BQZip01

Like I said earlier, there are plenty of people who fly out of there into hostile zones and they should receive the pay. Muslim extremists have caused more terrorist incidents in the Middle East than anywhere else. This is not about the possibility of a terrorist attack, but the probability of one. Your chances there are much higher than Minot, North Dakota.

I never said that. I think the quality of life has nothing to do with it. Those at the Khobar Towers had it pretty nice too for a while and weren't living in tents either. But they were attacked and killed all the same. It all has to do with the location, not how far you have to walk to the bathrooms, whether or not you have salsa, or anything else along those lines. Imminent Danger/Hostile Fire Pay is determined by location, not the job you perform. There have been terrorist attacks in Qatar and other "less hostile" places in the Middle East and will continue happen because of the extremists who hate those who disagree with them so much that they feel that they must kill 'em and don't care if they themselves die in the process. That level of hate will continue to spawn violence and hatred until the Muslim culture realizes it won't solve anything.

Those flying into Iraq/Afghanistan from there certainly have the potential for lethal engagements and deserve CZTE/HFP. As do others who fly from there and into those places. As for stopping that pay for those at the 'Deid, I see no problem with that, but realize that the center of the runway is just over 2 minutes from Iranian airspace at Mach 2 (rough estimate). Considering the stance of the Iranians at this point in time, I think they just might deserve that bonus.

I'm complaining about a waste of taxpayer money. We don't need it and just because someone gets money and you might get it someday too, doesn't mean it is right. Furthermore, if they are on the road, then they can file a travel voucher and get the money they deserve. We don't need to pay every Chief out there extra money just because a lot of them aren't there (the logic of that last sentence makes me dizzy...)

Is there a point at which favoritism is involved in any capacity? This kind of R&R between leadership of the officer corps and enlisted corps can do wonders for the chain of command/morale/keeping everyone on the same page for the base/group/MAJCOM/etc. involved. There is no difference between this and a message board like this or the squadron bar (for those fortunate enough to have one...)

Um, some basic information is accurate, but the conclusions are based on speculation. Furthermore, it focuses exclusively on the bottom line, not the quality/experience of the aviators and the impact of less experienced aviators on deployment rates. Sure, we can double the output of UPT if we need to, but if a pilot's life begins to suck dramatically because of leadership's shortsightedness (pilots pulling back-to-back tours frequently, always short of experienced/qualified pilots in the squadron, etc.), those pilots are going to jump ship just with the CHANCE to go to the airlines. Now let's not forget how many pilots fly for the airlines AND the reserves too.

I'd run a quick grammar check on that one before the Nazis show up...

Oh...my...

2 I don't know what those details are, but I'm sure they're substantial and not idiotic. That said, there should be a basic reason given instead of <silence>. Just tell them everyone it is a security necessity and leave it at that.

merry f***in' Christmas to ya, huh?

I would imagine it would be like a combatant commander requesting assets and the Air Force sending them over as they are available (basically the same way a B-2 is tasked from ACC to CENTCOM now). From what I remember, the Bone is no longer nuclear equipped/trained (someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this).

If it's stupid and it works, it isn't stupid...

It's the difference between global assets and tactical assets (SAC & TAC back in the day). The argument can certainly be made that the long-range strategic assets are being neglected for the benefit of the fighter community. As an example, a single F-22's money could be used to modernize the entire B-52 fleet with a host of upgrades performing many of the same missions at a fraction of the cost. The same goes for modernizing our tanker force. How about affording the troops we need to do the job? I'm not saying we don't need the F-22, but simply the cost at which we are receiving them may be focused too much in the fighter realm. I believe that is part of the reason for the new BUFF squadron GSC=yes. see above. Placing 24 AF under AFSPC is misplaced, IMHO. If anything, it simply needs to be a numbered Air Force not under a MAJCOM. With the increasing reliance on the internet, its vulnerability to attack, and the sheer manpower that China has dedicated to it? Yes, yes, a hundred times yes. Right now, they are the nation states' world leaders in cyber attacks, IMHO. They have a massive quantity of troops doing nothing but cyber attacks. If you don't think we don't need a capacity to counter it, you are sorely mistaken.

Yeah, but there's two problems there 1. We use commercial sites all the time, not just government ones. 2. Not everyone has a computer and, unless they have a computer lounge, that kinda cuts people off from their homes.

My stats come from the Marine Corps directly. It's also how they are designed: physically use them to their max and then they're done. Nothing wrong with that, but it is their philosophy. My point is that they use up their people in different ways and it is a completely different lifestyle; know what you're getting into.

You have got to be kidding me. The problem, IMHO, is that we should have simply treated them as POWs in the first place to avoid this mess. No right to a hearing. No right to sue. No rights outside of the Geneva Convention. I agree they don't deserve those rights, but it would be a lot less complicated. We could hold them until Al Qaeda surrenders or we both cease hostilities (not gonna happen anytime soon). Then we can charge 'em with crimes later, if we ever feel the need to do so. It's what we did with the Germans in WWII. For those complaining about treatment, guess what? The Geneva Convention allows just about everything you hear about: Sleep deprivation, noises, etc, so go read the friggin' document. These guys DO NOT get all the liberties an rights we get as American citizens. While we believe in certain rights for our citizens, you need to realize that with those rights come responsibilities too. If you aren't sharing the share of the burden of those responsibilities to which you are allocated (even if that means just paying local taxes), you don't deserve the rights. Example: A thief who steals a car. Guess what? You steal a car, you lose your rights. If you are a terrorist from another country, you never had those rights to begin with and you should be treated accordingly. Yes, there are some basic rights you should not be denied, but that's what the Geneva Convention was for. [/rant]

I would heavily doubt that the AF would let you go. Realize the positives and negatives about your choices (did you know that the Marines have a 67% attrition rate every 4 years?) and then make your choice. Once the Air Force trains you, they REALLY aren't going to want to let you go, so make the choice now rather than later. If you'd like some insight into the "real" Air Force vs. UPT and the other services, fire me a private message; I won't pull punches, even on the AF.

Thanks. For those who, like me, have never heard of this:

Would someone be so kind as to spell out the "24-hour rule"?

Ziploc, Contact me at kaerfsusej at yahoo.com for more info. I just graduated and can give you some more info about the program if you want it.

2

AMF said it best. The housing on base is fine. Realize it has almost no carpet (if at all), so rugs are a must. But if you are going there for ENJJPT, Missile Road housing is pretty good too. I wouldn't recommend living too far away, killing an extra hour or two (total time) per week where you can't really study while driving to/from work isn't really worth it. While the O housing is no longer guarded, they can bring ti back in a pinch if extra security is needed. Nothing says "go away" like a guard with an M-16...

I remember the same emphasis at the 'Deid, but I offered rides every time I had an available seat anyway. I didn't need an order to do the right thing...

2 :notworthy: :notworthy: