&T and Time Warner was delayed for more than a year, during which Time Warner’s CNN unit worked ever harder to meet Trump’s definition of fairness." -Yes, let me know when that happens and I might take the article more seriously... "Opponents of the regime are not murdered or imprisoned, although many are harassed with building inspections and tax audits." -Obama wrote the book on that one... "And congressional oversight might well be performed even less diligently during the Trump administration." -Again, are we going to ignore the lack of congressional oversight under Obama? "They owe this chance solely to Trump’s ability to deliver a crucial margin of votes in a handful of states—Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania—which has provided a party that cannot win the national popular vote a fleeting opportunity to act as a decisive national majority." -Saw that one coming a mile away... I know this is a new concept, but we're not giving out participation trophies for this contest. "Trump versus Clinton was not 2016’s only contest between an overbearing man and a restrained woman." -Reading from the playbook I see... Hypocrisy is bashing political polarization then making the above statement a few paragraphs later... "Republicans in Congress have long advocated reforms to expedite the firing of underperforming civil servants." -As a government worker, I read that "Mean Republicans want people who don't show up for 3 months without notice to be fired earlier than 3 months... And to also not pull a paycheck for the time they didn't show up to work." "Presidents from Jimmy Carter onward have balanced this unique exemption with a unique act of disclosure: the voluntary publication of their income-tax returns." -I'm actually impressed the author found something positive related to Jimmy Carter than reflects poorly on Trump... "McDonnell then set up meetings between the favor seeker and state officials who were in a position to help him. A jury had even accepted that the “quid” was indeed “pro” the “quo”—an evidentiary burden that has often protected accused bribe-takers in the past." -Oh, so we're talking 'quid pro quo' now? Pretty bold to ignore the *cough* e-mails *cough* mentioning those words verbatim, but with much more serious implications... "The oft-debated question “Is Donald Trump a fascist?” is not easy to answer." -I was actually anticipating that one as well... Perhaps this is the wrong question. Perhaps the better question about Trump is not “What is he?” but “What will he do to us?” -Didn't this article begin by denouncing Trump for fear mongering? Strange... "By all early indications, the Trump presidency will corrode public integrity and the rule of law—and also do untold damage to American global leadership, the Western alliance, and democratic norms around the world. The damage has already begun, and it will not be soon or easily undone. Yet exactly how much damage is allowed to be done is an open question—the most important near-term question in American politics. It is also an intensely personal one, for its answer will be determined by the answer to another question: What will you do? And you? And you?" -Rally the troops! Less than 2 weeks is more than enough time to draw rash conclusions and gather "evidence" to successfully accuse, convict, and topple the dictator Trump! "We are living through the most dangerous challenge to the free government of the United States that anyone alive has encountered. What happens next is up to you and me. Don’t be afraid. This moment of danger can also be your finest hour as a citizen and an American." -Ooo, a resistance! Can't wait to see the type of fighting the anti-gun crowd uses to win.

I consider myself to be a generally smart guy, but can anyone else, as a rule, make it through an Atlantic article and discern anything that comes close to a coherent theme? I try, but always find myself struggling to maintain any amount of real focus as they (generally) wander through what approaches 10,000 words of soup. Maybe someone has a technique for making it through one, but to this day, I have not.

Will his successor institute "Cross Dressing Day" for field grade and above, to better understand our military members that serve under a different gender?

Creech AFB: just...why? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

What happened to the commitment to the RPA community?

What is unclear about this? "The Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as statutory advisers to the NSC, shall also attend NSC meetings." Edit to add: Furthermore, since the hullabaloo seems be be over the principals committee, where the memo states: "The Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall attend where issues pertaining to their responsibilities and expertise are to be discussed." Since when did the SECDEF stop being the military representative within the executive branch? I don't know what "fake news" is, but if it exists, this seems pretty close. They were not removed. They were explicitly included. And even if they were excluded, which they were not, they aren't at the same level as the others on the principals committee. Should the CSAF be on the committee? What about the Vance wing commander? Hyperbole, yes, but I think the point is valid.

Good insights, thanks for the post. However, when the former CSAF was directly asked about morale, his answer was pretty darn good. In truth, it is not good and was not when he said those words, and he frankly should have known that. Consequently, a lot of folks "feel" he was inaccurate in his representation of the gravity of challenges facing our force. Im sure your observations are correct about D.C., and I'm sure the CSAF does a lot of things behind the scenes that we'll never know about. Certainty the folks who worked for him were filled with a protective zealotry in every conversation. But in life, we get judged by what people see, even if they don't have the full picture. It's unfair, but nonetheless is it true. And what I saw from that CSAF was someone almost out the door, with nothing to lose politically that still stuck to how he felt instead of what the statistical indicators said. He was incredibly fake in my single meeting with him, although I know that is anecdotal. He literally lost and never acted on the hugely important QOL survey he told us to take. His legacy, in my opinion, is one of talking a big game and failing to play with the heart we needed. When I contrast his behavior with the line guys flying and fighting, it saddens me that he didn't appear to attack his job with the same selfless vigor I see from the the average mid career mid-strat IP.

Saturday I had studying to do. Sunday's the Sabbath, so that's a no-protest zone. Plus...not too much protesting going on in the Lone Star State. I keep seeing ads for the House Plan on Youtube when I turn my ad-blocker off. No actual plan, just that there is a plan... No one had any thoughts on removing the JCS and DNI from the NSC meetings? I found that the most disturbing thing from this past weekend. Well, that and Spicer's statement of Bannon having "extensive military experience." Well, that and blocking green card holders and Iraqi translators.

Not throwing a spear at you but anyone with the attitude above. Few things make me more angry than someone being a bitch on assignment night. Hell no I did not want my RPA, I stood up, shook my flight CCs hand, saluted, he gave me a bro hug and said sorry man, I drank my bottle of Jack, cheered for my bros that got killer assignments and moved on. UPT is a amazing experience and just graduating is a lifetime accomplishment. I will be more than happy to kick anyone in the nuts and give them a bitch slap for being bitter about being non vol to a fighter. We have way to many other problems in every community than to deal with people not liking there airframe straight out of UPT.

It's time for pilots to take back the USAF. I get it, 6-9 years back when we were scared of pissing someone off and getting an RPA or RIF, we bowed to the chiefs and spineless leaders. You are setting an example for the young airmen just by being a pilot. Pilots should have status, status should have privileges. Don't be an ass, don't be a clown with your superiority but accept it, you are at the top of the food chain, act like it, be proud of your work that got you there. Don't let some jealous nonner shoe clerk pilot-wannabe strip you of it.....especially in times like this where you are finally being acknowledged as an asset. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Airline life is like a stripper. Once to get your hands on her and see how nice she feels, you'll never be able to go back to your ugly, fat bitch wife. Sure, the stripper isn't perfect by any means...but it's oh so much better than your previous witch...

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Dude, 2.87 GPA is pretty darn low...you are looking like a football scholarship type applicant with that on your record. Not saying it's the end of the world, but man you are making it a harder road than it needs to be. Quit messing around...anyone can get a 3.0 + in college...ESPECIALLY if you are business major..jeez man...make it a priority over beer and video games and maybe you can fly jets for cash like the rest of us...or put it off...up to you.

The point is Obama is no longer president. The election is over and Hillary is back to giving speeches, probably at exorbitant rates. Yet Republicans Democrats continue to lash out at everyone who is against them. For fvcks sake, the POTUS Democrats think the only way he they could've possibly lost the popular electoral college vote is because the largest voter fraud influence conspiracy in the history of the U.S. has taken place. It seems the only coherent conservative liberal strategy these days is to be against whatever liberals conservatives are for. That is pathetic. This used to be a party run by statesmen with real, achievable policy goals, and the intention of constructively governing. Now it's put suffering the backlash of a departing president in power who'd rather listen to Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly give Iran ransom money, free terrorists, and offer would-be ISIS fighters jobs than listen to his daily intelligence brief. Just step back and think about that for a minute. The man would rather be consumed by outlandish conspiracy theories giving our enemies billions of dollars, freedom, and jobs than deal with the real day to day crises that regularly come up fact that bad guys aren't going to stop burning people alive if we let them serve us lattes. And the most outlandish conspiracy theorist political failures of them all now sit at the head of the NSC on the sidelines ready to curse the Russians everytime Trump makes a move. Quit whining, about Obama. His Your term is up. Forget Hillary. She lost. Trump won and we should all be watching him like hawks. It may not be is not the end of times, but if you are not at least slightly disturbed by willing to give a man with Trump's disposition and character a chance in the White House, then you are looking in the wrong direction just asking to be miserable for the next 4-8 years, regardless of whether it turns out to be the best 4/8 years in the history of the US, or the worst. Neither one of these paragraphs is accurate. You're too polarized if you think Republicans are the only ones to blame for Trump winning. Yeah, yeah.. Republicans are evil fascists and Democrats are the epitome of good will and love. I should check my straight white male privilege and all that other good stuff..

You go to Altus twice!

A T-6 FAIP who never flew the 38 (flew T-1 in UPT) went out to Beale for the U-2 and was made a 38 IP after a very short time...