FLEA

OCONUS there are still several bases in masks -_- so happy I'm done with this nonsense. I was at an Army installation in Europe earlier this year and you were required to wear mask while working out in the gym. Maybe it was the same in the AF at the time but I have my own gym so I don't know. But it was the stupid idea I've ever heard. Wonder how many people have passed out lifting more than they should be able to on reduced oxygen.

Yeah so I was reading a pros on how Russia is justifying this earlier and it's a bit weird and total bullshit. It's very ethnocentric and highly genocidal in general. Basically it recognizes all western European culture as fascist by nature. They are focusing on the political aspect of Naziism and not the racial aspect. So they see all of Europe as significantly right and authoritative and they argue Ukraine and Russia are the same ethnic people based on the shared use of Cyrodillic language. They then go on to say that European fascist/extremist are actively attempting to cleanse Russian culture/identity/heritage from Ukraine by upholding western values and demeaning Russian ones. It's totally bizarre and bullshit. It's a stupid stance though because Russia was the one that allowed Ukraine autonomy on the first place, but even prior to that, treated Ukranians as second class citizens while apart of the Soviet Union.

Yes, because jus ad bellum is separate from jus ad bello. So it doesn't matter how bullshit the reasons for the war are, the conduct of the combatants is only viewed in an independent lense. It's an important norm for us because there are a lot of countries that believe our 2003 invasion of Iraq had unlawful jus ad bellum. However, we generally don't like armies that believe they can protest their government because they don't like the reason for the war. Do they not still teach this in ACSC? There are reasons we want officers to blindly follow some orders (specifically, the one to fight the war) but not others (as in how to fight the war). Preserving a civilian led military is one of them.

Depends on the station and the setup. I don't know enough about the particular one struck but have seen enough that I'm hesitant to throw the outrage flag yet. Lots of terminals are used to move personnel and usually the main body housing for the administrative enterprise is stationed in the terminal. Was not uncommon in Korea to see terminals filled with conscripts mobilizing to their duty stations. Seen that a few times in Europe as well but in a slightly different manner. I get it we want to be outraged but let's try and use our expertise on these things to keep it focused on what matters most. I don't have any particular soft spot for Russia or the Russian people. Could care less. But I've been doing this long enough to realize war is shitty and lots of innocent people die in it. That's just what it is. Most wars are not the kid glove "winning hearts and minds" counterinsurgency bullshit weve been doing the last 20 years. They are total wars, meaning the totality of the society participates.

Doesn't surprise me. One of the "other approaches to history" is that Japan didn't surrender to the US because of the atomic bombs, but because they feared a surrender to the soviets more.

There is a large degree of culture behind it. One of the mainstream criticisms of Just War Theory that most LOAC conventions is built on is it has a very heavy Christian foundation. JWT requires the double effect doctrine Thomas Aquinas derived to justify Christian acceptable homicide. I think what we've found is that's caused a slant in how some people interpret some of those conventions.

Because I want to ensure international norms and consistency are met so that they don't come back to haunt us? Buddy I get it, you don't like Russia and you want to hate everything about them and everything they do. That's an emotional argument. Approach one from logic. Elevate shit that can rightfully be criticized under current ethical frameworks. That's how you build an international coalition. Not by nitpicking shit that we want to do ourselves later. In the next year we might be at war with Russia and I dont want to see people coming after us because we struck rail terminals and explosives factories, things commonly held under conventional wisdom as being valid military targets? Or are you just going to plead hypocrisy at that point and say "well it's ok when we do it." That doesn't go over well on the international stage.

Nitric acid is a key component to making certain explosives which is why Russia probably attacked it. TnT is made chiefly with nitric acid, as well as amoniom nitrate fertilizer which is what was used in the OKC bombing. Kind of a similar thing with the rail terminal that was just hit. Shitty a bunch of civilians died but rail terminals are pretty important military targets. Again, not saying it doesn't suck civilians died, but it's not a crime to hit logistics terminals and explosive supply chain factories in a war. We need to focus on the stuff that has more substance like shooting bound prisoners, rape, etc...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/04/bill-clinton-nato-expansion-ukraine/629499/ Interesting article by Bill Clinton about his time working with Putin. While I don't 100% agree with him I respect the weight of his office. Dude had some tough decisions to make and it seems like he attempted them in good faith.

It's my guess there were some background phone calls that made it very clear heads of state would be there and where they would be. (To Russia) Sounds bizarre but I saw some similar coordination when Trump visited the DPRK. Generally sovereign states have a common interests in protecting heads of state. Especially authoritarian ones like Russia and DPRK. Those dudes already sleep with one eye open. No reason to give people the belief that political assassination is suddenly ok. (For heads of state) But if you really want my opinion of how weak article 5 is in its current state, even if BJ was mortared in Kyiv, I don't think you would get the consensus for an article 5. There would be states argueing exactly what you said. "Well.... He provoked it, common sense says don't go to a warzone."

That's a fair statement. I suppose what I meant was from a pure bodies to billets perspective, farm more O-4/5s than O-6s. I think the idea has merit but some significant problems would need addressed to not short fall flying squadrons.

Ok man. You do you. It's clear you got some weird narrative in your head that can't be shaken. Here's what Axios says. https://www.axios.com/putin-war-crimes-charges-punishment-0a6275ca-daa5-4fa2-9296-2b9e1348661e.html I guess statements from a former ICC prosecutor are also Russian propaganda? You're laughable man.

Might be easier actually. At a NAF some of the directors are O-5s. Usually the 2 and 6 will be O-6 but that's really the only certain. And a staff director isn't seen as high as a commander under the same command echelon. For example, the NAF A3 is not considered a peer to the Wing CCs that also report to the NAF CC. What did they do at bases that tried this because I could totally see them cropping O-4s/5s who are soon or about ready for command to do this.

Which is what I said in my original post. There is a big difference though between being tried internally and being tried internationally, and none of our folks have been tried internationally. The US position on this has been that we maintain good order and discipline within our ranks so we dont have a requirement for an international body to hold us accountable. Russia will make the same appeal. All of this is kind of pointless to discuss anyway because I dont think the ICC actually has jurisdiction in the Ukraine conflict because neither party are full signatories. Best-22 is one of those people that believes everyone who disagrees with him must be the victim of some disinformation campaign and not realize that maybe they just have more facts than they do. Fine. Whatever. But its just the reality of the circumstances. All I'm trying to explain to him is that in conflict, there is a game that states play. And Russia knows the game and they know how to play it and they are playing it quite well because they are doing a pretty decent job of insulating themselves from any widespread prosecution against the state. Its like Covert Operations and the concept of plausible deniability. It doesnt matter if the whole world thinks its bullshit. If its plausible, its good enough to evade most international consequences. All states do is look for something that is just strong enough that other states with significant ties to them can internally justify to their populace why they are not making retribution.

You are missing the point. But lets assume for a minute you didn't join the military assuming it was going to be rainbow farts from gilded unicorn assholes. In EVERY single instance of outrage you expressed above, I can pinpoint a near EXACT equivalent that happened in the US GWOT. Mishandling prisoners of war. Abu Ghraib, 2003. Striking hospitals marked as shelters? Doctors Without Borders, Kunduz, 2015. Raining artillery down on residential neighborhoods? al-Aghawat al Jadidah, Mosul, 2017. Raping and pillaging Ukranian villages? Mahmudiyah Iraq, 2006. I could name half a dozen for each of these actually but those were the best specific examples that most mirror the circumstances you point to above and as I said in my original post, its going to be really hard to pin some of these because Russia doesn't have access to advanced aerial sensors or PGMs that we do (and they are not required to). Futhermore, Zelansky muddied those waters further by giving every civilian in Ukraine a rifle and telling them to go out and kill Russians. I don't fault him for that, this is a war of survival for them, but recognize that makes it really hard to throw charges at Russia, charges, not accusations, and make them stick. More important to the overall point though, you lack the nuance of how LOAC is applied, where it hails from and the international audience it caters to. You brought up the Hague. Did you know that the United States of America (the country you said you still believed in) is actively sanctioning the ICC and has placed entry bans on ICC investigators tasked to investigate US war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq. Ever ask yourself why that is? Ever ask yourself how the news stories about the incidents I outlined above were portrayed in the rest of the world? Ever open up a Pakistani newspaper article on drone strikes? This is just silly. You guys just want to chock everything up to Putin apologetics and in reality i'm just telling you how shit is going to play out as I see it which is that Putin has sufficient fog and noise in Ukraine to effectively conceal a case against the state for war crimes based on Zelansky's decision to arm a civilian populace which massively distorted any cases against distinction and the lack of advanced targeting technologies, mainly sensors and PGMs, which allows Russia greater leniency and presuming proportionality. Just War Theory makes it pretty clear that combatants are innocent of Jus-ad-Bellum and therefore no matter how idiotic or stupid Putin's reason for entering Ukraine is, nothing justifies the extrajudicial killings or Russian POWs that are presumed innocent unless tried and found guilty of war crimes. If someone understands something better than you don't just dismiss it as propaganda, ask them to explain it. I can write pages on here about LOAC, Just War Theory and the Geneva conventions. If you were a shooter at some point, and you did some shit that bothered you, you probably talked to a Chaplain and a JAG a few times about this stuff, and they probably gave you some things to read, and you probably read a shit ton about it because you wanted to sleep at night. But hey man, what do I know. One last thing, Russia is not winning the information space right now. Ukraine is. And if you don't believe Ukraine is targeting American and Western European citizens in that information campaign, you are completely naive. And they are not doing it because they want to "be our friends" or "help us lead the free world." They are doing it because they are acting in their own country's interests, as ALL states do. There are "reasons" we are hearing very little about how the snake isle defenders suddenly ended up in Russian custody, what is happening in the inner ranks of the foreign legion, and how Russian prisoners are being treated in Ukraine. If we go balls to the wall break all hell lose against Russia so be it. But lets make sure we are doing it because its in our interests and not because its in Ukraine's interests.

Was kind of eluding to this earlier. We all want to see war crimes as this black and white thing but it's not and the fact is, states will attempt to blur the borders and boundaries of it as best as possible to serve their interests, including the US. The only definitive assurance is that your state will suffer less scrutiny if it comes out the victor. Its sort of why I don't put much stock into all of these cries about Russian war crimes because I can clearly see that what they're doing isn't really that far removed from our own state targeting processes, but they are doing it without the advantages of advanced sensory ISR or PGMs. I'm not saying there were war crimes committed by Russia, there certainly were; but most of the stuff I've seen right now is going to fall on an individual level and not on a state level. Now what is worth observing is if Russia internally disciplines those cases which is what we normally expect of our own military in this case (and why we won't sign in or participate in the ICC). Again, not sure how many people on here are shooters or involved in targeting, but it is and always had been completely legal to kill civilians in war. Witnessed multiple times where we assessed a military target had the requisite necessity and proportionality to justify striking without regards to nearby civilian collateral.

I forgot about this! Thanks so much!

Random question but does anyone have the Air Force course number or PDS number for AIS? I'm sure its on my certificate somewhere CONUS but I'm oversees right now and happen to need it for some paperwork.

I mentioned it in the other thread but I do think C-NAFs are necessary and we need to keep those around. Not so much sure about traditional NAFs but a C-NAF fills a very specific niche in maintaining a regional expertise for a theater. However, there is gaining traction on removing the A3 position from the C-NAF and dual hatting the AOC/CC as the A3. This actually makes a lot of sense to me.

Bumping/Resurrecting this thread since the topic came up in the Eval Downgrade thread and a lot of people haven't heard of it before.

I think there is a whole thread on this forum somewhere discussing when the concept was originally announced. Believe the idea is to just stream line C2 at the wing level. I think it's a good idea honestly. The group level of command seems largely unnecessary to me. I know a lot of people don't think NAFs are necessary and I largely agree except C-NAFs. C-NAFs fill an important niche as the air component to sub unified commands and work theater level operations in geographic AORs too large for a MAJCOM to focus on. (IE Korea/7AF) Edit: I actually just found the old thread. It's from 2018 and I bumped it for you.

Any fighter guys that moved to a crew aircraft? Im curious what the take is on if it is easier/harder to evaluate someone when you are not sharing the same cockpit space with them?

In todays culture of hyper vigilant moral enforcement its simply too risky for it to get pegged as bribing (which it is) and end your career. Just a different AF than 15 years ago.

So Just War Theory is something we have all probably heard of but it actually goes much deeper than the intro level we get in PME or LOAC training. A key tenant of it that is written into the Geneva conventions, is the understanding in war that uniformed members are ALWAYS innocent unless they commit crimes in the warzone, in which they are guilty of the crimes but still innocent of the war. The only belligerents of the war are the states as sovereign entities, and uniformed members simply serving their country are simply victims. (Obviously caveats if for not following illegal orders but you get the general idea.) This is one of the reason Geneva only discusses two types of incarceration, criminal and POW status. In both cases there is an emphasis on humanity.

I don't think Russia has the megalithic ISR enterprise we have for those sorts of operations. Theyve historically invested most of their intelligence ventures into HUMINT, something they've historically been much better at us in.