GKinnear

More US Hockey excellence...maybe we need a hockey thread to go along with football and the field fairys thread

Those are topline numbers only...there are multiple discrete program elements that can be offset and not reduce mission effectiveness in that area, O&M has long been an easy cut to balance the portfolio...cut an FHP here, reduce an exercise by a day there...and BOOM!...a balanced budget. Or shit, go the Kendall route and just wholesale cut programs like the U-2 to pay for other shit...Sentinel ICBM missile silos aren't going to pay for themselves when you don't account for them.

How's that working out for our neighbors to the north...who brings a"go for the bronze" gusto that's done them so well over the years?

I think both the reg change and the reaction from the masses are distracting arguments...however, c'mon Big Blue, get your shit on one sock and make sure your public media recruiting campaigns are squared away first! Although having seen how the Puzzle Palace works over the last few budget cycles, the lack of thought beyond the initial good idea fairy isn't surprising.

Look up Black September and the PLO attack against the King in Jordan. Palestinian political power can't get along with anyone...to include a country that is populated with the same people and culture as them. Any goodwill the other countries may have to accept refugees has been burned by the Palestinians themselves.

The complaint in the report comes from Danielle Dietrich...who is not the sister of Pete's ex-wife. Danielle is the ex-wife of Pete's brother. It may not matter, but Pete's getting Kavanaugh-ed in the final minute of his confirmation process raises many doubts about the accuracy of the source. Single-source reporting in the intel world sucks unless the source has the street cred to back it up. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/senators-received-affidavit-containing-new-allegations-pete-hegseth-de-rcna188342?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma&taid=678ff942749f2f0001051b76&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter Money quote from the NBC reporting: "Belated claims by Danielle Dietrich, an anti-Trump far-left Democrat who is divorced from Mr. Hegseth’s brother and never got along with the Hegseth family, do nothing to change that," he said in a statement. "After an acrimonious divorce, Ms. Dietrich has had an axe to grind against the entire Hegseth family," he added. "Ms. Dietrich admits that she saw nothing but is now falsely accusing Sam of lying..." Samantha's (actual ex-wife) is getting her lawyer involved...so pop that corn indeed!

Anyone who can mentally think Elon's a raging anti-semite / Nazi because of a gesture taken out of context, either wasn't listening or is on the Clayton Bigsby level of bullshit.

I posted in the "The Next President Is..." thread, but if Milley accepts the pardon, the admission of guilt is included in it. He shouldn't accept the pardon if he's not guilty of anything...if he or any of the pardoned do, you legally can say "Confessed criminal Gen (ret) Mark Milley" every time you refer to him. Again, I'm not a lawyer nor stayed at a holiday inn last night...

IANAL...but the SCOTUS determined in 1915 that accepting a pardon included the acceptance of a confession. So kinda like the "declaration" on the ERA being a law, the current POTUS is wrong on his preemptive pardons statement. "The issuance of these pardons should not be mistaken as an acknowledgment that any individual engaged in any wrongdoing, nor should acceptance be misconstrued as an admission of guilt for any offense.

You're probably right about that...my language may have been over the top, but I'll stand by the intent of my post. I found the original post inconsistent for this forum, and I'm at a loss for why it was included in a thread about VRRAD. We generally post about how Big Blue gets it wrong on promotions, and then when someone makes it to O-6, he complains about how the Senior Leader assignment system works. @Dogs-N-Guns Acknowledged you had already applied for retirement...I'm glad you were able to make the choice that was best for you. I agree that I've also seen too many O-6s just marking time for the High-3, and have done fuck all when it came to doing the J-O-B...as either a staffer or a commander. You might not have been that guy, but it is sobering to realize you've crossed an invisible threshold and went from the top of the line flying pyramid and you're back at the bottom of the Senior Leader echelon. Colonels who move that often are doing so because they want to work the GO development timeline. No one's forcing you. Again, unless you have an ADSC, you can retire at almost any time you want to. Regardless, back to my passed-over days...it sounded like a petty complaint when there were plenty of O's who would have been great Lt Cols, let alone great Majors, who will never get that chance...even if they return to AD. Sounds like there were two separate conversations going on, so I'll buy the soon to be Vet's first round if I fell for the spoofer comms.

Nah brah...I've accomplished everything I needed to, and plan on leaving nothing on the table when I walk away. Making rank is at the bottom of the "nice to have" list, and it's certainly not a requirement for my service. Perspective is a great thing to have. Please make sure you have your retired ID card out before you get to the gate, and don't bore the thicc A1C a the gate with your "back in my Air Force" stories...some of us are trying to get to the shoppette before they stop selling booze on Friday night.

Passed-over Maj gkinnear checking in Yes...but in most cases, you can always retire. The old-school "brief" was direct about about it. "What if I have a rising senior, sick parents, etc?"...slide..."Feel free to retire". Unless the devil's money is holding you in, an O-6 has the trump card in their hand. I've only had a few glimpses into that rarified air, but I've seen assignment comments along the lines of "I want location X, Y, Z. I do not want A, and will retire if selected."...and the hiring GOs had an honest conversation about it. Ultimately, the new philosophy, to my understanding, is there is an assignment for everyone. GOs and Colonels are the main groups that actually get a retention effort. Baby GOs get selected from the O-6 kiddie DV pool...so the assignment train is necessary to get all the box-checking for pilots who've barely left the cockpit. I've got a few Navy and Army O-6 bros who did all things as young O-4s. One more data point how Big Blue sucks at all things Joint. Now, aside from the counter-point of view on the "Why," the Colonel's Group works that way...I'll end by saying you sound like a little bitch complaining about a system for O-6s...which guarantees an O-5 retirement at worst, with the added kicker of expanded career opportunities post-USAF. Congrats on your selection, congrats on your retirement, thank you for your service!

Open source reporting it was some remotely piloted American exceptionalism that carried out the strike. 🍻 to the crew if I ever run into them!

But that hard work and discipline doesn't matter if the on-field record doesn't. I think it's becoming it obvious neither of us will be swayed by the other's arguments, we'll agree to disagree and move on. And since this is my last post on the 2023 CFB Playoffs, I'll leave off with what @Rainman once posted that applies here: 1) Life isn't fair 2) Timing is everything 3) Bloom where you're planted and 4) Boo Corrigan can get fucked.

I'm not betting anything...and that's the issue. Enough people are betting, as well as TV just throwing money at the sport in an effort to turn people's emotional connection to a college into dollars down the road, that the chase to maximize the $$$ is the deciding factor. As a team, FSU is one of the 4 best teams in the country....look at the undefeated record in what used to be a Power-5 conference. Hell, ACC has dominated the CFB Playoffs just as much as the SEC has....yes it's mostly Clemson (Go TIGERS!), but other than UGA's recent run, it's been all 'Bama in the SEC. If it's down to who you feel as deserving in the playoffs, why didn't the Big-12 put OU in over OSU in their conference game? But the record is what fucking matters...not how you feel about it. 'Bama's on field record doesn't warrant a Playoff spot...they lost to a team (t.u.) who lost to a team (OU) who lost to Kansas. They also needed Auburn to implode...a team that lost to NM State lost the Iron Bowl instead of 'Bama winning it. I'm not the CFB Playoff Committee chair, and I haven't been paid by anyone to vote...but Boo Corrigan can get fucked. BONUS Mention: Kirk Herbstreit, Joe Tessitore, Jesse Palmer, and any other ESPN & CBS on-air talent that sucks from the teat of CFB Playoff money...can get fucked.

Going undefeated, on the road, and with backup QB #2 & #3 speaks for it self...unless you're not in the SEC or Big-10.

Well, I think you landed on the real reason...more money will flow with 'Bama being there. But, I won't be surprised if FSU and Clemson bail on the ACC...ESPN has a clear bias for the SEC (which has a losing record overall to ACC this year) and proven it's the P2 +2 Notch another mark in your belt boys...killed the PAC-12, and will probably kill the ACC. Apparently winning all your games doesn't matter any longer. Boo Corrigan can get fucked EDIT to add: changed P3+1 to P2+2. Once that school in Austin leaves, the Big-12 is just as screwed over as ACC is. Just what the college football tradition is all about...2 super Conferences and everyone else. Boo Corrigan can still get fucked

'Myopic' in that Bone WSO a) may have a bias from a close and personal working relationship with the aforementioned Senator, and b) his was a micro look at a singular member, not the macro level I was initially referring to. As far as being a Legislative Fellow goes, I'm sure every selectee has a solid paper trail of sustained performance and is everything we've come to expect from years of military training. As a future senior leader in the USAF, I seriously hope for nothing but the best for those cats...living with high expectations can be a bitch. YMMV.

Apologies for the double post...missed your post earlier. Same as my previous one...if there was the political will from the controlling party in the Senate, the senior uniformed military leaders would already be a confirmed. There's no legal reason why the Senate can't discharge it's responsibilities to ensure our collective national security.

Sure, your example may be true...but you have to admit you may have a bit of a myopic view of the situation. If National Security was truly a priority, and there was the political will to get it done, none of the listed examples would stop them. Again, why didn't the Senate Majority Leader bring a full floor vote for the USMC Vice Commandant, CSAF, & CNO when CQ was up for CJCS? Was there a legal hurdle or a political one stopping them? At least that's my opinion as a voter and taxpayer.

Agree to disagree. Congress wants to be in charge, then accept the responsibility that comes with it. I've got E-1, 2, 3, & 4s working 6/1s on 12s, I expect the same kind of work ethic from the highest law-making body in the land. Insert a cliché about 'ignoring a problem won't make it go away' or 'Bad news doesn't get better with time'...both apply to this situation. Again, this is political theater with three sides…unless you truly think that the 12x takers of the DoD policy on funded abortion travel is a higher National Defense priority over the nomination approvals of the Senior Military leaders. SecDef Austin and Senate Majority Leader Schumer have statutory options they are choosing to not exercise...and I have to ask myself "Why?"

No offense, but 'exercised the authority the Senate had the entire time' is probably a more accurate description. What legally changed for Chuck Schumer between last week and today? Tuberville's hold was never a insurmountable obstacle. Remember that politically, both parties use your military service as pawns of whatever it is its after.

I agree with both @Danger41 and @tac airlifter, but a few years ago I started to ask myself 'what's the right number?' on AMs or AAMs? I don't have a personal threshold, because some career paths, still hacking the mission, don't take you through multiple combat deployments. The examples listed above, white jet / FTU tours, etc. It's needs to be a balance...and while fuzzy, I know it when I see it skewed in one direction. A flying Wing King in the modern Era with low single digits on AMs...yeah, that's a little 'Sus as the cool kids say Sent from my SM-N976V using Baseops Network mobile app