Lawman

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Dude you’ll be fine. I got it with a recommendation from a retired Army Major (from the 80s) and an enlisted Navy Chief. We are so short of manpower across Army aviation they literally don’t care. The recommendations merely show you aren’t some crazy with no friends. It could be from a pastor or a high school track coach, it’s just a matter or proving you have social skills and a decent work ethic. You’re recruiter is an E5/6 who like so many is freaked out about the process of WOFT because it’s not what they normally do. If need be hit me up in PM and give me Sgt whoever’s info. Worst case he’s gonna hear fro Chief to knock it off and drive forward. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If Al Assad and Erbil didn’t fully demonstrate the stupidity of basing key nodes within range of SR/IRBMs without associated PAC-3 coverage you really aren’t gonna get the severe risk of exposure all of Afghanistan is. Herat can’t be protected, neither can BAF or KAF or any other place in Afghanistan. There aren’t enough Patriot units to cover everybody, in fact even if there were that’s banking a lot on the countermeasure working 100% of the time. That doesn’t even begin to go into the discussion of just how convoluted and self licking an ice cream cone the movement of combat power necessary to sustain offensive ops in for example an Iran scenario would be. Just for sake of example... you can drive supplies and sustainment from ports in the Med to key nodes in the typical Middle East footprint far easier than you can move them either via ground route or air route into Afghanistan. That places is a logistical black hole when people aren’t trying to kill your supply lines. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Like I tell my wife in my birthday/anniversary.... It’ll totally fit Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There is no strategic advantage to invading a country from Afghanistan. It does not create anything of a “two front war” in a fight with Iran. There is literally nothing in eastern Iran worth worrying about. All it does is plant a strategically difficult place to resupply and sustain using high density low force protection nodes like BAF within the easy range of Iranian Ballistic Missiles. If anything getting our exposed troops and assets out of Afghanistan sets us up better for a conflict than we currently are. As it stands any hostile that wanted to be actively belligerent and make the craps roll of “inflict enough immediate pain and there won’t be a long response and they won’t go nuclear” has a big free chicken target to eliminate a lot of strategic asset in a single series of attacks without much we can do to stop it. We are banking our whole game on “F around and Find Out!” And after 2 solid decades of war fatigue I could see the logic and outside threat would have in thinking we won’t back up that threat. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Io

General Milley approves... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edit (now that I’m not four whiskeys into an angry night) Congrats to the Navy/Corps found at most 15K of fuel if the RV is taking place right over top of a location for that osprey to get ground fuel... 10K is probably a realistic/optimistic number. But operationally that’s where they plan to put this tanker, right over the boat acting as a way to pass gas to the guy that can’t get aboard the ship for whatever reason. The Osprey tanker is justified out of giving the CSG another Hornet tanker they can press forward and even bigger about creating a new and useful capability aboard the gator carriers to add a desperately needed flexibility/option for safety that doesn’t currently exist. For those unfamiliar with the landing weight requirements in Harrier, it basically drives the air ops plan on the boat because it has no flexibility in fuel planning. When it is within its weight for landing its barely above bingo. The 35 will have a bit more leeway but it’s still a friction point in operations. Having a tanker that is organic to the air wing instead of needing to be within range of land based 130s or a Carrier Strike Group opens options for a MEU. Given the number of AFSOC tiltrotors even available and the given locations for them to stage from, you gotta ask what does that actually buy you in combat power. It takes gas to move gas the further/longer the less useful it is... the Osprey is still a slow fat kid compared to a 130 much less a jet carrying buddy tank ability. Trying to push it forward to provide gas becomes a self licking ice cream cone really fast, and unlike the 130 it can’t go up and catch a drink of the 135 to stay useful. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That new president was actively part of the previous admin which had no problem taking all the Armor off the continent, shuttering the only forward deployed Heavy CAB in the Army, and cutting troop levels by a full 2/3 of what they were when from a few years before. All that while ignoring Russian aggression and pretending those T-72/T-90s rolling from East to West across Ukraine were “possible rebel forces.” Yeah I think democratic leadership and the party will happily go back to gutting NATO and the active component with a new president, and not a damn word will be uttered by the same press critical of Trump for his statements about our “allies.” Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dude... CENTCOM is in Tampa Bay and we have been way beyond “committed” to that region for decades. The strategic and economic value of the region has never been a question. Should we move that to Jordan to let the locals know we are in their corner? Africa is a real suck as far as support and infrastructure. No matter where you placed your HQ element within that continent it was going to effectively be no less isolated from any other portion than being based Across the MED. the difference being as far as effectiveness now you can send people there on non remote tours and get some continuity of work out of them. You try convincing good talent at 6-9 years of service to go work staff without family living in a prefab support barracks Kenya or something. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hear this line of stupid oddly enough from some of the very same people that vehemently defend the right of the citizenry to own spooky black plastic rifles. Saying cops should deliberately ignore a half a century of firearms technological development for the sake of “look less like the military I associate you with in my head” would be akin to saying “carry a revolver instead of a semi-auto pistol because screw actual usage and capability I want to feel better about the way you dress for work.” Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Have you ever participated in any of those training regimes? Are you just parroting the “research” of agenda reinforcing media outlets? There are in a given year ~1000 total deaths at the hands of an officer involved shooting. In that same year there are ~250 million police encounters which require an officer to go through the numbers that may result in a warning, arrest, use of force, etc. So ~.0004 percent of police interactions (most of which are responsive in nature) actually end with somebody dying at the hands of a cop. Trigger happy... right... This myth that cops somehow fancy themselves a bunch of snake eater/ranger Bn wannabes needs to go. It’s crap and the fact that they are “militarized” has nothing to do with a desire to be a military force and everything to do with needing gear that holds up to the ever expanding list of jobs we give them, having a budget that is paltry, and using the best outlet to get what you need, the military yard sale that we happily provide. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Lipstick on a pig... Look we need to accept that cheap and small/light are mutually exclusive terms. Persistence and hang time in the stack combined with the fact that a host of weapons to be carried could be dropped just as effectively from an AC-130 (ie from a non maneuvering MDS) and the sensors mean you don’t need to somehow combine aerobatic maneuver with an attempt to build SA in the battle space. For F sake, can we stop trying to reinvent the sky warrior. Those ODA’s on the ground don’t want a new take on the P-47... they want a pocket size easy to get set of options that mimic the AC-130J’s. Get a turboprop or small turbofan something from the commercial market, put sensors and non direct fire ordnance in a variety of options that can tailor to a fight, and accept the fact that gone are the days of gunning a locomotive with 6-8x .50 cals, because it’s dumb in a world of everything from rockets to bombs that will guide from miles outside the WEZ of anything expected in asscrackistan or African. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Just like moving forward forces out of Syria to avoid the cross fire of a NATO “ally” and Russian forces was fought tooth and nail by people who didn’t want us there in the first place... so will this be a “OMG Trump” issue. They want to leave, but they have to oppose leaving until they like the conditions/plan. Fact of the matter is they will never approve of any executable plan Trump has, but they know they can sport bitch the whole time and oppose him while he will leave because it’s what he said and what they oppose. They both get to play to their respective bases and make political talking points and YouTube clips for campaigning. Meanwhile we get to finally stop pissing away combat power and attrition the force no matter which group of political talking heads “wins.” Let’s do this. If I ever go back to Afghanistan it will be too damn soon. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Left June 1. The war has been pretty much over since Feb. The token drone strikes have been the best way of us yelling at our unruly children to “keep it down over there.” For the most part it’s like an agreeable breakup between us and the Taliban. We want out, they want us out, and after killing 3 generations of them continuously it won’t be shortly remembered that despite the rhetoric we have the ability to come in the night and take them like the boogie man at will. The only people clamoring for a fight is ISIS-K (reference IDF strikes on Bagram and Kabul). They are just trying to keeps us there because as soon as we are gone they are going to get spit roasted by the Taliban and the regular Afghan security forces. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think the hardest problem operating in this whole thing from a Military Orders and Mission Command perspective is the people with Birds/Stars on shoulders/Sleeves that are supposed to be making the play calls for us to take guidance from have all backed away from any decisions that have to be made. The reason they are doing that is the last great example of somebody with a Bird/Star sacking up and saying “this is my call as a commander and I’m making it,” got publicly fired out of a cannon and his Carrier taken away. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah don’t go anywhere... This green/red craziness CONUS/OCONUS stuff is just insane. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can you effectively use this weapon as a short close in fight gun... Yes.... with a buttload of training. Look I love my M1A but I’m realistic about what it is. It’s entirely too heavy to be a long walk through the woods hunting rifle, and entirely too heavy bang with low capacity to be a close in fight gun or provide rapid available firepower like an AR (especially in a caliber like 300blk). It’s a bench gun or a gun that gets stashed in a trunk until needed. And it’s need it fills is hammering rounds at a semi rapid pace in that 300-500 yard block. The Socom is basically a really complicated/poor-method at making a designated marksman style rifle and you pay more for than an Archangel stock M1A precomp. It’s only advantage is “oh look how compact I am while still weighing more than any AR platform in similar performance.” It only wins a pro/con battle when it’s limited to other older style rifles (FAL, HK91, etc). It’s a solid gun, and if you’re just getting it because its different and makes louder noises at a range than you would with an AR, go nuts. Otherwise get something else on the M1A line, and go into it understanding Springfield either makes a sub MOA gun or they don’t with every one that comes off the line. You only know for sure after you shoot a box through it. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yet most of Kuwait is still built out of tents. Long term planning is hard in an organization where leaders only reap the rewards they are present for and think little of what they do now effecting anything further than 18 months out. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All things Equal the manned platform will be preferred over unmanned. Yes *insert call sign here* was padlocked to just go look at something not even in the city limits of Raqqa repeatedly and not just by one task force JTAC. Yes, I’ve watched 9 lines punted from one asset to another because dudes training didn’t get it done or because they weren’t responsive enough to the dynamic nature of the target. Drones weren’t the primary VBIED killer over Mosul, the Apaches flying at Block 7-9 under them were. Or did they just imagine the 1100 Hellfires we shot into that city. You guys asked the open ended question of “does the ground force care” without actually living/knowing the ground force and you seem to have definitive answers to speak for those guys. Or you don’t buy it when somebody gives you their take. Which one of us probably has the answer and backstory as to why they feel the way they do about it. It’s not hard to know how they feel about drones vs manned aircraft and why they prefer one over the other when you actually spend time with the dude who to the rest of the stack is a callsign and suffix. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This isn’t “one time at Band Camp” crap. I’ve watched plenty of robots be either flat booted to “padlock useless building at grid....” or piss in the pool bad enough that they are pushed back for the rest of that task forces rotation when there is any other option. Remember not all of us on here are with Big Blue. Some of us live with the ground force. The guys that get all the toys are picky and they have their reasons. Whether there is an equipment limitation or other those guys design that sensor plan and there is a hierarchy to what they want if they get to pick from the whole menu. Robots aren’t at the top of it. Especially not if there is a Gunship or even a U-28 available. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because when you compare the number of times a JTAC has had to bench a manned asset vs an unmanned one number is significantly higher than the other. It’s not that robots don’t have a place, it’s that historically if somebody in the stack is likely to go full Bozo it’s the drone. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I think this falls into somebody sensationalizing the report when reality is “we don’t have a memo/frago for it.... yet.” In 72 hours we had procedures for masks service wide though so somebody please stop worrying about refining that crap and do some real work. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not just ground forces. Primary desire for the HAF going in with that GF aboard is that asset is both live and able to do it line of sight to all the players in the stack. SATCOM is a secondary. Ideal desire is that not only can that asset be manned, but be low enough in the stack and with a fires capability to do something about it. Hence why the Gunship is so tasked with that role. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s because Divisions don’t deploy as a complete set anymore. Easy way to tell the difference is names ca numbers. If they call themselves something like “Task Force Lightning” than it’s a 25th ID brigade with some supporting elements trying to sound like its badass. If it’s just some numbers... then it’s actual bad asses from somewhere in the SOCOM hierarchy and their supporting players. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You’ll never get Flag officers into the back of an OV-10. It’s cramped and there are no windows for their aide to lick. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk