brickhistory

They, the Afghans, knew at the time we were using them. They knew it, they let us because it fit their needs at the moment. It's a little bit patronizing to assume that they weren't wise to the deal at the time. We didn't create the Taliban, we didn't make Afghanistan the suckhole that it is, has been, most likely always will be.

World War II Combat Squadrons of the United States Air Force: The Official Military Record of Every Active Squadron. Author, Maurer, Maurer (no, not a typo) USAF Historical Division, Air University, 1992 Some contenders for your 20th ASOS: 20th Bombardment, 20th Pursuit, 20th Recce, 20th Tac Recce, 20th Troop Carrier. This last one looks like it might be the granddaddy of your current unit - 20th TCS - 20th TASS - 20th ASOS. Contact the 9th AF/HO and get them to do the research. A letter signed by your squadron commander (maybe even an e-mail) should do the trick. If you should get the gouge, it would be interesting to know.

1. Go to the base historian. That's his/her job. Every base is authorized one. If the billet is empty, go to your Numbered AF and/or MAJCOM historian's office. 2. Contact the AF Historical Research Agency (or whatever they are called now) via a letter. Signed by the Sq/CC or better will work best. Horsepower = faster response. 3. PM me with the unit or post it here for everybody, there are some awfully smart people on baseops who may have something you can use. If not, maybe I can help or know somebody who can.

AMF! Say "hello" to that other fat corrupt dead bastard, Ted! Thanks for your service as a grunt Marine. Too bad you forgot some of the concepts - right/wrong, being a servant of the people, not wasting taxpayer money, or sticking by your fellow servicemembers until a court finds them guilty. Somebody wants to lecture me about class? Riiiigghhhttttt.......

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/military-obituaries/special-forces-obituaries/6962966/John-Leavitt.html Godspeed, sir.

Carl from "Slingblade" voice to ON: "Uhhmm, some folks call it "feedback," some folks call it defending an indefensible (and retarded) position, uhhmmm." Voice to OFF.

DEFCON-2 by Norman Polmar and John Gresham. Mostly tactical account of the Cuban Missile Crisis - what the American and Soviet crew dogs were doing getting ready to "go toe to toe in nukler combat" to quote Maj. Kong. While the sabres rattling over Cuba were held by POTUS and Kruschev, an off-course U-2 over Alaska was intercepted by MiGs who were met by nuclear-armed F-102s sent to bring back the U-2. USAF and Soviet captains could have started the Big One. And a Soviet diesel sub loaded a nuke-tipped torpedo before deciding to surface after being tagged by the USN. Likewise, a USN LCDR or his Soviet counterpart could have kicked it off despite what Moscow and Washington wanted.

old crow, well done!

The following could have gone in the "Leadership at the 'Deid" thread, the "Good Military Read thread (which it is), but I thought I'd put it here as "historical." From the book "The Hungry Tigers : The Fighter Pilot's Role in Modern Warfare" by Frank J. O'Brien, 1986. A bit dated now, but it has some good nuggets about traits required, the lessons from his Vietnam experiences flying F-4s, and some other pertainent to today areas. The troops at Phu Cat had to put up with a problem that was most likely unique to the base. Had it been more widespread, the hue and cry would have been heard all the way back to the Pentagon. The difficulty centered around the base finance section, and since it dealt with pay, it was indeed a very touchy item. It also took a considerable amount of a person's off-duty time to make repeated trips down to finance to get things straightened out. The result of these trips in nearly all cases was increased frustration and confusion. They did, however, give you a chance to socialize a bit since most of your friends would also be there with similiar problems. Unlike stateside bases, just about everybody's pay was fouled up, and to make things even more infuriating, the personnel at finance were entirely disinterested in solving the problem. Some even had the gall to suggest that you go without a portion of your pay for the entire tour because it was easier to do this than correct the records. During the 1970-1971 time period, finance was the only area at Phu Cat that was not 100 mission-oriented.

Can't speak to the ANG, but can to USAFR. No PME and no advanced school = terminal major usually. Nothing wrong with that, but know the 'rules' before making any decisions. All the b1tches about this are nothing new. Nobody is experiencing anything that hasn't been felt/done before. Read Jumper's "Dear Boss" letter. Read some Vietnam books. Read some Korea books. Read some WWII books. Read some Indian fighter books. Young pups have always complained about the 'clerkness' of the service. Right or wrong, it's a damn big windmill to tilt at. Nothing wrong with trying to change it, but history and the odds are not in your favor.

That's life. Not trying to be a d1ck, just speaking the truth. Your colleagues are in jobs that aren't in as much demand as yours and thus have flexibility to pursue other things within the Air Force. You owe Uncle another five years and are in a short-manned area. Questions? Yes, it's always better to be in a position of strength when wanting something from Big Blue. Again, nothing new there. A question for you: If you have decided to punch at the end of your commitment (no judgment, thank you for your service), why bother with SOS in any flavor? Or is there still an element of keeping your options open? If the latter, see my opening line. Don't take an "on-line bu11shit" degree if you don't want to. Find a "real" university to get an advanced degree if you think that will be of benefit or interest to you post-USAF. Get the degree because you want it. Unless you think you might want to stay in and get promoted. Then see the opening line again. The system is what it is; until you are CSAF, you can't/won't change it. Generations before you have b1tched the same thing. Any changes noted? Again, deal with reality, not "how it should be" and you'll be much less frustrated, IMO. Good luck.

Nope. The sheeple look at you (me) funny when not following the rules, no matter how redundant at that moment.

Bristol Beaufighter, P-61, F-82,F-89,F-94,F-100F,F-105F/G(EWOs,not WSOs) F-4C,D,E,G(ditto EWOs), F-111/EF-111

Riiiight. Some things just don't go together. But given the above, how about a "pip, pip, wot?" Knock yourself out with A400. Hope y'all buy lots of 'em. Don't see it happening, but I really do hope I'm wrong.

It wasn't "always better" back then. There are plenty of memories and historical examples of war-fighting being less important to leadership than 'clerkness.' Why was Robin Olds such a hero to most here? Because he fought the 7AF/Pentagon risk-aversion and kowtowing to Vietnam-era political correctness. When sortie count counted more than effectiveness. A four ship of F-4s with only one bomb on each? Launch 'em! Sortie count is what gets the wing king promoted. And the DO. Korea? Same. WWII? Even more so. The memories of wearing a freakin' tie (shades of reflective belts!) don't hang in there like the 'good' memories. There is a difference today in that the information age makes such buffoonery known immediately. But it is not new. Doesn't make it right either. But it is what we (and most other services/countries) pretty much always do. The experienced aircrews that stay in after the current fights are over (if ever) will be the ones who assume the mantle that Rainman laments as passing. Your stories will no doubt get better with age/time so that the next generations of youngsters look back at those "good old days" when (most) folks flew in the aircraft. As to fighter (or other combat) squadron bars, not my place to speak on them historically or currently. I hope the informal, but invaluable, lessons are passed on somehow. The politcally directed ROE have direct historical precedents as well. Shame we have to learn that lesson again as well.

Lack of basic English skills aside, this little nugget contained within your weak diatribe is exactly the point. Those commanding at Al Udeid should have leadership skills.

Dated (just prior to the handover back to PRC from UK) so take it for what it's worth: Hong Kong? Yes, please! Go for at least one fancy night and dinner at the Peninsula Hotel. Very old school cool.

Reading in today's Early Bird about the transfer of the three missile wings from AFSC to GSC with the bomb wings from ACC to transfer as well. Uhh, didn't we do this once and call it SAC? (rhetorical - I had to fight to escape SAC back in the dinosaur days...) Second that Frankenklotz is the CC. Jeezuz Keerist, that guy won't die. A vampire-like stake through the heart probably wouldn't do it either. Watch your backs, boys and girls. Whatever happened to the public law about having to be rated to command aviation units? Either way, that ghoul is an example of hanging on and climbing no matter how long it takes. He was an Lt Col in the late 1980s as a frame of reference. Not respected at all. Perfect example for the leadership issues of our Air Force. Great "all about me" skills, however. Jeezuz H. Freakin' Keerist...

Or the worst. His stream of consciousness writing made think of a bad R&R for him in Hong Kong and not a real life accounting of "there I was." But it's on the best seller list and has been for some time, so what do I know?

Sh1t.

Umm, isn't that Mikey from American Chopper on the right?

Another one that time has only improved; sorry no then hot, now not capability on her: Sela Ward

I hope the guy will ask the SQ/CC "Why?" Politely and respectfully, but a simple question of "Why is this buffoonery being tolerated? Is the price of "good order and discipline" vs. the asspain of this clerking to the nth degree something he or she, personally, agrees with?

The Flying Tigers Chennault's American Volunteer Group in China USAF History & Museums Program 60th Anniversary Edition, 36 pages. I wrote this back in 2005-ish for the AF/HO office. They wanted it for the USAF 60th Anniversary. They just published it this summer. Go figure... It is available FREE at your base HO office and, possibly, base library. There's no original research, just a review and capturing of the already published AVG works - kind of like a college paper approach. Big brass ones for everybody involved - Chennault, the pilots, the ground guys, even the nurses. And they kicked some Imperial Japanese Army Air Force butt. Up for discussion, but something like 199 aerial victories to 10 KIA in combat, another 3 KIA during ground attacks, and 10 in flying accidents not related to combat.

Because in a tragically warped way, it is ironic. Dark humor at its darkest. I get per's point. And what "investigation?" A bad case of "sh1t happens" and a crew is under "investigation?" Y'all watch your backs out there. As the cartoon strip used to say, "We've met the enemy and he's us..."