nsplayr

I'm betting he's talking about future uses i.e. do the new IDP rules make SDP mostly a thing of the past that's restricted to a very few locations? Their page hasn't been updated since 2011, so probably just call and ask about specific locations.

Did someone drop MC-130H ie. Talon II Nav straight out of the schoolhouse? That did not used to be allowed...

Shouldn't we all be so lucky! Realize that your perspective is not the norm re: your experience. Hazing continues to exist in organizations because people are often too selfish to give a guy younger than them a better deal or an easier time than they got, even when it's eminently logical and better for the organization overall. That being said, I for one glad the rules are changing even though I spent my free time time doing an online masters that I would not have pursued unless it was a "wink wink, nudge nudge" requirement to continue a career as an officer beyond O-3. Let's stop the hazing WRT stuff that doesn't lead to mission success at the lowest level possible and hope that the powers that be will stop what they can from the CSAF/Wing/Group/Squadron on down.

- Volunteer for anything aircraft-related (i.e. tail swaps, any and all TDYs, engine changes with MX, static displays, anything really) - Take out the trash - Make good corn - Don't be a weirdo in general - Hang out with the guys - Be extremely nice to everyone's significant other and ensure your significant other (if you have one) does the same - Treat the Boss like a normal human being and talk to him when he's around in the bar - Ask questions even if you think you know the answer - Have a good time

Maybe jumping the gun for now, hopefully they can continue to work it out.

I answered your question in the thread that got deleted. BL: yes. Why was the answer not transferred to this thread as well during the clean up?

Yes, "military service" includes Guard or Reserves, even part-time. About to do this myself in the fall. There have been threads on this on BO.net, honestly that's how I found out about that possibility. 4 years as a part-time guard dude is a much different opportunity cost vs 4 more years on AD. Documentation found here: "(1) Time for Transfer. An individual approved to transfer entitlement to educational assistance under this section may transfer such entitlement to the individual’s family member only while serving in the Military Services (active duty or Selected Reserve.), NOAA Corps, or PHS. An individual may not add family members after retirement or separation from the Uniformed Services."

Great thread, thanks to several of the last posters for useful stuff. I found this report helpful in figuring out just how much total compensation the military was providing (i.e. much higher than what it says on your LES) and also this federal tax estimator to figure out what a "normal" amount of taxes to expect when I stop being deployed during 6-9 months out of every year. When it comes right down to it, figuring out what my net + benefits was compared to my gross was eye-opening (i.e. very close). I do not expect my civilian gross-to-net ratio to be nearly as high (i.e. no tax free BAH, no entirely tax free months, no free healthcare, etc.), thus when looking at civilian salaries, if I want take home what I'm taking home now or better, I needed to look significantly higher than I expected. I also got a lot out of the book PCS to Corporate America written by the founder of Cameron-Brooks. I didn't work with them beyond a quick phone call and looking over their website, but I thought the book had a lot to offer in terms of interview prep for the $10 and couple of days reading time I spent on it. If I had started down that path earlier in the process of separating, a recruiting firm like CB or one of their competitors may have been worthwhile, totally depends on what you want to do and if your goals are compatible with the types of positions they place guys into. Big thumbs up on this whole discussion overall, keep the good stuff coming because I for one thought that TAP here at Cannon blew chunks and was an enormous waste of time. Sounds like other bases are running better programs.

The funniest part was that the folks helping me transition to a successful career outside the military were ORFs (old retired farts) who managed to land the prestigious civilian job of teaching TAP at Cannon AFB, NM. Wow...with that shining example how could I not succeed? Here's my (partial) solution: before TAP starts you do a 2-minute sit down with every person. If your two minute "what's your life plan" pitch passes a reasonableness test, you get the 2-hour gentleman's course where a VA rep will collect your claims paperwork and someone will discuss the finer points of the GI bill, gives you the free LinkedIn gouge, etc. and sends you on your merry way. About 1/3 of the class could have been excused on day 1 and the folks working there could have spend more one-on-one time on the dude who's "plan" was to become a hippie.

I agree with you...Filkins does have a great summary of how we got to where we are and that's important. He argues that the Arab Spring-caused civil war in Syria and a decision we made more than a decade ago are largely to blame and I agree. I would have fully supported a residual CT force in Iraq, but most Americans didn't want that for political reasons and the Iraqi goverent didn't want that for political reasons as well. So no dice...and I sure as hell don't wanna be TDY to Iraq if we'd be subject to their kangaroo courts.

The author provides nothing but platitude-laden criticism mixed with a lack of expertise. His main "credential" is guest hosting several popular conservative radio programs. There are plenty of well-argued criticisms of Obama's handling of Iraq out there if that's what you're in search of, this just doesn't measure up if you ask me. Here's a short piece on Iraq from someone who I think is one of the best foreign correspondents out there. This much longer one is worth a read as well. So is the author's book. Master's degree in IR and more time on the ground in war zones than probably any of us FWIW, plus he's just a great writer. I for one completely agree with the analysis Filkins presents: Iraq is in chaos because it's neighbor is in the middle of a violent sectarian war that's 4 years old at this point, it's PM is an autocrat who's done nothing to include Sunni or Kurd minorities in the new Iraqi government, we completely (and unnecessarily) destroyed the Iraqi state institutions when we invaded, and we didn't follow-through and negotiate the ability to leave a residual force behind to help prevent exactly the mess we're in now. Plenty of blame to go around both parties, several American administrations and policy makers, the Iraqis themselves, and the wider Mess O'Potamia region.

We're not talking about breaking the law or being suspected of breaking the law and trying to weasel out of punishment...we're talking about routine security (airport) or immigration (interior checkpoints) searches conducted on all people passing through that point. If you try to say you're a General to get out of a DUI or some other such nonsense you're an idiot and I'm pretty sure you won't be successful anyways. The point of those searches is to screen for security threats to air travel and to attempt to interdict illegal immigrants. I say that showing my military ID, one in particular that identifies me as an officer (since all officers must be citizens) is helping those guys do their job more efficiently, although I probably won't show any ID at those immigration checkpoints anymore since it's not required or really expected (news to me, first timer). The chance of a military officer blowing up an airliner or being an illegal immigrant is extremely low and thus I any any other person possessing such an ID can rightfully benefit from the positive side of law enforcement profiling, which BTW I also support as a general concept. I'm all for our law enforcement officials using legal ways to operate more efficiently; focus more on actual bad guys and less on regular dues who are going about their business and it's a win-win. BL: I'm not getting any "special treatment;" I'm getting the same treatment any person would get who is assessed to be an extremely low threat to airline travel (i.e. your sweet, old-ass grandmother) or who at a quick glance is assessed to almost certainly be a U.S. citizen (your call on what that means). And FWIW if there was some way to reciprocate the same level of professional, low-risk "bro treatment" to a federal law enforcement officer should he or she be riding aboard my aircraft for some reason then I'd absolutely extend them the courtesy. Despite some feelings to the contrary I've read on these boards and a small percentage of bad apples, law enforcement officers are generally part of the good-guy team and I'm happy to salute other members of that team.

VTSAX. I like to keep it simple. That plus some G fund in TSP are my main investments other than real estate. Good thread, like the idea.

Damn man...have a bad day or something? You disagree with the policy of internal checkpoints, got it, no need to make it personal. Honestly this was my first experience with such a checkpoint and I noticed the 3 cars in front of me seemed to show an ID, I did not realize that was not required or necessarily expected. No apologies for showing my CAC as a form of ID, I do it all the time and see absolutely no problem with doing so. I'm assuming from your response that you don't take part in military discounts and also have never used your CAC as a form of ID at the airport which usually results in expedited screening.

Holding up the folks behind you, causing extra work for the border patrol agents, etc..not some huge detriment but still not exactly being neighborly and reasonably cooperative to something I at least think is a reasonable endeavor to help catch illegal immigrants or other criminals.

You have every right to do a lot of things that are dick moves...doesn't change my judgement of them. Open carrying an AR in a Chipotle may not be illegal but it's a detriment to society. Holding up traffic and essentially verbally sparing with federal law enforcement agents at an interior border checkpoint because you refuse to truthfully answer "yes" to a question that's perfectly legal and logical to ask, that's a detriment to society. You can do those things, just like you can burn a flag or protest funerals or be a racist or whatever, but you can also be judged by others. Nope.

Look, I already broke a personal rule by engaging with you (once again). I think our respective points have been made. I still say it's a dick move to flaunt a demonstration of your individual rights to the detriment of the rest of society. Doesn't mean I don't also believe in a person's right to refuse to answer. Good day to you sir.

I totally support the right to not be subject to random searches and seizures, but just because you have that right doesn't mean you have to refuse to answer a question that takes 0.69 seconds to answer and does not harm you whatsoever to answer. It's significantly less stressful and wasteful of everyone's time to just say "Yes" or "No" as applicable and go on with your day. I do not feel that my stop at an internal checkpoint was a violation of my constitutional rights and the law is kind of on my side in being interpreted that way. What I'm talking about is the same principle as guys who open carry AR-15s into a Chipotle. "Just exercising your Constitutional right" absolutely can make you a dick when you're inconveniencing others with a super-sized demonstration of those rights. Guns are cool and I really don't have a problem with open carry in theory, but come on, is carrying an AR into a restaurant really a good idea even if it's not technically illegal? And while I do support deporting illegal aliens as a principle, it's funny that you try to ding me on that yet are so against measures set up explicitly to catch illegals and prevent them from crossing further into the US. All said it's clearly not an argument that's winnable against a staunch libertarian, but I'd forward that you can maintain and cherish your constitutional rights without making it a dick measuring contest every time you encounter a law enforcement official trying to do his job. There's a big difference between being asked a quick question about citizenship status as a means of enforcing our immigration laws and a strip search of your car and body cavities, and the Supreme Court upheld that distinction.

This guy's within his rights and also just kinda being a dick. These guys are doing their jobs and didn't exactly give him a hard time (only watched the first exchange). I know it's cool around here to shit on law enforcement and DHS law enforcement in particular but I guess I just don't have that particular hate in my heart. I rolled through a checkpoint between El Paso and Ruidoso recently and had an good experience. Flashed my mil ID and was told. "Thank you for your service Captain, have a great day." Took about 69 seconds off of my planned 5 hour trip.

If you're taking care of your people and there's the persistent 5% that aren't meeting the minimum expectations then work as hard as you can to A) keep them engaged and B) get them off your team. Obviously not as easy in the AF as the private sector. 7 PT failures and retained by the WG/CC...must have been quite the guy! No way! In the story I told, my squadron had a DUI and another ARI within like a month of each other...the CC kept his job and rightfully so. If it's a long-term trend item and you're not able to take care of your people enough to keep them out of significant trouble then that's where you're failing as a leader. If I'm in charge of 169 airmen under age 30 there's gonna be some shit that happens, that's just a fact. At some point repeated failure of subordinates is the fault of the leadership, but that's not the case on incident #1. Way too often we see a zero mistake AF where one minor incident is cause for career-ending punishment...it leads to CYA and more bad leadership.

Exactly...the blues uniform is just that, a uniform. I'd wager most people would prefer to wear ABUs or especially a flight suit but it's not something that should mandated due to a fuck-up. Especially if you are not the guilty party. Take care of your people. Use your creativity, resources and experience to figure out ways to keep your high-risk-of-fuck-up population out of trouble. Mentor them, find peer mentors for them, put them in a position to succeed. Accept that you will never have 100% compliance and meter out punishment appropriately to those who, despite your best efforts, fail to do the right thing. This is kind of the heart of what being a leader is about. If, as a commander or subordinate leader, you can't figure out a solution you should be replaced with someone who can. Leader enable their people to succeed, bottom line, period dot. If you can't achieve that given the tremendous financial and human capital resources available in even a below-average USAF unit, you are not a very good leader.

So wait...is the wearing of one particular uniform or another a punishment or not? Do you wear blues because it's a uniform like any other that represents pride in your country and your service to it or is it basically a diaper that you're only supposed to put on when you've shit your pants? Because it can't really be both. Ball kicking, paperwork, losing previously earned positions of trust, checking IDs at the gate, terrible hours, etc. Commanders have so many tools available to adequately educate the guilty on the error of their ways that don't involve added BS to the 98.69% of people who have done nothing wrong. A guy in my former squadron got a DUI as an LT...got an article 15, didn't make Captain when he was supposed to, and likely will not make AC anytime soon. Around the same time, another ARI happened involving multiple people from our squadron and our sister squadron, prompting a stand-down day in our community to discuss risk management and decision making. As someone who did nothing wrong I was not affected in any way other than having to participate in the stand down day, and after that our community returned to the mean and let some other poor bastards make the next inevitable ARI-linked mistake. Set your expectations and clearly communicate the rules of the road, take care of your people and trust them to get the mission done. When bad things happen, give special attention to those who need it (and those responsible for them i.e. immediate supervisors and subordinate commanders) and let the rest of your otherwise high-quality force carry on. A great leader will know how to solve issues like this with his people while avoiding taking actions that just give the appearance of action but which produce little real progress. So it sounds like if that's what you believe then the Commander (along with the guilty obviously) should be punished, not the whole squadron or group.

So a mass inspection in service dress is the culture change that's needed? I don't think anyone's faulting Altus leadership for appearing to do something...they got that base covered. But is what they are doing effective or, as you put it, just for " shock value" rather than actual value. Is the wearing of service dress meant to be a punishment?

Sure, but there's very specific legal implications behind calling someone an "unlawful combatant" or an "enemy combatant" or a "terrorist." What you designate someone determines how you deal with them. I totally disagree with labeling every member of the Afghan Taliban as a "terrorist," it's not an appropriate characterization for the vast majority of them or their actions within Afghanistan. And don't get me wrong, I've participated in smoking a fair amount of Taliban who were shooting at our guys or rolling around with heavy weapons and I've got no issues with that. In a war you've generally got to kill the enemy. Vacationers? And yea, definitely lots of disagreement about whether to or how to clos Guantanamo across party lines and ideologies. So because Mexico didn't ask "how high?" when we told them to jump that constitutes "not a word" of effort on behalf of the US government? You realize that effort and effectiveness aren't the same thing right? And that negotiating this guy's release when he may have legitimately broken Mexican law in Mexico doesn't just happen by waving a magic wand? It's much easier to argue that "not enough is being done" or "the administration's efforts haven't been effective" without being hyperbolic and saying "Obama doesn't care! Hasn't said a word!!" Just pointing out in all three cases that the US generally has a good record of getting our guys back under all circumstances, even during the hated current administration. Absolutely false. See Vertigo's post re: Israel prisoner swaps. Like I said explicitly, I don't know if the deal was worth it but I'm glad we got our guy back. That's about it; anyone who claims it was an amazing victory (see Rose Garden announcement) or a terrible, impeachable offense (see any conservative outlet) either lacks most of the pertinent details, has a political agenda, or both. WRT to Guantanamo actually closing...I doubt it. I'd be surprised if Obama gets it done before leaving office; obviously he's tried (effort doesn't equal effectiveness...) and Congress isn't having it and there aren't a lot of good options. I'm pretty sure I'll be there with 69 of my closest friends so see ya there if you're on the hook too.

I would have thought that in a forum like this we could do away with broad-brush distinctions like this that we know simply are not true. Do you honestly believe every person who fought against us in Iraq and Afghanistan (or elsewhere) is a terrorist? What's your definition of terrorist? Not much of a student of history eh? Exchanging prisoners before the conflict is over has happened very frequently in the past. Except when the Secretary of State raised the issue on a visit to Mexico...and except the 11 times he's been visited by US consular officials. Ya know, not a word. Could more be done? Probably. That's really more of a law enforcement case involving a close ally rather than some fighting group or tyrannical regime grabbing one of our dudes so it's a little more nuanced. We'll see, hopefully he'll be out of Mexican jail soon despite any mistake that might have been made. You also conveniently left out cases like the Current TV reports or even Captain Phillips and Jessica Buchanan. I think the perpetrators in those last two cases saw some pretty effective "negotiation" techniques being employed.