Leaderboard

Politicians and pundits having been calling for acquisition reform for decades. Having worked in that world I've seen only marginal changes, until yesterday. Hegeseth dropped a bomb on the system and wants to end the 8(a) contract system. If this happens it will shake up a lot of things in the "business." There is a simplified definition of 8(a) contracts below which basically states these are set aside contract for supposedly small disadvantaged businesses and tribes. What started as an effort to help groups like Indian tribes turned into a yet another way for people to make money doing nothing. Most of these contracts were awarded to companies in name only, owned by a wife with enough native American blood to qualify, a huge fee was taken then they subcontract it to another company or consulting firm. I dealt with several range management contracts that were exactly like this. I am not in favor of everything he has done but this is a good step towards reform and getting the most of the taxpayers dollars spent on defense. His full statement is below. "When President Trump appointed me as your Secretary of War, I made you a series of promises. I promised that every single one of your taxpayer dollars would go toward one thing and one thing only: building the most lethal fighting force on the planet. And I promised we would gut the corruptive, unconstitutional, non-merit-based DEI programs that have weakened our military and distracted us from our primary mission. And I promised we would hunt down the waste, the fraud, and the abuse that has run rampant in this department for decades, and to instead redirect that money to President Trump's America First priorities. Well, today we are once again taking action on these promises. We’re actually taking a sledgehammer to the oldest DEI program in the federal government, a program few people outside of Washington have ever heard of, that I hadn’t heard of. It’s called the 8(a) program. Now, if you're like me, you're asking yourself what is an 8(a)? It’s a great question. 8(a) refers to the Small Business Administration’s program to assist "small disadvantaged businesses owned by a socially disadvantaged individual or tribe." Providing these small businesses with opportunities is a laudable goal. But over the decades, as it happens, the 8(a) program has morphed into swamp code words for DEI race-based contracting. And here’s the worst part: in many, many instances, these socially disadvantaged businesses, they don't even do work. They take a 10%, 20%, sometimes 50% fee off the top and then pass the contract off to a giant consulting firm, commonly known as "Beltway Bandits." For decades, this program—8(a)—has been a breeding ground for fraud. And this administration is finally doing something about it. The Department of Justice, under Attorney General Pam Bondi, recently exposed half a billion dollars in 8(a) fraud. Treasury, led by Secretary Bessent, found another quarter billion, and their investigation is just beginning. Treasury, Justice, and the Small Business Administration under Administrator Loeffler are all actively investigating their 8(a) contracts right now. Now, in the Pentagon, $100 million sole-source contracts go out the door to these 8(a) firms almost every day. One hundred million dollar sole-source contracts go out our door to these 8(a) firms almost every day without any competition or opportunity for anyone else to bid. The Department of War is required by law to do almost a hundred billion dollars’ worth of contracts per year with small businesses, including 8(a) firms. Seems 8(a) is quite important. But we're not required to pay enormous brokerage fees only to have these firms pass those contracts along to giant consulting companies, and we won't. We're not doing this anymore. So effective immediately, I’m ordering a line-by-line review of every small-business sole-source 8(a) contract that is over $20 million. And we’ll look at everything smaller than that too. The Department of War has the biggest chunk of 8(a) spending by far, ten times more than any other agency. So our cleanup, it’s going to be ten times tougher. It’s a two-stage mission. First, if a contract doesn’t make us more lethal, it’s gone. We have no room in our budget for wasteful DEI contracts that don’t help us win wars, period, full stop. Second, we’re doing away with these pass-through schemes. We’ll make sure that every small business getting a contract is the one actually doing the work, and not just some shell company funneling your money to a giant consulting firm. This approach is of course not meant to hurt small businesses, and that's not the point. America’s full of great, amazing small businesses. This is part of a larger effort to transform our acquisition ecosystem into one that makes sense for the threats we face in the 21st century. I gave a long speech about this back in November. Our goal is to spend your money to build our defense industrial base with businesses, large and small, that share our mission, not to line the pockets of Beltway fraudsters or to advance the agenda of DEI apologists. Only lethality, and we’re going to look at every single contract."

Unfortunately many of us don't realize this stuff until we're well into our career. The system will drop you faster than you can say integrity first. So much of the daily bullshit is completely unneeded. Honestly, how much time do you suppose the average officer blew formatting, or redoing, OPRs because white space is a mortal sin. How much of that data was inflated bullshit? How many TDY's/deployments were unneeded? How many jobs have you guys done in the AOR, that could have been done at home, or not done at all? I've know I've done a job at the deid, that could have easily been done from any SIPR terminal in the U.S (During rona, they in fact, did that same job remotely...so it clearly could be done). I had to justify why I couldn't have done a TDY via secure VTC, when I'm moving an F-16 to a depot facility. Why is that same shit not applied to jobs/deployments? Now, this isn't to say the service did do great things for me, because it truly did. I have great memories, I did some amazing flying, developed great skills, I have friends who have become family, and I'll hopefully get a decent pension/medical when I turn 60. But what young guys need to understand, is that the day your retire, you'll get your litho, maybe a medal, and nice pat on the back "thank you"...then the system will continue just fine without you.

Remember when Iraq went into Kuwait? What's different now? I understand that Greenland is important but when did the USA start going after weaker countries for their goods? We typically help out the defenseless not go after their property.

Epic slugfest...Indiana was the better team and they deserve this end to their magical season. Mendoza was lights out on the TD run. Proud of the Canes and their run, they beat ND, FSU, UF, Ohio State, A&M and Ole Miss to get to the show.

If someone asks to buy your house and you tell them it’s not for sale, that’s the end of the conversation.

Case in point, I went TDY to my first ops squadron a little over 4 years after I left it. Other than a nametag on the wall in the bar, there was zero visible evidence I was ever there. And honestly, while slightly humbling, that's the way it should be. Even as a commander, if you are truly irreplaceable, then you've failed.

If you think your unit (or larger organization) is fucked without you, you have been misled. Everyone is a replaceable cog, including every single black border pipe hitter. Take pride in the good things you accomplish in your career, work hard at what matters, but don’t think for a second you’re the lynch pin that holds the whole thing together - you’re not. Operate with that mentality and you’ll be much less stressed and happier.

I just watched this video on the PC-24. It does some pretty heavy lifting in advertising for the PC-24 but dammit it does make me wish we had these to replace the T-1. I would have loved to tried landing on SPRO type fields, grass fields, compacted dirt, etc. This could be adapted into a syllabus that really gets everyone ready for real world scenarios where we might be island hopping or landing on unprepared fields after a hurricane/earthquake before the Air Force spends more money teaching this in their MWS. I know this is about the budget but if the training came first, this would be a great trainer.

Looks like a war crime to me

God bless little European Texas

What a game! I certainly didn't have Indiana going 16-0 on my bingo card this season, but it's hard to not like Coach Cignetti and what he and his boys have done this season. Hats of to Miami on a strong season, they man handled my Buckeyes and earned their right at the national Championship game via a hard fought schedule. College Football may be a bit jacked up right now, but I thought this was a pretty awesome season to watch.

Does anyone here actually believe that Trump is going to try and get the US to invade Greenland? If he does do you really think we'd actually do it? This is political theater. We reminded the world that the western hemisphere is ours. Now he's trying (poorly) to remind NATO that they really need us and we don't need them.

So Germany really needed Poland, Japan really needed Manchuria, North Korea really needed the south, North Vietnam really needed South Vietnam, Argentina really needed the Falklands, the USSR really needed Afghanistan, Iraq really needed Kuwait, and Russia really needed Ukraine. We were with the defenders in every single instance. The only people excited about the US shaking down a NATO ally are Russia, China, NK and Iran. This will not end well for the Republicans.

I suppose it could be that Trump wants Greenland to be the 51st star on the American flag. I doubt that's the plan though. I don't know what he wants, but I assume it's something more mundane (new SOFA as @Prosuper pointed out, maybe some kind of mineral rights, etc). And when Trump wants to move the needle on something, but he knows he'll run into difficulty, he has a well-worn strategy: If he wants X, he proposes X2. When he knows he's going to face some kind of challenge on an issue, he proposes the most hyperbolic, most extreme version of what he wants. The media melts down and the public melts down. Whoever is on the other side of whatever the issue is, melts down as well. After all of the chaos, Trump backs down, and the other side backs down, they negotiate, and Trump often gets what he wants, or close to it. It's not even all that unique. Developers do it all the time. When they want to put up a new 10 story building, but know they're going to face a bunch of NIMBYs, they go in with plans for 20 stories, take the attacks, and eventually walk it back to the 10 story plan they wanted in the first place. I suspect that's what's happening with Greenland.

You guys got a litho? Well s**t

Irony.

Winning! Man caught on camera throwing dozens of poop bags on Bell LGBTQ center roof: ‘He knows who we are’ On Wednesday, workers at an LGBTQ center in Southeast Los Angeles removed 125 bags of dog poop from their awning. It’s happening at Mi SELA on Florence Avenue in the city of Bell. Eddie Martinez, executive director at the center, told KNX News’ Emily Valdez that security video shows that every morning, a man walks his dog in front of the center and throws a bag of dog poop onto the awning. “He knows who we are,” he said. “He looks at the cameras.” He said that because littering is not a crime, the police can’t arrest the guy... (full story at title link)

Personally I think the pain is coming in 24-48 hours.

Who is justifying that?

Buddy I hate to break it to you, but that's every president for the last couple hundred years. The only question is what he thinks his legacy should be. I doubt it's "expand the land mass of the US more than any previous president." It probably has a lot more to do with bringing back the post-war America he grew up in. It's not like he's hiding the ball. Make America Great Again. He wants the US to be the dominant force on the planet (again). He's bitched about tariffs and trade imbalances for decades. He hates drugs. He bemoans the collapse of manufacturing in America. He views illegal immigration as a scourge of foreigners coming to the US and importing crime while exporting wealth. And he is absolutely, 100% a petulant egomaniac. So anybody who slights him is almost certain to see him turn the government on them. Whether that's relitalatory investigations for domestic opponents or retaliatory trade policy for international opponents, that too has been quite predictable.

All these arguments assume that Greenland becoming an actual US territory is his no-kidding actual objective. I'm not saying he's playing 3D chess while everyone else is playing checkers, but he approaches many political topics, especially if he sees a 'deal' to be made, in a business mindset. Right or wrong, he is clearly willing to rattle the saber to get what he wants and use the saber when he thinks its worth it (low risk, high reward like we've seen him do recently). Do I think he's going to actually go to war with most of our closest allies over Greenland? No, but threatening to might make them considering either selling outright or selling large mining concessions. Finally, I think he rightly sees Western Europe as allies of questionable value and maybe this is a more forceful shot across the bow. Most have been drawing down their defense spending for years and would have trouble defending their own countries, let alone projecting power. Also, our values have been diverging. For example, Great Britain has had as many as 30 arrests PER DAY for saying offensive things online. Meanwhile, Great Britain also has anti-Israel protests where there have been videos of protesters holding signs saying "we support genocide" in reference to 'from the river to the sea' that have faced no police action. That clearly selective prosecution and lack of free speech is something I expect from China or Russia, not one of our oldest allies.

I spent an extensive part of my past studying international relations. Rule 1: There is no such thing as international law. Rule 2: International relations is, by definition, countries screwing over other countries. No country has friends, just interests. That's a two way street and a lot Europe forgot that. Just because the USA has acted politely and almost philanthropically in past in no way means that should continue. Is it nice? Nope. "Nice" countries invariably end up as another's vassal. The Dutch guilder used to be the world's reserve currency before the British pound, now where is it? Dwell on that for a second. We've been looking after everyone else's interests for a very long time and have ignored our own back yard at the same time. Not anymore apparently. Regardless how much anyone likes it, the facts are true: No one else will look after our hemisphere with US interests in mind if we don't. From a broader perspective, the USA is finally starting to act like every other country on the planet, and arguable still more benevolently that any other country would if they were given the power that the USA currently wields. Jimmy Carr's comedy bit is rather insightful: - Everyone is a Communist in their own house (I'll selflessly give to my family what I have to what they need) - Socialist in their home community (we will collectively provide for those in our community that are in need) - Capitalist in the international environment (he didn't earn it so screw that guy) Several geopolitical analysts have been predicting the return of a neo-colonial world...and here we are. Don't have to like it to recognize what it is.

Threatening to beat up your playground sidekick to get his lunch money is slightly better than actually beating him up. The entire Greenland thing is asinine (in addition to being immoral) not one of the justifications makes any sense. Much like narco boats, they are all sophistry. This, like Venezuela is about Monroe doctrine.

You said "children." So that means you have more than one? And I'm sure you love each one in their own way. They're very similar, but one's a little shorter than the other? They're different, but both very special to you, and there's no way you could choose one over the other and having multiple enriches your life. I know I could never choose just one. Child, that is. Of course.

Does this mean MAGA believes Global Warming is real now?

I chuckled. Sorry about the FB https://www.facebook.com/reel/1251878460121486

This is a good start. I don't know if this is the place I would have started, but no matter. When it comes to defense spending, there is such a tremendous amount of giveaways, make-work, and other constructs that serve no purpose but to hand out money from Uncle Sam with no expectation of anything in return. I hope they continue along this path.

Lol. Childish. You can buy the houses surrounding them and make them miserable. You can use eminent domain. You can wait for a forest fire to obliterate the neighborhood then use onerous regulations to prevent the owner from rebuilding. Pretending like the world is a libertarian playground is why Maduro lasted in our back yard for years and China became a super power using our money. That doesn't mean we storm the beaches of Greenland, but especially considering the Danish status quo is only possible through the grace of our military umbrella, if we want it, the question is not "is it for sale," the question is "how much." This is the devil's bargain Europe made 30+ years ago when they outsourced their military capacity to us. Turns out the interest on that loan is a killer.

This 1000%. The biggest downside is that I'm now annoyed when I shoot guns that aren't threaded. Especially now being $200 cheaper, you can get an ok silencer for $500 and a good one for $1K. Your only regret is going to be that you didn't buy one earlier.

Just want to let y'all know, one of my buddies received a RIP today with a RNLTD of 31 Aug to Laughlin and training starting in Oct. He may have gotten a RIP because of a humanitarian thing he's going through but just wanted to give y'all something to look forward to....look for those RIPs soon. I asked where did his RIP come from and he said his front office and probably because of the humanitarian thing.

That was amazing. Adding that to my movies review channels (pitch meetings, honest movie trailers, and the critical drinker).

And at the same time, they wonder half the country isn't listening to them since they're the "experts". Zero humility, zero accountability when they're wrong. And in the last 6 years they don't even seem capable of admitting that they were wrong, instead they double down on what is clearly stupidity. There was a point that doctors thought smoking was just fine. They admitted they were wrong and fixed it. If that were today, you'd have those same doctors recommending to smoke 3 packs a day.

Naw man, I think those dudes got sick of opposing view points and retreated to their safe spaces. Or they created burner accounts because they identify as being pussies.

Scott Adams has died. In honor, here's my favorite of his art.

There is another part of the response that in my opinion is more important than the impact on hearing....fine motor skills. "The fight-or-flight response significantly impairs fine motor skills by redirecting blood and resources to large muscles for immediate survival, reducing blood flow to extremities, and shifting cognitive focus from complex tasks (like writing or precise movements) to basic survival, leading to clumsiness, poor dexterity, and decreased accuracy in fine motor tasks like handwriting or detailed work, especially as heart rate increases." It WILL impact your accuracy...the best way to overcome is through training. Another reason I prefer a weapons with more ammunition.

Right, but if my ears aren't physically damaged, I have a better chance of bouncing back quickly. I've certainly experienced the auditory exclusion while hunting and overseas. I can't do a lot in the moment to stop that, but I can avoid breaking my tiny ear hairs. The ones on the inside. Not the outside.

300BO with subs and suppressor. Ballistically similar to 45ACP at short range (superior at longer ranges) with less recoil than a blowback action. Hopefully allow me to talk to my wife and kids and cops immediately afterwards without temporary or permanent hearing damage.

I think it was 2013 or so I first flew with the Aussie E-7. 13 years later and here we are. Screwed indeed.

So even with this funding and the fact it’s already flying missions with allies we can’t field one until 2032 ? Our process is screwed!

Read my post again, for comprehension this time. I'm trying to help some out there understand the higher math behind the political theater going on. We don't "just leave NATO" That's not happened once yet and I doubt we'll be the first. We're not going to invade Greenland (we don't even need to, Denmark is more than happy to pay for basing changing we ask for), and we're probably not going to leave NATO, even if other do. However, the wide receivers on the team needs to know they're not the O-Line, they're not the TE, and they sure as shit aren't the QB. To those who pay attention to the history of nations, what's happening right now is what that 'define the relationship' conversation looks like between allies. I fully expect some things will change out of this, but stop with the black-and-white good-and-evil right-and-wrong bullshit. Act like an adult who thinks with critical analysis in mind, not just so you can response with your party line. We've already got news anchors doing that, please don't join them. Turn off CNN and/or Fox news and start recognizing that you and I don't hear 1 percent of the high level conversations that occur around these events. More importantly, quit reading your own rhetoric into other peoples statements. You sound like a weepy melodramatic 5th grader trying to tell a sad story while blubbering. It's embarrassing.

Your original post, before you edited it, came out pretty forcefully in support of the US continuing down this path with some statements that aren't supported by facts. You mentioned Eminent Domain as a way for the United States to "acquire" Greenland. That's not a legally accepted way that nation states exchange territory. I'm no lawyer, but it took all of 10 seconds on Google to figure that out. It sure sounds better than annexation or invasion though, which is what this will be if Denmark and Greenland continue to tell us hard no and we press the issue. You also mentioned this situation being our "Golan Heights" or it being comparable to that annexation. Israel captured the Golan Heights in war, then annexed it in 1981 from a country who had attacked it several times with intention of the destruction of the State of Israel. No such threat is currently present or even progged to be present from the territory of Greenland. Why would we do this? Do you really believe your statement above that Greenland needs "freedom"? The current administration has offered several very generic reasons for the US acquiring Greenland, depending on which way the wind is blowing that day. We've heard "we need it for security", to "Russia and China will take it if we don't", to "Golden Dome", to "they have lots of rare earth minerals", to "Arctic sea lanes are opening" to "I haven't gotten the Nobel Peace Prize" amongst others. The 1951 Greenland Defense Agreement between the US and Denmark, already gives the US very wide latitude to establish bases and conduct military activities across Greenland. The administration has offered no (that I'm aware of) concrete unresolved security concerns with respect to Greenland. Agreement listed here: Avalon Project - Defense of Greenland: Agreement Between the United States and the Kingdom of Denmark, April 27, 1951 Neither Russia nor China is currently capable of projecting the hard power beyond near proximity to their respective borders that would be required to seize Greenland by force. China has made several attempts to invest and/or purchase various interests in Greenland. That effort was blocked during the first Trump administration in a collaborative effort with Denmark and so far China's attempt to build a Polar Silk Road has been a failure. Background here: Greenland, Rare Earths, and Arctic Security Golden Dome. Currently a concept on PPT slides. No hard explanation has been given as to why Greenland would matter to this. Most of the concepts presented thus far have been space based. We already have Early Warning and Ballistic Missile/Bomber coverage from there, Alaska, Canada etc. And from point #1, if we wanted to build additional facilities, we already have an agreement in place to do so. 0 Rare Earth minerals have been extracted from Greenland. 0. They do have two known large deposits, but the environment and lack of infrastructure have been major impediments. Even with the warming temperatures up there, development will take a long time to see results. Also, Greenland's parliament passed a law banning development in one of them (the Kvanefjeld field) due to it being full of uranium and, shockingly, they don't want to pollute their country. Chinese investment attempts were stopped. Same link used in #2: Greenland, Rare Earths, and Arctic Security Russia does have a large fleet of polar icebreakers (including 8 nuclear powered) to exploit the Arctic sea lanes. The US currently has 3, count'em three, polar icebreakers, two of which were built in the '70s. US shipbuilding is currently in the toilet, so much so that we're buying icebreakers from Finnish shipyards (a NATO ally). Canada also operates a large icebreaker fleet and is expanding. If we rupture the NATO alliance over this, will those assets and new ships still be available to us? Who knows, because there's no way to know. NATO’s ‘Arctic seven’ find strength in numbers | The American Legion Nobel Peace Prize. Such a retarded fucking reason to blow up NATO I can't even address it. Right now polling in both the US and Greenland show that each countries' respective populations are against this: US voters widely opposed to taking Greenland by military force -- even most Republicans - ABC News Does Greenland Want to Be Part of the United States? We're demanding that a long-term ally give up a large portion of land. If they agree to sell it, bully for everyone, our free market economy is functioning. But they aren't, and we're currently using not so veiled threats of military force to take it from them. Our government has offered no concrete explanation as to why and is threatening long term Allies with economic and military consequences if they don't play ball. So I'll end on, once again, why are we doing this? None of the given explanations are developed or even make sense. Do you really want to occupy or annex a country that doesn't want us there just to take their natural resources? That's pretty close to some of the worst parts of the 19th and 20th centuries colonialism and/or quests for autarky. This isn't worth the dissolvement of NATO, and it sure as hell isn't worth us fighting Allies (kinetically or otherwise).

Agreed, though I'll call that a false equivalency. This is us pushing back against an organization of countries that have abused the good graces of the USA and acted as though access to our markets and access to use of our military force is their own personal birthright. During my time in NATO that attitude was common, and rather amusing to point out. Denmark really is too poor to buy blanks for it's military, so they point and say 'bang'. I'd guess the UK, some of the Nordic countries, and possibly now Poland are the only EU countries that could actually defend their own boarders...though Germany is on that path finally...(the history buff in me shutters at that). The US and the reputation of our military has kept the EU's Eastern flank secure for so long that the Europeans have forgotten that fact. Now the are being reminded and their calling foul on what should be called truth. Saying we're stealing our sidekick's lunch money is like saying a battered wife who finally defends herself is committed assault (I imagine something like Ronda Rousey being a battered wife for years and then finally realizing, wait, I can kill this guy...). On a technical level it might technically be true. On the truth level it's not. This is isn't bullying. This is the US finally standing up for itself.

Greenland doesn’t need shit. This is fucking ridiculous.

What does this have to do with global warming?

I'm in.

“Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime” Attributed to this piece of work. Lavrentiy Beria - Wikipedia

This cracked me up. I wish Nick was my TN state rep instead of a VA state rep. ClearedHot you can’t bring your gunship. https://www.facebook.com/reel/1413212763837365/?fs=e&fs=e

Th good thing is you don’t have to! Both is the only right answer!

And young guys should take notice. Don't sacrifice your forever family for an organization that will drop you without a second thought. Work hard at your trade. Take care of your people. But remember none of your AF leadership will attend your funeral. It's not personal, it's just business. Treat it accordingly.