Leaderboard

Taiwanese U-2 pilot Johnny Shen died last Thursday, age 92 He was a U-2 pilot with The Black Cat Squadron on Taiwan from 1968 to 1973. He was admitted to the CAF Academy in January 1952, then trained in the PT-17 and the T-6. After his graduation in December 1955, he was assigned to the 4th Tactical Fighter Group in Chiayi. He was first sent to Tainan to be trained on the T-33, then returning to Chiayi to fly the F-84 in 1956. Later he converted to the F-100. He left the 35th Sq in 1973 and became the vice military attache in Vietnam. After the loss of Vietnam, he returned to Taiwan to served on several desk jobs. He retired from the CAF as a Colonel in 1977 and joined China Airlines, where he flew the Boeing 707, 727, 767, and 747, and Airbus A-300. He transferred to EVA Airlines in 1992. Then he returned served in Taiwan's Civil Aviation Administration until 1998. After retirement, he emigrated to Canada and lived in Vancouver. These guys flew some really risky missions. Him him...

I could get on board with that, if we can go back to the 1800s where it was pretty easy to simply execute violent criminals, whether through official or unofficial means. But we’re not in the 1800s, so if you get out of prison after violently raping a woman (or man if you’re BQZip’s mom), conducting armed robbery/assault, carjacking, etc. then fuck you, you gave up your right when you acted like a total POS who would have simply been put down in days bygone. Above answer is directly related to background checks. I only support them to verify you are in fact not a felon.

From the AP I'm gonna withhold judgement on this one. For now, at least, until more info comes out. It sounds like this is a case of family members battling after a death. If you've ever witnessed it, you know. Reasonable people do unreasonable things when a death happens in the family. Even more so if a step parent is involved.

I've been making my way through this page. Fascinating debates by our founding fathers about their concerns when writing the Constitution. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/debcont.asp I found this passage pertaining to John Madison's speech to be particularly relevant today. It's from June 29th. "His great fear was that their Governments would then have too much energy, that these might not only be formidable in the large to the small States, but fatal to the internal liberty of all. The same causes which have rendered the old world the Theatre of incessant wars, & have banished liberty from the face of it, would soon produce the same effects here. The weakness & jealousy of the small States would quickly introduce some regular military force against sudden danger from their powerful neighbours. The example would be followed by others, and would soon become universal. In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of war, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people. It is perhaps questionable, whether the best concerted system of absolute power in Europe could maintain itself, in a situation, where no alarms of external danger could tame the people to the domestic yoke. The insular situation of G. Britain was the principal cause of her being an exception to the general fate of Europe. It has rendered less defence necessary, and admitted a kind of defence which could not be used for the purpose of oppression. -These consequences he conceived ought to be apprehended whether the States should run into a total separation from each other, or shd. enter into partial confederacies. Either event wd. be truly deplorable; & those who might be accessary to either, could never be forgiven by their Country, nor by themselves."

The only person who has mentioned or linked to RT is you. Am I wrong? Quote the post. The best you can do is... stil... a random unsourced screenshot of an unknown person claiming the podcast is linked, but by multiple layers of separation. This is called the "straw man argument" and you can add it to your growing list of dubious debate tactics. It would be so cool if you would just acknowledge, address, and debate the actual specific pieces of information you disagree with. You'll also find it's much easier than using your repertoire of tactics to do anything but. Yes, RT is an outlet for state propaganda. This is not new information and I thought it was so obvious that I didn't need to make a confession to you. We in the US, also have dozens of media outlets coordinating with government officials to censor dissenting information and distribute approved information. That shouldn't be new information, either. Do you not know this? It's just a fact of life that both sides carry water for both governments. Objectively, usable information can still be gleaned. There is virtually no unbiased information floating around out there. All of it has to be taken with a grain of salt, deconstructed, and it's parts evaluated. Not only do you refuse to do any of this, but admit that you don't even know who has deemed that info as false. And then you wave it around to everyone shouting "PROOF!" It's mind-bending. I'm not here just to be contrarian. My motivations are not a problem for me or anyone else. I'm not being creative here. Lying takes effort and this is effortless. These things are as apparent to me as going inside, pointing up and saying "Hey, the sky is blue" and being met with a chorus of angry people saying "Why did you go outside? WTF? Putin also thinks the sky is blue you Russian shill! It's not always blue, sometimes it's gray, liar! Whatabout the clouds? They're white, moron!" I only want people to consider than they're being manipulated. What is the alternative to Bashi or me or anyone else posting here with a different perspective? Would you rather have a little circle jerk with only the people who wear the same blinders you do? That's what it seems like. You're actually arguing that you don't have first hand knowledge or critical thinking skills. You just let other strange people on the internet tell you what info you should and should not look at. I find it fascinating anyone operates like that.

I don’t…if someone is so dangerous that we can risk them illegally obtaining a firearm then they should remain in prison (ie fufill their sentence). Once they do the time and are deemed able to rejoin society, they’re free, and should have the their rights restored. If not, we run the risk of a tyrannical government (even worse than we currently have at the federal and state levels) charging people for BS crimes, and giving them a “plea deal” to avoid prison (or a very light sentence), and there goes your gun rights. If you’re a free person, you’re free. As for background checks, same type of thing above…it is essentially asking for permission to exercise freedom. I think it’s hilarious that people still trust the feds after what we’ve been seeing that last several decades.

Having read the perspectives of several BOPS members, I started doing some research to better educate myself on the overall topic. Looks like the Colorado House is starting to slide down that slippery slope.

Russia sucks.

"Ghost guns" are another fabricated and irrational scare tactic term akin to "assault rifles" for those who are hoplophobic. Serial numbers don't stop the illegal use of a firearm any more than a VIN stops someone from stealing a car. The right to keep and bear arms is an alienable one, not "granted" by any government. And, as we all can attest to, anything the government gets its nose into is more likely to get fucked up that fixed!!

While I agree with the concept of debating the content and not the source, the only realistic way to do anything useful is to filter out sources that do not meet a certain standard. Being correct sometimes is not a high enough standard. As an example, it is unrealistic to expect someone to spend time disproving the many insane things Alex Jones says regularly. Even though he's right sometimes, and even though he's right sometimes when everyone else is burying the story. It's just the peril of dealing with unlimited information. As an intermediate solution, you can ignore a source with an obvious bias. A sort of "recusal" for media. I'm this case, it's rational to discard Russian-government-controlled media when discussing a war Russia is waging. Yeah, they'll be right sometimes. Too bad so sad. There's not enough time in the day to vet sources with a huge bias when other sources exist. I wouldn't trust the Ukrainian press releases either, nor waste time with them.

The words "well regulated" are interesting to think about given that words change meaning over time. Just take the term "decimated". Nearly everyone uses that word to indicated something along the lines of 'nearly annihilated', but that's not even close to what it originally meant. Used to mean killed 10% (notice the 'deci' in it). Similarly, 99.9999% of Americans would think "well regulated" means it is ruled by a lot of laws. But there are many reputable people that point to 1780's contemporary uses of the word regulated much more like the clock example stated earlier, meaning 'it works well'. That would entirely change the implications of gun laws today. https://www.americanrevolutioninstitute.org/video/a-well-regulated-militia-history-of-the-second-amendment/ On the topic, it would be interesting to know how many crimes are solved with the serial number being a significant aid to the investigation. My guess would be near zero. Think about the scenario that it would actually help in; you'd have to have a murder scene where someone threw the gun away at the scene. And that person would have had to have bought the gun legally in order for the serial number to be associated with them. Seems unlikely. Finally, as technology continues to evolve, the manufacture of ghost guns will only get easier and nearly impossible to manage. Go buy a few thousand dollars worth of equipment and you can print or mill guns. In just the last 10 years, 3D printed guns have gone from curiosity pet projects that fail after shooting a couple rounds to being able to last hundreds of rounds. More than enough for a criminal. That's just the 3D printing, you get a mill that cuts out receivers from aluminum blocks (a set up you could easily do in your garage) and you could make guns better quality than many gun manufacturers. Technology will continue to evolve faster than 80 year old legislators and 85 year old presidents can keep up with.

I first saw it in the official Fidelity reddit from their customer service people. It's also on your March CMA statement in the Additional Information and Endnotes:

Going through this now with my in-laws. For the love of all that is holy, write out your will in excruciating detail and remove any family member from executing it.

Definitely a poet first... his songs all sound poorly produced and his voice is trash. But the lyrics are always amazing. I always had this one in my head when we'd all drunkedly stumble back to the base in UPT.

If that were truly the case, then I would have no issue with it; but far too many times we have seen violent offenders released only to commit more crimes. That said, there are cases where the right to bear arms has no bearing on the matter at hand (i.e., non-violent crimes), and should not be a factor.

That's from the Democratic/Liberal viewpoint...

I had to “convince” my Wing commander to sign the waiver using my network. I didn’t know him, he didn’t know me so others (sq/cc, chief pilot, his execs) had to vouch for me. I haven’t heard one way or the other about others getting denied. The point of the waiver is to screen those that really shouldn’t serve anymore due to whatever (hard to work with, lazy, poor piloting skills, etc). The scroll and waiver are 2 independent processes.

choose your fighter. i'd take the russian.

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157283917915330

Scroll early and often

Leonard Cohen was more of a poet than a singer but when he did grace the stage the results were outstanding. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bashi is getting a bit close. Continuously proclaiming the inevitability of Russian victory and arguing that Ukrainian corruption sets them up as an unworthy ally. Especially when there are plenty of examples of much bigger countries being defeated/repelled by well-funded underdogs. But he's also just a troll But yeah, the character attacks as Russian shills is getting old.

That restaurant metaphor wasn't mine. You seem to have this blind implicit trust in anyone that happens to be in a position of authority. Wouldn't you want to know why something was deemed unsafe rather than just accept anything someone says at face value just because they happen to be aligned with your beliefs? It's easy to fool someone, but it takes 10x the effort to convince most people that they've been fooled. You're so deep into the approved narrative that you're unwilling to even listen. In this case, the link/play button for the podcast in question was directly in front of your face, one click away. But you chose to navigate away/open up another page, do a google search, screenshot a random claim of that podcast being Russian propaganda, which was substantiated only by other media outlets making baseless claims. Then you had to copy/save/upload/post it, and act all condescending like it was the gospel, while not one step in your entire process contained an original thought of your own, a source, or specific point. It's bewildering that you, a self-proclaimed professional military officer, would try to pass this off as some sort of astute deductive reasoning. It's so glaringly intellectually dishonest, it's insulting that you would expect anyone to even consider that you might have a valid position. It seems crazy to me that you somehow thought that was the best/most honest COA. If you were correct in your assessment, it would have been far easier for you, and more difficult for me to refute, if you'd have listened to 5-10 minutes and said "Here are some of the claims being made... and they're false Russia propaganda because here are the facts..." I could respect that. But we both know why that didn't happen: When you know your position can't be adequately defended or finding a flaw in the opposing argument proves too difficult... name-calling, hyperbole, and ad hominem are the preferred tactics. Not one person on this website has ever, ever, been a cheerleader for Russia as much as you would like to paint them as such. Many of us here have, however, reasonably argued that our US leadership shares some (not all) amount of the blame for the origination of the chaos and conflict we are experiencing, as well as the continuous funding and intensification of multiple conflicts on multiple fronts. No one here hates America, and no one wants America to fail. But it's easy for our obviously corrupt leadership to lead us further into trouble when they have people like you willing to do these ridiculous logical gymnastics to justify their actions and cock block dissident voices because you don't want to be proven wrong.

Until the moment one is convicted of a crime (and therefore legal to own firearms up to that point), an individual should be able to own whatever they want, including homemade firearms. That also means the NFA is a significant violation of the constitution and should be fully repealed. Any additional roadblocks to ownership/use such as firearms/ammo specific taxes, insurance requirements, banning of whatever, etc. are unconstitutional. I support restrictions for felons and I’m fine with background checks for purchased firearms (without any arbitrary waiting period), but anything beyond that is unconstitutional and illogical. The anti-gun crowd doesn’t give a fuck about safety or “saving lives,” they care about disarming the public to gain control of the plebes, pure and simple. Your average suburban dipshit who’s anti-gun just doesn’t realize they are simple pawns in said goal, despite whatever hollow, altruistic goals they claim to personally have.

0% if they're filed off as they often are once they enter the underworld. I looked for a stat about how many guns used in crime have altered/removed SNs, but I couldn't find anything. A decent number of guns are already untraceable because they have altered SNs. https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/report/nfcta-volume-ii-part-iii-crime-guns-recovered-and-traced-us/download Between 2017-2021, 48,601 guns couldn't be traced to a buyer because their SN was altered. 25,904 crime-linked guns traced back to a .gov owner! Opposition to un-serialized firearms is not about crime prevention - it's simply about placing obstacles and red tape between citizens and legal firearms and creating the groundwork for a future confiscation database.

Uh… yeah? I do around 8 overnights a month, and I make it a point to explore new places, look at the menu, and experience things for myself. I don’t understand how you mean that as a criticism. What would you suggest? Read a single review and repeat it to everyone I know without any first hand knowledge? This is what I meant when I asked if you read your posts from the perspective of others. I’m sure it sounded like a zinger in your own head, but….??

Curious, do you ever read what you write from the perspective of someone else? You often make some good points, yet sometimes post things that are bizarre. These things jump off the page when I read them as glaringly obvious. Perhaps you don't realize name-calling and hyperbole in the first sentence makes your position seem weaker. You seem to be affirming that "Yes, we do have PsyOp programs" and "the ends justifies the means", which is a widely accepted Machiavellian principle. That those means won't also be used against you should your interests diverge seems incredibly naive. And lastly, you seem to be calling the people on your side A-holes while simultaneously expressing faith that those same assholes have you and your children's best interests in mind. It seems completely inverted because you're the one defending them for foreign policy decisions that will result in conflict for you and your family. You care about them more than they care about you. I'm not trying to attack you, but it does seem crazy to me.

I would recommend pursuing AD/ANG/AFRC all simultaneously. For me, it was actually faster to get hired by a reserve unit since the AD recruiters couldn't get my paperwork right to save their lives. As for your goals and ideal air frames; I thought I saw the A-10's were going to the boneyard? Explore other mission sets that might interest you: gunships, OAK-1, CV-22, CSAR? If you find those missions to be in line with your interests, then you can go into AD with ideal airframes in helo, heavy, and fighters and not be too upset with whatever track you find yourself in.

RIP Mr. Betts.

One thing I never understood during my 20 years and 4 days on USAF active duty is why everyone on base wanted to make it harder to get shit done. Outside of the flying and mx squadrons, most of the AF personnel didn't want to help get the mission done. It always felt more like they (non combatants) wanted to make my day a little harder. Instead of helping us get into the air, they wanted to let know that they wish they could help but they couldn't because they'd get in trouble or that it was somebody else's job. Of course, that somebody else was always TDY or on leave.

Excellent post by @FDNYOldGuy well said and laid out clearly. To @DeskDriver2023: you seem to have a good attitude. Keep grinding. I know it’s a very frustrating process, if you’re wanting to fly anything painted grey and paid for by Uncle Sam, apply everywhere. Most will agree the ANG is the best of what’s left. If heavies are interesting to you, I’d highly recommend you enlist as a Loadmaster, Boom Operator or some other enlisted flying position. My buds in ANG heavy units will all agree the best chance of getting picked up there is be a bro who they’ve flown with. Hang in there, happy hunting.

Not a fighter dude, but my guess is that, even thought you're not above the age-waiver land, Reserve/Guard fighters usually shy away from folks close to that range. They got burned by the oldies in the past bailing out mid-UPT and there are pieces to a fighter track that are tougher as an older person. You're playing a numbers game and betting on the longer shots by narrowing to fighters; more competition for fewer seats. If you really just want to fly anything, you really should start looking at heavies. If you want some autonomy, start rushing heavy Reserve/Guard units. As many before have said, 96.69% of people usually enjoy wherever they end up as long as they embrace it. "Bloom where you're planted." AD has its place...and it's life. If you want life autonomy, (more of) a choice of what you fly (depends where you're hired, obviously), and the ability to get that airline line number started years earlier, you probably are infinitely better off holding off for Guard/Reserves. You might have a "better/faster" chance flying just going AD, but you risk getting pulled by your hammer around the world. As for flying fighters, you're putting WAY more in the hands of the fates than if you get hired by a unit. Your skills, your competition...errr classmates..., available 38 slots, and the needs of the AF all dictate more than you "wanting to fly fighters." You could be a strong above average 5th in a class that gets six 38 slots or you could be a hot shit 3 in a class that gets two slots. You could get that 38 slot and they only have 2 fighters in the drop, so FAIP or bombers for you. All of that is decided by random luck and timing. Then again, some folks are in it to win it and wanna ride or die AD. It's certainly admirable and a guaranteed paycheck for 12-ish years. It really is only something you can decide. Lastly, look into Reserves more. Guard is great and less AD-light, but it's much more disjointed in the hiring due to the inherent state by state nature. Each Guard unit has its own separate hiring apparatus with separate recruiters; Reserves can get you started (MEPS, forms, basic intro stuff) for any airframe (I think they still do Unsponsored...) and you can begin rolling as you're rushing multiple Reserve units. Whichever path you choose, 100% rush multiple times to the units you truly want. They're getting lots of hotdogs tossed their way; be a more memorable hotdog. Be a good human, put in the work to make them want to pick you, and don't stop until you've gotten the last TBNT. it's tough competition and no one is gonna just hand it to you, so don't give up. Good luck! Signed, A happy Reserve heavy driver that started UPT 7 years above the age cutoff ***(DISCLAIMER: during a VERY different hiring environment, so not happening very often anymore)*** and has greatly enjoyed the adventure I've been fortunate enough to experience thus far.

Back on the personal finance front... Fidelity will allow SPAXX as your sweep account in Cash Management Accounts (CMA) starting around June 15. IMO this makes CMAs a no brainer. No need to mess with separate online savings accounts to get higher rates on your cash. I know this took me a while to wrap my head around and I wish somebody had broken it down for me earlier, so for those that don't habla CMA, here's the skinny... CMAs are brokerage accounts that operate "like" checking accounts. Debit cards, ATMs, fee reimbursement, checks, online bill pay, direct deposit, etc. Your cash balances by default are kept at various banks around the country. You can see which banks, but there's no reason to care. You get FDIC protection, ~2.7%* interest, and manage your cash centrally via Fidelity. If you elect to keep your cash in SPAXX, you give up FDIC coverage, but you can get ~5%* on your cash balances. Vanguard just started "Cash Plus" accounts to compete. I'm sure they'll be great accounts, but I moved from Vanguard because (IMO) their service starting slipping around 2020 and became untenable. Bottom line, especially for the young dudes: Look beyond USAA for your banking needs. With some work, you'll be very wealthy one day - learn to manage it well now. *all rates are as of 4/15/24

This still cracks me up.

No I was pointing out that specific podcast from the absolute absurd claim by our local useful idiot that everything on our side is a lie and the proof is on a dubious state funded post cast used by the Russians to advance their BS. And if you want to go down the “do we have Psyop” you should see what happened to all our actions post peace dividends. We basically unfunded that part of the State Dept and wonder why so many places seem to be cozy with China over Belt and Roads. Diplomacy/statecraft/foreign policy is my A-holes vs the other sides A-holes, and I know which one has my and my children’s better interests in mind. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That guy is advancing Russian propaganda now openly admitted in a site full of professional military officers from various points of perspective to all call him out on his stupidity. He is a Shill, and yet he continues to do it. Sorry but not sorry whatever he did in whatever life before he pretty much flushed to become that old crazy Vet on your street screaming about whatever “liberal conspiracy” or other noise. And you’re feigning ignorance or woefully uninformed to think we (like every other nation on Earth) aren’t engaged or maintaining Psyops and other methods to advance agendas. There is an entire discipline in JSOC called “Psyops.” Why do you think we do all these partner force exchanges or exercises if “make them align our way” wasn’t part of it? This kind of theory shouldn’t surprise you. Do you want to be the honest guy at the poker table when you know everybody else is cheating? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk