Clark Griswold

I don't have an answer to those questions you asked, I'm not sure that there is a quantifiable number of casualties I or anyone else could say in terms of risk you could determine that would sway whether or not it is a mission we should do based on that percentage or risk. I think the threshold is whether you are willing to take combat casualties or not, if I were the POTUS making the call i would be willing to risk American lives for this mission, not brazenly, stupidly or carelessly but with the highest seriousness that this is America risking blood and treasure for the principle of a world not ruled only by force and self-interest. I'm not naive and nor foolish to think evil will ever be completely vanquished nor blind to the fact that our opponents are not necessarily evil or completely bad, they have their reasons for pushing their agendas the way that we do but from our perspective that's not enough to justify doing what they want to the way they want to do it. In this life and on this world, nations fight when there is no other way to solve our differences. I'm not ever gonna think they have the right to invade and take Ukraine, there is no cajoling or rationalization to persuade me of that, we have the power to stop them and the fight there is important to maintaining the balance between powers and the systems & relationships we have established that have generally been beneficial to the world. But on that happy note I found this podcast on the subject worth the time on my commute: https://mwi.usma.edu/mwi-podcast-a-looming-showdown-over-ukraine/ Realistic assessment of the situation I fear.

Yup, they wear us out with feints and bluffs then when winded they just push us over. I'm sure the brain trusts of Russia/China have considered this and the just slight backup of maritime delivery right now, frankly I'm kind of amazed they haven't moved yet, if they ever wanted to or if I were their advisor I'd tell them to. My answer to that is the grim realization that Cold War 2.0 is in full swing, it's time to face that and make the call whether or not to commit the USA plus reliable allies to long term strategic and conventional deterrence and denial military operations with associated economic, diplomatic and cultural efforts to isolate the aggressive autocracies and their proxies scattered around the world. The practical first step to that in relation to the crisis du jour we are discussing, potential Russian aggression, is a sizeable long term US led military mission to the Baltics, Poland and Ukraine. Pre-positioning and overseas basing while expensive solves some of the logistical problems you mentioned, demonstrates resolve, hopefully deters aggression and imposes cost on our enemies. But to your point, yes to using Commercial Lift versus military airlift when possible.

Some open source on the Russian deployment to the Ukrainian border https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-25/mud-could-help-decide-timing-of-any-russia-move-against-ukraine 100k there now, probably need another 100k there with gear and vehicles Rhetorical questions: Could they move 100k in a month from other theaters in say 4-5 days to reinforce an invasion? Could their airborne corps affect an operation to seize an objective (city, airport, port, etc…) to create an outsized effect during Days 1/2 of an attack to put the Ukrainians on their heels? Long range fires - could they destroy the Ukrainian Air Force and IADS on Night 1/2? What does the world do after a successful invasion? Assuming eastern Ukraine (all territory east of the Dneiper River) is seized? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably not appropriate for a wedding reception Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know it’s out of character with our recent record but light a candle We have no choice really unless we wish to be reduced to some sort of second tier power If not us who? Who stands against the aggressive and strong for those who are to be their victims? Our power is not infinite but neither are our responsibilities, we can stand up to the encroaching powers Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Like it or not, Ukraine while not a member of NATO would be considered a capitulation as it has become an ally of the West and particularly the US. Finland is not a NATO member and Russia has threatened and intimated them in recent history, if they attacked and we did not thing it would be interpreted as cowardice encouraging further aggression. Treaty and formal alliances are important but everyone knows the score and where the lines of the Western, Free, Developed world exist, allowing the eastern autocracies to aggress with no answer is just about the same as an attack on formal alliances. Not defending them as they are not a member of NATO but saying that because of that we did not defend them while the bear attacks them seems quibblish and unbecoming... I didn't help that lady as that 250lb dude was attacking her as she was not my wife... I'm not a warmonger nor a monster seeker looking for new adventures for the US to get into but when it is obvious the winds of war are gathering and that our role that we have told others we play in the world would call for us to act then we should, if not stop telling others we are the beacon of liberty and the defender of freedom. If that is true, then stop offering false hope and poorly placed faith in us, it's a shitty thing to do. Admit your just like every other nation and go about our business, the truth may not be pretty but at least it avoids the stench of lies. If we choose to act, call together the allies we have that are reliable and go into the fray with us routinely. Don't waste time trying to get those who can and should fight but won't, bureaucracies and diplomatic bullshit will waste precious time as the initial fight starts and they will delay to give the Russians time to get so far west that they will hide behind the excuse of the fight is over so let's not bother with it. Don't call on NATO, it's a self-licking ice cream cone system now mostly concerned with the preservation of the institution. Go big, go strong and don't try to out finesse this. Intimidate and be ready to cut loose with everything just short of a nuke, communicate to the Russians that we consider the use of tactical nukes as an attack by the Russian Federation upon the United States requiring a retaliatory response, if this comes to fisticuffs then we settle it with conventional weapons only, if you use a nuke, you will regret it. Anyway, armchair general analysis and recommendation: - Declare an international crisis forming simultaneously with a national security threat on our southern border. 4 theaters in crisis requiring multi-year, coordinated, coherent response: Ukraine-Baltics / Straits of Hormuz / Taiwan / Southern US border Immediately deploy 50,000 boots to Ukraine, tell NATO members to deploy 50,000 troops now or we leave NATO, privately of course, if they balk, do it and begin immediate redeployment from their countries and send any members in training or on exchange tours home. We're serious, no more of this. - Use what we have now but come up with an 18 month plan of action to get the whole of DoD pointed to the new heading. - Call for an increase in end strength of 35%, immediate reform to statutory, policy requirements to get more tooth and less tail. - Activation of Guard units as required, 2 year call ups. - Call Congressmen standing in the way of modernization and divestment of legacy capes, make a Faustian bargain to swap missions/equipment not needed for missions/equipment needed perhaps in quantifies or redundancies not necessary but necessary to get the new gear, people and training. We may need only X of the new F-69 but we're gonna buy X+75 to make Congressman Porkchop happy so he'll get the bills moving. - Others ideas not likely to ever get done but be bold and decisive, not holding breath....

I get it, I'm sick of freeloaders with the money, tech, industry and the military age male population to help secure the free world but don't as they benefit from the system and international political and security conditions that exist now thru the sacrifice of blood and treasure, thru expensive and difficult continued vigilance to deter aggression. I see how this appears tenuous but allowing the weak to be bullied, conquered, assimilated, etc... when that weak state is not geographically close, economically significant or culturally tied to us but it is. It is the principle that we don't leave our friends and allies out to dry. That where it matters, where aggression would threaten the free world, to the rules based order, we and others will fight for it. That we are the powerful nation that is willing to act on the principle that others deserve the right to live as they wish without being dominated unwillingly by others and that we will fight with those being oppressed to prevent that. We approached, encouraged and publicly supported Ukranian democracy, reform and turn to the West, this drew the ire of Russia and now as the storm clouds gather, we abandon them? Seems unbecoming to a nation that prides itself on being the shinning city on the hill and the guarantor of freedom. I don't believe in poking the bear but running from it is not acceptable either. I don't think your son, mine or any American should be sacrificed in a war, conflict or military operation that is not fought to win but that rightfully skeptical sentiment given our recent debacle in withdrawal from Afghanistan should not stop us from fighting or deterring a fight that is not an unsolvable problem like nation building in places where a nation really only exists on a map. I'm not naive, I know our power is not infinite and not every conflict is our responsibility, we have to choose wisely where we have to or should intervene. If Ukraine is invaded or Russia takes other aggression towards them beyond what they are doing now, I believe we should help them. Just my two cents.

The why is the same as why the British retook the Falklands, if they did not no one would respect or fear them, they would face a never ending series of challenges around the world and be reduced to something much less than deserving of their heritage. Like it or not we are on stage as the protagonist, the defender of the global commons and the one global power that defends a rules based system that albeit imperfect is infinitely better than the vassal-tribute system pushed by Russia-China. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Valid point as all my source of old man ranting is open source but the point of showing resolve to deter this and the other fight I’ll stick to Stand up to Biff or do his homework forever The quick deployment would send the message we aren’t just going to sit back and watch the borders of the free -ish world be changed, a high risk deterrence mission would be high risk but a non-response to aggression, conventional or hybrid, would be disastrous The bad guys have been on the offense too long with no response, it’s time to change that Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

New CBT requirement prior to deployment.

And from the NYT of all places...

Response can be more than all out WW3 Depending on how they act and how Ukraine fares in conflict will drive our hypothetical response. Ukraine starts to collapse, that’s one thing, Ukraine does well that’s another. But ultimately we have to be able to act fast enough to not let them be collapsed and IMHO that’s to preposition troops, armor, artillery, aircraft, SAMs, RPAs, EW assets and prime Cyber-Info capes now Not sure what the Russian objectives and timelines would be but if they go for it and only the Ukrainians respond initially and we can’t respond in immediately, like within 12 hours, they will have moved things on the ground so far in their favor, it’s essentially a victory Honestly we should shock the hell out of them and make the first move, rapid surprise deployment of 25,000 troops with 50k more enroute to Ukraine right up to the border with Russia Put them on the defensive Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How many pax are we talking about in this NEO? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Concur Buy 150 LAAR. 50 for ACC, AFSOC and ANG (station at ANG MQ-9 Reaper bases). Use as an accumulator to absorb production pipeline from SUPT and keep warm till B courses open up for ACC, AFSOC establishes its own program, ANG gets the FTU and distributes as capable with MQ-9 wings, not a dual qual program but a component of the Attack Wing(s). Stateside mission is to train often with the JTAC / TACP / SOF community and keep the AF still primed for the LIC, COIN, Grey Zone fights we will get sucked into like it or not. File that under shit that ain't gonna happen but whatever, it's BO . net Look at the size of the beast, Calidus B-350

Greek mythology was my favorite elective so I’ve got a soft spot sts for classical references, my vote Odysseus He wandered the sea on a mission and got out of some tough spots That’s my rationale Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

One more thing Supersized COIN aircraft https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2021-11-14/calidus-unveils-giant-attack-aircraft?amp https://www.flightglobal.com/dubai-2021/calidus-unveils-heavily-armed-b-350-turboprop/146370.article https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/air-warfare/dubai-airshow-2021-calidus-bulks-up-with-b-350/ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/dubai-air-show/2021/11/14/thailand-becomes-first-foreign-customer-of-at-6-light-attack-aircraft/ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let them eat cake MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle: ‘Dirty Little Secret’ About Inflation Is People Can Afford It https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021/11/14/msnbcs-stephanie-ruhle-dirty-little-secret-about-inflation-is-people-can-afford-it/ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great concert by these guys in 87 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice Runway independence has a nice ring to it also Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Shack That's the best argument against the US-2 but I'm not sure it's a disqualifying one. The cargo door / ramp capability is perhaps a requirement for a mission that may have gone by or one that we will not do in the continuous spectrum of conflict / competition with China and other challengers in other arenas. The air / amphibious delivery of cargo (mass, wheeled vehicles, etc...) may not be what this platform could / should be doing for support in the Indo-Pacific, versus smaller, lighter, on demand deliveries and support of cargo, pax & fires / effects to outposts and teams sustaining, taking, defending and securing objectives (islands, ships, platforms, etc). Taking a look at what the competition is doing, namely the AG600, it has no cargo door and only conventional crew / pax entry doors It appears they are not planning on using this as a means of rapid delivery of outsized cargo to remote locations principally accessible via amphibious ops. As the most likely aggressor in the Indo-Pacific, if they don't see the need to have an amphibious aircraft with a cargo door, we as the most likely defender probably don't either. As our Marine Corps (the principal land warfighter in the Pacific) is moving to a lighter, agile, lower footprint force structure, we as the supporting services should probably OT&E a certain small percentage of our force for that. If they intend to be unencumbered by heavy armor, fighting vehicles and the like then they should be supported by force that supports the light, small and agile. Concur with your point on SOCOM, they like to modify iron not wholesale acquire it themselves (the fleet of platform X). I have no solution to that fact, only the conventional force providers have that much money and wherewithal to buy, sustain and operate an entire MDS, SOCOM ain't doing that so you have to convince the USAF, USN, USMC that it is (amphibious capable air mobility / utility platform) is in their wheelhouse. Maybe AFSOC would see this as an opportunity as the ME AOR is downsized in DoD engagement, not sure, not an AFSOC staff / braintrust guy but maybe... For me, one platform, is interesting but it needs to part of an overall warfighting strategy for the air platforms of the USAF, USN and USMC, for the USAF as a part of ACE. An amphibious mobility / utility platform, a manned multi-role manned tactical expeditionary / dispersed ops capable platform, an unmanned modular expeditionary / dispersed ops platform and a family of systems for logistics and C2 for these systems. A Cactus Air Force that can survive and move, fighting and supporting while under long range fires to its fixed bases and operating sites. ACE is great and moving in the right direction but there is only so far you can go with systems designed and built decades ago with certain parameters and expectations.

Not a bad strategy, not a Guard mission but looking at WX Surveillance as mission set, the Hurricane Hunters getting recapitalization along with the NY ANG with LC-130 ski modification if the US-2 could be adapted to ski ops also the rescue 130s the Guard operates on Long Island and in CA, IIRC the WY ANG operates 130Hs for wildfire fighting during the summer, another customer, just some Reserve/ANG missions off the cuff that I think could be recapitalized with US-2+ legitimately The HIANG or AKANG getting equipped with it also is reasonable IMHO Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Word Just armchair general here but if the Joint Team seriously wants this my two cents would be for a more robust capability versus a niche fleet, a joint purchase of X planes with some tailoring for each of the services buying. For me, a purchase by the USAF, USN, USMC, SOCOM and USCG makes sense, provides a total fleet size that provides for immediate response and surge capacity, a fleet size industry will be motivated and confident in to support and can cover requirements in a very wide theater. Looking at this profile view and just thinking about mods: AR pods and recepticle(s). Boom and Probe/Drogue systems for max flexibility. Military avionics and capabilities integrated well into existing US-2 avionics. ECM, IR, Decoy provisions Hardpoints wired and plumbed on the wings. EO/IR turrret under the radar or wing mounted dual sensors. Wake/Spray might make under the radar not feasible but just a thought. Wideband BLOS blister Rollup door for jumpers with blast deflector and platform. Door gun kit. 40mm or better, floor bracing and anti-recoil provisions. Gun kit not exactly roll on roll off but my requirement would be 3 hour install or removal with 200 rounds. Expendable munitions capability thru doggy door in main door(s). Unpalletized load/unload system. Could be a floor based belt system or overhead railing to get shit on/off fast and with the crew available. That's just my Christmas list off the cuff but IMO any US procured US-2 variant would not necessarily have to have those as we would be buying them for 5 different US customers but the capacity to accept and operate with those if the customer choose to install them. Basically a US-2+ model, not sure if that is one 10% bigger or other what but one size that could fit all.

More practical than a float 130 methinks... https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/a-japanese-seaplane-could-be-the-difference-maker-for-the-u-s-military/

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk