Leaderboard

And even less likely to be killed or injured by COVID.

“This article is terrible” is true if you were looking for a well researched scientific study. However if you are merely documenting a fact that is not widely documented elsewhere, then the article is helpful because it adds information to our evolving understanding of the situation we’re in. There could be many reasons the cause of deaths has increased, and I’m glad the article did not speculate. Vaccines or isolation, I don’t know. But since children are not at massive risk of contracting and dying from this disease, why are we even taking a risk with them? You are “willing to wager,” but I’m not. I’m unwilling to have my children receive a vaccine that could harm them without proof the situation demands that risk. As it is, our society is being too aggressive with the vaccination campaign. I am also uncomfortable that the entire media and government conglomerate seems to be pounding the same message and preventing debate: the vaccines are safe and effective. But there’s enough information to have me question if that is true always for all people under all circumstances. The blanket nature of these pronouncements and policies gives me a lot of pause because there are people with unique situations. Covid is not smallpox or the plague, and we can’t let the cure be worse than the disease. This article merely adds an avenue to further that discussion.

1. So it is harmful? Thank you. And you can make that statement only if peanut butter had just been invented less than a year ago and people were "unexplainably" having adverse reactions and. Peanut butter has been around for quite some time so we know there are no long-term adverse effects. 2. Not an answer to my question. By how much does it have to lower your odds to actually be a "vaccine?" 3. Not an answer to my question. Thanks for only answering one of my questions and side-stepping the others. "Alot" and "tiny" are also very useful numbers. Appreciate the thoughtful response. /sarcasm I have received the flu vaccine twice in the four years since I've departed active duty. It is well-established. I'll wear your down votes as a badge of honor from here on out!

But that's a choice I get to make on the risk/reward. I know the risks of car crashes as they are well established and generally not altered to fit some political objective. My kids wear a seat belt or sit in a car seat because the risk of a car crash, while minimal, has a realistic chance of death. The cost/risk of wearing a seat belt is hearing them complain about it. The cost/risk of my kids getting the vaccine are not established. Could be nothing, could be a lethal blood clot; no one can really say for sure because they won't release the "science". The risks of serious consequences due to COVID for my healthy kids are basically zero, so why take any risk at all to avoid what is essentially no risk? If we were facing an Ebola outbreak with a 90% mortality, my kids would get the shot. Instead, we're facing a virus that I personally know multiple people that were sick and never realized it (based on positive anti-body tests).

Woah woah woah woah buddy! Looks like you need some additional extremist training! I got my eye on you…

Honest question; what COAs do you think we should consider going forward. I have a conflicted view on this. Russia (really Putin's, since he calls all the shots) actions are towards Ukraine are pretty much unceasingly hostile/coercive, and a full blown invasion would violate pretty much any international standard/law. The realist in me says any US military intervention on Ukraine's behalf in the event of a Russian invasion would be illogical. They're not a member of NATO so therefore not entitled to Article 5 status, they're not a powerful conventional or nuclear ally, and they're not integral to US national security. The liberal in me says they're a struggling democracy under threat from an autocratic enemy of the US, they're making honest efforts to be a part of the international order, and most of their people want freedom/don't want to be a part of Russia thus we shouldn't allow Russia to invade its neighbor. I went to ACSC with a couple of Ukrainian servicemembers, they all came across as solid dudes who were proud of their country and willing to fight for it. One of them completed ACSC and was immediately deployed to the frontlines on his return to Ukraine. I think about those guys and my Estonian buddy a lot when I think about this problem. The blunt reality of this is that Russia plainly sees Ukraine becoming closer to the West/member of NATO a direct threat to their national security. The US and probably most of Europe doesn't see things that way, nor does most the US population care about Ukrainian sovereignty. We are not currently in a conventional military position to deter or defeat a Russian invasion of Ukraine, unless we start a force buildup now. If we would intervene in the event of Russian invasion (talking right of bang) we'd have to face the very likely possibility of high casualties and an adversary that may employ tactical nuclear weapons if they feel they're threatened with a loss. All that said if the order's given I'll go without hesitation, would be nice to have a clear goal to fight for for a change.

This one. The rest of their vaccines are real vaccines, against genuinely threatening issues, with significantly more research and no political taint. We even elected to have my daughter receive the HPV vaccine which is questionable for some, but it was our choice and it met my risk reward threshold. given all that, consider how disingenuous it is to label me an anti-VAXXER if I don’t unquestioningly comply with mandates surrounding this vaccine. For children, the cure has been worse than the disease. I’m speaking here not just of the vaccine but more importantly of the forced isolation, school lockdowns, school masking, no friendships, blunted development, etc. The same experts who championed those practices are now forcing a vaccine while hiding the scientific data for 55 years.

Actually I do a lot of things with my son more risky than driving: shooting, weight lifting, ocean swimming. I do those things on purpose because I am raising him to be an eagle, not a chicken. And I am with him and able to mitigate the risk while I teach him. Said another way, I take calculated and controlled risks when required in order to achieve desired benefits. I do not play Russian roulette. I do not take risk for its own sake. I understand your viewpoint from a mathematical perspective, but from a leadership perspective unnecessary risk is extremely irresponsible. There’s enough information in the public domain for me to conclude that mandatory vaccination of all children is child abuse.

Exhibit A: https://www.mn.gov/covid19/vaccine/vaccine-rewards/kids-deserve-a-shot/index.jsp From my neck o the woods, a state website that is literally paying your child to get a drug, and up until about a week ago they were giving out 200$ gift cards for every 12-17 year old that got vaccinated. This is coercion, preying upon children. If any rational parent saw this in 2015, I bet 99% of them would have been like “WTF, if the drug is so good why are they paying my child to take it? Shouldn’t it’s medicinal benefits be enough? This seems too good to be true. It probably is too good to be true”. Now a lot of parents are like all on board with state “carrot and stick” medical procedures targeting their own children. My mind is blown. Honestly people have lost their marble sack. How do you undo this madness?

There are potentially significant effects that we may not know about for years because how rapidly the vaccine was approved. Several steps were skipped during the process - Effects on cancer, potential for birth defects, etc... And the survival rate for a healthy person is far above a flat 99%. How can you trust the people who have been making these decisions when there is zero transparency, they have no accountability, they have downright lied and changed their stance on multiple issues several times, and they don't want to release data for something like 60 years? I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona if you're looking...

Shouldn't take any time at all. None of the data is classified and there is a significant public interest in it. Their argument doesn't make sense because they are basically saying they need 55 years to review the data to be released but supposedly this data was all reviewed in a year to approve the vaccines.

Pawnman you’re the last person who needs to be lecturing based upon “risk”

We can now lock VAs using the new high balance limit of $647,200! Jon

Yeah, not to be a jerk, but you're not understanding it correctly. Married people are the benefactors in our current tax paradigm because they can make more income subject to a lower tax rate. i.e. a single person starts paying 35% as soon as they trip $216K. A married couple doesn't pay 35% until they make double that. The benefit to filing jointly is that it allows a couple with basically one bread winner to pay less taxes. If a married couple so chose (as some may because they are equal earners, etc), they could both file as single people and avoid the so-called penalty which you identify. Bottom line, a married couple can choose whichever path suits them best. No such choice is available for someone who's not married. Also, this is really how it has always been, under Rs or Ds.

Pawnman simply cannot comprehend false equivalencies. This is not the flu shot. Or the small pox shot. Or any other shot that we've taken as part of the standard DoD regimen. Know how I know? Because I don't take THREE flu shots within 7 months. Putting the MRNA technology, the testing trials, the FDA approval, etc. etc. aside, the number of shots alone puts this in a different category. And if you think it will end with 3, you're on crack. They're already rushing to create another shot that's tweaked for Omicron. And why not..... there's already a line of tripple-vax'd, double-masked basement dwelling covidian freaks clawing to be first in line to roll up their sleeve yet again. Pfizer and Moderna are thrilled, and on and on it goes. I got the original two shots. But now it's clear that the efficacy wanes incredibly fast. 3 shots in 7 months, and more already on the horizon? No thanks. Not the same as other vaccines, and I'm not lining up every 6 months for a disease that the statistics clearly demonstrate is not a substantial risk to me. Likewise, I'm not going to have my kids jumping through these hoops. "OK boys, get back in the truck.... we're headed to CVS for the 3rd time this year..... there's a new variant." GMAFB. The "risks of driving" analogy is another false equivalency. Pawnman, yes, my kids wear seat belts. That's not the same as wearing a mask 8 hours a day at school or taking jabs every 6 months indefinitely. It's hilarious to watch you argue which is riskier, the disease or the shot? Because the risk to kids is absolutely infentesimal, for BOTH. Look at the data for hospitalizations and deaths in the 0-17 age group (Just the raw numbers.....without critical details on BMI/comorbidities, or Vax status.) The risk is statistically zero. Now imagine if the data included health conditions and relative risk to an average healthy kid. And then imagine the data also somehow captured all the asymptomatic, undetected, or unreported cases. Calculating covid risk to kids is an exercise in multiplying by zero. It's stupid. You've been had.

Before I give COAs (and not sure there are any good ones at this point), I have to wax philosophic for a moment. One of our biggest faults as Americans and with our foreign policy is our attention span. Unlike our adversaries we suffer from ADHD and Alzheimer’s, we quickly lose focus and absolutely refuse to play long ball. We have the world's most powerful and capable military but we want quick victories with few casualties so we can get home as and back to Facebook/Twitter. We constantly change our goals, shift our expectations and completely revamp our strategy as often as we change a roll of toilet paper. Our adversaries may adjust their approach for the current environment but ultimately, they play chess while we play checkers. China wants Taiwan and has been steadily marching towards that goal since they lost it shortly after WW II. Scholars have openly noted they were employing a 100-year strategy towards reunification. Our tragic flaw has manifest in every conflict since WW II. How many times did we change our Afghanistan strategy (if we ever had one), finally signally to the Taliban (and every other threat), if you wait, we will tire and go home. I think my theory is easily proven when looking at the situation with Ukraine. When the former Soviet Union collapsed and the wall fell, we went to great lengths to sway Ukraine in hopes they would lean to the west. At the time they had a significant stockpile of nuclear weapons which WE convinced them to destroy in return for a paper promise that we would provide security. While we did not offer full-fledged NATO membership, we certainly led them to believe we would be there when they needed us. Flash forward to 2014 when Russia invaded the Crimea and what did we do? Barack Obama suggested that defending Ukraine against Russia wasn’t a core U.S. national-security concern…sorry you gave up your nukes, you are on your own. Obama and his minions finally provided aid, but it was all humanitarian. In total since 2014 we have provided $1.6B in aide but we have mostly stood by and watched them struggle. That strategy came to full fruition in 2017 when Ukraine was forces to sign the annexation of the Crimea to Russia. The Trump administration did change the game in some regards when they agreed to give Ukraine lethal “defensive aide.” Philosophically I wonder, would Ukraine still have the Crimea if Ukraine still had their nukes? Putin immediately tested Biden when he took office, the buildup of troops and equipment along the border has taken time. The fiasco in Afghanistan sent a very clear commitment about our resolve. If Putin does move against Ukraine, you can bet your paycheck that will signal China to speed the clock against Taiwan. As far as COAs, there are only a few and the only palatable one I can see would be to act now at N minus to bolster Ukraine and deter Putin. It is one thing to give Ukraine more lethal aide, it is another to place U.S. forces in Ukraine. Perhaps a game of chicken but it would drastically complicate Putin’s calculus. Barring that COA we will likely melt like butter and Russia will steamroll Ukraine.

The marriage penalty isn't something new from this administration; it's been around for decades at least.

Support? Yes Mandate as a condition for enjoying the rights of citizenship? No

We ran from Afghanistan in the middle of the night, if we sit back and watch Putin steamroll Ukraine I wonder what that message sends China about Taiwan?

I can agree with this for children. At least I can agree that the evidence supporting the need to get vaccines for healthy youth is shaky. But do you guys support boosters for those over the age of 50 or 60? Boosters for those with BMIs > XX? Maybe boosters for those with certain immune issues? Because there are very little actual analytical or data based reasons not to other than political propaganda says to be a pain in the ass to the “liberal” branch of society. Thats the main issue with a lot of this conversation. Many folks on here are taking absolutely indefensible black and white stances (no boosters whatsoever, no shots whatsoever!) with no justification other than their political circle wouldn’t like it disguised with an “I don’t feel like it.” Also, it’s a fallacy to say that an argument is incorrect (some people should get boosters) just because they said something else that may not be true (it’s imperative for children to be vaccinated). You don’t get to conveniently ignore all of the evidence of science or experts or whatever just because you disagree with one conclusion.

They were never really your friends…

What story?

Does any normal person actually buy into this shit or is it just the Twitter sphere?

The 163rd is now accepting UPT applications to fly the mighty A-10C in the great state of IN! See attached announcement for details. Please read carefully and follow the directions as stated. If you have any questions about the application, the A-10, or the Blacksnakes, don't hesitate to ask. 2022 163FS Application Announcement.pdf

I know I'm way more cynical than most, but I honestly can't remember a time in my 18+ years in the AF when I even knew who the Air Force Under Secretary was. Political appointees like that, as mentioned above, don't require any prior military experience. Does anyone really care about this?

One example: Gen Moseley fell on his sword for the F-22.

It all depends on the training pipeline, age of the applicant, PPL/no PPL (for Pilot/RPA selects), etc. A lot of factors go into it. Most of my intel is from previous years threads and some people I personally know. There are some people who had nearly a year wait from selection to departing for their assignment at UPT. People who have a PPL have a higher likelihood of being put in an earlier class and in turn PCS before others. URT is all TDY from your current duty station for current AD members. UCT now does their own form of IFS at NAS Pensacola.

Officially retire in April, will probably start terminal in February. I’m looking into DoD SkillBridge also that I can start 6 months prior to retiring in my retirement location.

I mean, you gotta admire his commitment to playing Whatabout-ism Tennis all day long. I kind of assumed he was getting paid by the post or something.

As opposed to people willing to risk a 99% survival rate but not a 99.9999% rate of no adverse effects?

I concur. That being said, it's about the same as saying "The vaccine is safe and effective."

So basically, you're fine with poor risk decisions about your kids as long as you get to make them. No wonder this pandemic is drawing out so long.

Do you always tell people their thoughts and reality? Dude, get a grip on reality. Why would they not be able to release data on the "vaccine" for 55 years? Sounds super sketch. You don't think so? They skipped several steps in the typical vaccination approval process and got it approved in 10% of the time of a typical vaccine - How does that not make you question this whole situation?

Even one is too many, eh? Hell of a way to make decisions about risk.

Did you balk at any of the other vaccines your kids required before you sent them to school? Did you do a deep-dive on the VAERS data for MMR before taking them to the pediatrician? You guys are taking a political stand and trying to disguise it as concern for your health.

Are you also unwilling to put them in your car? Because they're more likely to get injured or killed in an accident than by the vaccines.