Leaderboard

Probably you should post a photo or two of her so everyone can decide for themselves.

I've shot a view VBIEDs myself. Usually the secondary is near instantaneous to the primary. Furthermore, the secondary leaves no doubt the vehicle was laden with explosives. An 8 pax van laden with explosive material makes an enormous plume compared to a tiny hellfire. I remember one clearly; we shot in a garage and when the IR camera readjusted we realized it had disintegrated half of the multistory building it was parked under. So I was skeptical from the beginning the way leadership described it. I'm also concerned for the crew. Even if the AF doesn't come after them, living with the knowledge you just murdered a good person and his 7 children would be hard to live with. Especially if it's a newer Lt and SrA.

and I'm her crew chief. She does most of the weed eating/mowing around our house. The thing is I have to string the weed eater, mix the fuel, crank it up, tune it up, then hand it to her so she can start weed eating. I should give her a silk scarf to wear.

https://babylonbee.com/news/general-milley-is-releasing-a-revised-version-of-the-art-of-war----and-weve-got-exclusive-excerpts

Watch them blame the crew...instead of the insane pressure to wag the dog and hit something to distract. I HIGHLY doubt this is crew error...more likely someone speeding in the PED chain because they were getting pressure form above.

Oh yes! And don't forget to include any of her friends who like to weed eat.

What?

Until the top takes responsibility and takes it off the crews hands, this is probable... and even then. How some of these CCs/Gens are still in charge is beyond me. I've seen Sq/CCs fired for waaaaayyyy less. Navy COs that hit another ship, fired. But these guys??!!!?!!

Just a 2 min video. These comments were on September 1. How is he still the CJCS? All three of the points he made here have turned out to be false. Was he ignorant of the truth, trying to stretch the truth, or knowingly saying things that weren't true?

I hope not. They did the best with what they had and the outcome isn’t their fault.

I hate to admit it, but you’re probably right. This case could be amazing for actually showing that the military gave a shit about mental health and helped a guy who served honorably for 17 years.

It was a nice theory but it worked the wrong way. Our balance of trade with China was negative. Trade is at its core, the exchange of culture. The theory was if we traded enough with China would we subtly introduce free democratic values to their culture through movies, art, music, video games, etc... But China got the upper arm on trade and simultaneously became the worlds largest market and nearly the worlds largest producer. Because of this they are largely allowed to determine the quality of goods that are distributed across the globe. 30 years ago when the US held this position the quality was simply determined by supply and demand. Better goods for lower price would sell. However, as China has a controlled market, the government is allowed to alter the quality. What's extremely dangerous about this is that they have begun altering the quality to favor their own culture and are now using our own strategy against us. How many American children will grow up believing that China always had a historically documented claim to the 9 Dash line because they have an unconscious memory of it in the background of Disney's Mulan, displayed as a historic map? China seeks to slowly change the social memory of the world into one that favors Chinese superiority and hegemony. They are bitter and jaded of Chinese humiliation by westerners over the last 250 years. Its not going to be a good outcome for us.

Agreed, some of the logic and statements seem suspect. I wish the author provided more sources, or at least more background. Hence my ask if anyone in the A-10 community could corroborate any of the claims. His statements on the A-10 depot work for example. He jumps around from claiming it's an issue of parts, then an issue of manpower that leaves the depot with about half the throughput they need for the A-10 line. That's a pretty significant claim, with not much more than some hand-waving as a source. For me, it's not so much the question of tactical relevance of the A-10. It's more the question of to what extent is the Air Force going against the will of Congress to starve the A-10 fleet out of existence.

Unsat for execution but is he wrong?

A couple months into my first tour my family asked what it was like..."it must be so exciting." I started to think about it and could not find the words to describe what a life drain it was. Walking into the building every morning, with every step closer you find yourself looking down, no one makes eye contact, no one says hello...you enter with the sole purpose of trying to survive and mark another calendar day off your sentence. In the beginning I was idealistic, maybe I can make a difference, then I saw how the sausage was made and the absolute selfishness, the dysfunction and the parochial decision making that defies logic and the good of the nation. It didn't take long to become jaded and salty. I watched the Navy lie and runs deal behind everyone's back to absolutely screw the Air Force AND the nation. During my second tour I watched a now sitting three star outright lie and manipulate the system to screw warfighters...AFSOC could have had all J models to replace the most deployed AC-130's and MC-130's YEARS ago AND they were already paid for, but this absolute scum bag argued AMC needed to homogenize the slick fleet at Yokota...which was doing one AEF rotation every 18 months at that point. I remember sitting across the table from him after a meeting with DEPSECDEF trying to appeal to his common sense..."these are by FAR the most deployed and used aircraft in the Air Force...63-64 year model MC-130Ps and 69 year model AC-130Hs that are flying three times the programmed hours every year and need to be replaced now...think of the young men and women we are sending out to fight in these machines. He just looked back at me with a blank stare...sickening. I have no idea how these people look themselves in the mirror. Speaking of mirrors, this was one of the best days in my career.

I think people make too much of the hiring process complexity and black majic but if i've learned anything talking to U-2 people it's don't listen to non-U-2 about the U-2, which I of course I am not and so you shouldn't care what i have to say about it, lol.

Safe - I'll refer you to the CDC, the clinical trials, and the experts in the field of immunology for that definition as they are the ones who come up with the criteria, not me. For it to be considered safe, my understanding is that adverse reactions have to be below a certain statistically significant threshold and below a certain severity threshold, both of which I also did not come up with. Much in the same way, walking out your front door is widely considered safe despite the fact that a chance does exist of you being hit in the face by a meteor. That is because it is not a statistically significant chance. If you have statistical evidence (from a reliable source.. that you interpreted correctly) pointing in a different direction I would love to see it. Until then I will defer to the people who's entire life's work is to make these determinations. Effective - the vaccine reduces your risk of contracting covid and drastically reduces your risk of hospitalization, and death. On booster shots: why is there a new flu shot every year? Because immunity wears off and new variants emerge. As for how many boosters to get and when they will be approved for the general public, I will once again defer to experts. Much like they defer to me on matters pertaining to flying airplanes.

Damn, brother. So sorry to hear this. I don't have much humor for you. I was lacing my boots for an afternoon low-level formation airdrop as an Lt when my pregnant wife called me in to see the TV. I fought back tears after I saw the second plane hit and the towers fall. 20 years went by. Almost the entire middle of my life. Then, I watched the chaos at Kabul as we left. Not to make this about me, but I understand what your friend may have been feeling. It took a lot of mental and emotional effort to remain stoic in the midst of what I was experiencing. Depending on what his individual circumstances may have been, he may have had a more difficult time wrestling with the thoughts of "What was it all for?, Why did something I believed in so much in, seem to fail so badly? What about the people I knew that were wrecked by that place? Why is my country abandoning so many other things I thought I was fighting for? Was I wrong about everything?" How do we prevent someone from having to ask those sorts of questions? Maybe begin here at home. What can we do to fix this foundation, this society, so that none of our future military members ever have and doubts or second thoughts about what they're fighting for. The military needs civilians to fight just as hard back here. There is a different type of war still going on, and I don't think it's hopeless. Go make sure this country is the one you want it to be, not the one he thought it might be becoming. Again, very sorry for the loss of your friend.

Reminds me of when states started making seat belt use mandatory..I can still hear it..."I got my rights" "seat belts can kill you" "blah de blah" ..This from guyz who were forced to wear a seat belt and shoulder harness from release to set...in a vehicle with essentially a zero chance of crashing....but drove on out the gate in a vehicle where safe travel is questionable at best...often with a brewski or three on board.. This bug is turning into the research project from hell..which will be helpful down the line..I guess..pray for the medics...

We've had this discussion before. When you say "a certain statistically significant/severity threshold", it indicates you don't actually know. It may not even be your fault. Perhaps you don't know because those numbers don't exist. Even if we could produce completely objective measurement and defined goals, the CDC and vaccine manufacturers wouldn't want them to exist. If a concrete threshold did exist, it would be a target, and they don't want to hit the target. Do you and I get the freedom to choose whether to walk in or out our front door no matter the associated risks and without government imposed consequences? Who? Names. Who specifically is making the determination of "safe", "effective", how, and why do you personally trust them with your health? Please say Fauci. I'm ready for that one. 😄 If it's someone else, do I also get to produce an opposing argument from a healthcare professional who has made it their life's work? If someone is a nutritionist, do you want them dictating to you what you can and can't eat whether you agree or not? And should you job depend on it? Great! I think you should take it. But, what if I or my doctor assesses my risk of hospitalization and death due to COVID to be low because I am healthy and I have tested for, and possess, natural antibodies? Isn't that what vaccines are for? My body has already done the work. And I can cite studies that show natural immunity is better. There's a new flu shot every year because flu shots do not eradicate the flu. (Although COVID has) So, are you saying that COVID, also, cannot be eliminated? I think you're way too deferential to unnamed experts you've never met and likely know virtually nothing about. That is entirely your choice. When it comes to matters of my own health, I'm not going to be. If I have a health problem, I discuss it with my own personal doctor, whom I know and he knows me. I still get to choose whether to accept his diagnosis and treatment. How many times in history must it be demonstrated that being deferential and submissive to government power is bad for your health?