Blue

Timely question for me, as this as recently become a hot topic of discussion on the homefront. Stumbled upon this in Quora of all places, which I think captures what a lot of folks think. Not all encompassing by any means, but you get the idea.

Not so much a defeatist. I'd say it's better described as cynicism, brought on by seeing all of the previous "attempts" to fix acquisition. Stract, can you give some examples of things Roper has done to make things better (honest question - not trying to be a smartass)? I've googled around, but didn't see anything concrete. I saw his bio as well. Props to him for rising to that position at just 41 years old, but his resume seems light for the caliber of the position.

Sigh. He's about two and a half years into his tenure as the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics. This is a position where folks historically have spent anywhere from 1-3 years. And he wants to completely up-end how we buy fighter jets? At a base level, his reasoning is sound. The reduction in players in the defense business is a bad deal for the services and the American taxpayer. But the resultant "winner-take-all" production contracts are a great deal for the defense companies. So, I'm sure Boeing, Lockheed, Northrop and the like are nodding politely at everything Mr Roper says, and will send a nice card thanking him for his service when he departs his position 6-9 months from now.

I'm not as up-to-speed on these issues as many of you, however isn't drewpey right? The Supreme Court more or less told the Trump administration to "go back and try again?"

Even though no one really asked, Air Force leadership took it upon themselves to make their statements. They could have seized this opportunity to emphasize the fact that the US Military has a long track record of being one of the most inclusive institutions in the country. They could have highlighted how the military will take people of all races, mix them in a unit together, and make them work together to accomplish a goal. They could have emphasized how the military demolishes any perceived barriers based on race. Instead, Air Force leadership chose to just jump on the victim bandwagon. They'll be all kinds of thrash, PR, and probably a CBT or two. And then it will all dissolve as soon as the next crisis pops up.

So, the Air Force is jumping on the latest Social Justice Warrior nonsense. This should be surprising to no one who's spent more than a year in uniform.

I believe that's referred to as a "false dilemma," or more accurately, a "false choice." In other words, "a deliberate attempt to eliminate several options that may occupy the middle ground on an issue." I'm certainly no expert, but you can't tell me with a straight face that the United States Air Force, with it's ~$160 Billion yearly budget, had no other option than choosing between retiring the A-10 and the Personnel Hunger Games.

Currently retired and (unsurprisingly) working for Lockheed.

Watched Dark Waters last night based on this review. Interesting stuff, really enjoyed it. The trailer prompted me to go down the google rabbit-hole on the backstory before I saw the movie, including the New York Times Magazine article the movie was based on, "The Lawyer Who Became DuPont's Worst Nightmare." The wife on the other hand hadn't read anything about it, and also enjoyed the movie, if maybe not as much as I did.

Yeah, this. Sounded like it wasn't so much the fact that he sent the letter asking for help. That was OK. Everything I've read makes it sound like they guy sent it via unclassified channels, to his boss on the To: line and everyone and their mother on cc: That's what got him fired.

Reminds me of an old joke.....

My impression has always been that the Air Force, and the DoD as a whole, has three overarching goals: 1.) Spend the money to support the economy. 2.) Promote Diversity and "Social Justice." 3.) Defense of the country. Everything seems to make a lot more sense when looking through that lens.

And, from Air Force amn/nco/snco, the below post brought out all kinds of comments (most pertinent pasted below).

So, if you click on "Show More" below that video, you get the below:

My knowledge of aircraft-level certification mostly comes from watching this documentary on the design and construction of the 777 in the late 80s/early 90s, then watching the news highlights of the ups and downs of 787 development in the early 2000s. I always hear that developing a clean-sheet Part 25 airplane is incredibly difficult, but what exactly is it that makes it so expensive? Testing? Number of required flight test hours? Design? All of the above?

"The Report" had a limited release in theaters early 2019, and then released on Amazon in November. Daniel Jones (Adam Driver) is a Idealistic Senate staffer tasked by his boss (Sen Diane Feinstein, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee) to lead an investigation into the CIA's post 9/11 Detention and Interrogation Program (i.e. detainee torture, black sites, etc). Saw a couple reviews along the lines of "this movie felt like a Wikipedia article on screen," which it kinda did (lots of dialogue, little to no character development, strong focus on names/dates/places, etc). Still, it kept my interest. From what I could find, the movie is more or less accurate to actual events. Not a good choice if you're looking for action/adventure, but if you want to see the nuts-and-bolts of some of the more important aspects of the "War on Terror," I'd recommend it.

The "Frozen Middle" is real. https://othjournal.com/2018/12/17/forget-the-frozen-middle-this-mysterious-layer-of-bureaucracy-is-not-an-insurmountable-obstacle-to-innovation-even-if-it-did-exist/

Go and interview. See where it goes. If it ends up that the unit wants to bring you on, any medical/legal/other issues will come up. Honestly, if you get that far, I'd tend to think a unit would overlook the legal stuff, then it would be up to medical to clear you for the physical.

Her bio reads like the definition of an anointed one who can do no wrong.... https://www.columbus.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/1594693/colonel-samantha-weeks/

I'd heard all the buzz around The Irishman, so watched it a couple weeks ago. In all the buzz, I hadn't realized that the movie is three and a half hours long. Damn. And not "Wow, that three and a half hours just flew by." More like, "Damn, Scorsese really likes doing those long shots of people simply walking....for like five minutes straight." It was entertaining, but be prepared for the long haul. Not Goodfellas good, or Casio good, but still entertaining. Felt like it could have been edited down to 2.5 hours or so, and still not lost anything.

The Washington Post weighs-in this morning with "The Afghanistan Papers," a broad look at the war in Afghanistan. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-confidential-documents/ The article also contains links to all the source documents (interviews, memos, etc). Quite the rabbit hole to go down. This interview with BGen Brian Copes, Indiana Army Guard, was just three pages, but hit on a lot of the major topics (too much money, too much in-fighting between DoD, DoS, etc, too much "top-down" thinking, etc). https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/documents-database/?document=copes_brian_ll_05_c15_02252016

I feel like that article kinda buried the lede.... So the United States Air Force, the world-renowned King of spending taxpayer dollars, has been sitting on $160 million of unspent funds for Light Attack? With some of those funds up to three years old? I think that's the most powerful piece of evidence showing that the Air Force does not care about Light Attack.

We have candidates legitimately trying to normalize the concept of wealth confiscation for the common good. On the Left, I think they don't have a chance in hell of winning the general election. It's incredibly hard to unseat an incumbent president, and I have to think it's going to be next to impossible considering the current crop of clowns on the debate stage. As for Trump, I guess he could be called "unconventional," but I don't think he's entirely as unique as the news media would have you believe. By all accounts, Lyndon Johnson was a boorish, loudmouthed asshole who you wouldn't want running your local grocery store, much less your country. However, we didn't have the internet, cable news, and digital cameras in every pocket, so no one was the wiser. I dunno, just perspective from flyover country, I guess.

Ehhhh........ If your worldview stops at the boundaries of Washington DC, and if you determine the health of the country based on what's on CNN/FOX/etc, then yeah, it looks kinda bad. Honestly, I think the majority of Americans are doing ok, and the country as a whole is going about their business. But that kind of narrative doesn't get clicks, so you won't normally hear it.

We need to evaluate all our overseas engagements against the Powell Doctrine. If we can't answer in the affirmative to each and every question, then we need to go home. Spoiler alert: In the vast majority of cases, we need to go home.