FLEA

Russians killed an American journalist. WARNING: At least 1 violent picture on the twitter post. Be careful if you're sensitive to that. https://mobile.twitter.com/police_kyiv_obl/status/1502985544514654209?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1502985544514654209|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fworld%2Fukrainian-police-officer-american-journalist-killed-tell-the-world

Dudes a fucking saint. He will go down in history as a legend.

What's being reinstated won't be nearly as good as what we had. We had no bargaining leverage going into the current negotiations and Iran had a ton.

It's the second headliner on fox right now just below western military base (just a few miles from Poland) being struck in Ukraine. I don't think the Democrats are ready to deal with another embassy attack though. Most dangerous job in the world must be the foreign service during a Democratic president.

Oh boy.... Fox news explaining OODA loop to the masses..... https://www.foxnews.com/politics/putin-successfully-implementing-pro-active-u-s-developed-strategy-while-u-s-lags-behind

Just throw pickle grandma up there with tractor boi for next year's NDAA requirements. https://www.businessinsider.com/kyiv-grandma-took-down-ussian-drone-with-jar-tomato-pickles-2022-3

Well I can speak to the assessment portion a bit because I was interviewed and assessed. I was not picked up but my opinion was they were incredibly selective who they let in the unit to the point there was no chance to grow the enterprise. At the time I interviewed less than 1% of candidates (people who submitted resumes) were getting offered positions. Realize these were generally high speed individuals being looked at for school (including weapon school grads in my group), other selective hire units, etc... So of that 1% not all of them were even accepting. While I was there they had a mandate to scale the enterprise on a 3X multiplier and they didn't hire enough bodies to replace their units natural attrition that year. I understand there is a mindset in some SOF types that you can't drop a standard of whatever. I won't fault them for that. I'm to this day not sure what it was they were actually looking for. (Especially since I've worked successfully in security cooperation in two capacities now.) But I guess I could see a problem if they held that standard to a point that it became self defeating. Might be a useful capability on paper but if you can't scale it to a sizeable echelon than I really can't do anything with it as a geographic commander. I've read a lot of academic papers on AvFID and I used to be a big believer. But as I got a bigger picture in the mechanisms that drive the DoD machine I think I've fallen off the boat on it for other reasons mentioned above. ODAs are not teaching a level of warfare that is as technically demanding and C2 centric as airpower. ODAs work because you can train bare minimum useful infantry in a matter of weeks. Youre never going to stand up an Air Force that quickly with a capacity to bring effective arms against a prepared enemy in a way that it wouldn't be cheaper to just use your own air power to start. I dunno, FLEA's 2c noone cares about.

While we are at it, may as well bring up that the Biden Admin just restored California's authority to unilaterally determine vehicle emissions standards for cars sold nationwide. Not sure how I feel about that one. Definitely an issue of states rights, but a case where one state can flex it's economic status to force other states to comply.

Anyone else imagine the Jaws theme playing with that lower picture?

All great points. Thanks for your comments!

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-03-07/antiwar-protests-in-russia-won-t-change-putin-s-mind-about-ukraine Here's what I was saying about Russian protest not be indicative of Putin's popularity. Also some light discussion on how Russians feel about sanctions on the general population.

No to......

Yeah, the problem is really difficult to solve unless there are some fundamental changes to the way the AF recruits, mentors and manages pilot manpower. I honestly thing we need a holistic look at force structure in general, starting with the officer/enlisted paradigm. Its something we grabbed from 17th century warfare and very little has been done to advance it. Not saying I have the ideas or the solutions but that's the place I would start.

Wonder if our own leadership is watching this before phasing out the MQ-9. The drones Ukraine is using are very comparable arent they? I think they are using the Turkey predator equivalent.

I mean..... I see the point here. I hate additional duties more than any other. But the AF knows it grabs its future commanders and GO's from the pilot ranks. Before you command a squadron you've hopefully hopped a few shops in a squadron and understand their basic mechanisms that make them work. Before you lead a group, you hopefully understand the spending and resource allocation. Goes on.... but what he's basically getting at is you are learning the foundations that the government operates on. The problem is...... only 10% of pilots are going to command. For the other 90% of pilots this a waste of time and its frankly exhausting. At the same time, we as a pilot union, get peeved when the AF crops its future leaders too early in their career and funnels them into better jobs. So I don't really have a good solution on this one either. Replace the Airman Development Plan for finding and allocating assignments. You now bid on a assignments and commanders of those assignments can bid on you. Then some algorithm assigns you based on bids and needs of the Air Force.

I was actually wondering how much pants shitting the Russians would do if Turkey transferred their S400s to them to pick up the F-35 again. Its far fetched though. Turkey has been the least supportive NATO country for Ukraine and they really love those S400s. But man if only....

Im actually considering moving off USAA when I separate. One of the main advantages of USAA is the ability to pick up your banking and just go anywhere but as I'm about to settle with some permanence I can't really see USAA offering bounds more than most other banks now.

Good stuff. When I talk about media polling im mainly critical of the practice of using a web polling which is obviously going to target readers who are probably geared to a political bias based on what media they are already consuming. This then gets published in an effort to influence public opinion, as you've mentioned.

I think we are all putting way too much optimism that Putin is going away. Ive mentioned it before, he is unfathomably popular in Russia even with the ongoing shenanigans. Highly unlikely they deplace him. I believe what is more likely is the insurgency and domestic pressure force him to a compromise in about a year where Ukraine keeps its autonomy but has some significant losses as well. (probably Crimea and Donbas) Putin isn't really a soviet nut case. The dude was remarkably pro capitalism in his mid years and was very open markets in the 90s. Sort of like mentioned in the Presidents thread, people are not a polarized subset of values. Putin embraced some of soviet culture but hardly all of it. That was discussed in the Jordan Peterson podcast posted earlier.

If anyone knows what I'm talking about please inform: I'm trying to find a CSIS video of a speech given by a former SECDEF (cant remember which one) where he talks about Iran, North Korea, and Russia, and how the sanctions work and dont work there. Interestingly I think he said sanctions in Russia didn't work but I think that was before we had the full international support we do now.

Ok, Ill explain nK because I know this one a lot better. I've also realized a lot of confusion on what sanctions are, how they are enforced, and what we can and cant do with them. Im by no means an expert but I do have a decent grasp on some of this. Sanctions can generally be unilateral, or cooperative. The strongest sanctions are cooperative sanctions backed by a UNSCR. This is the case of nK. The reason the UNSCR is important is because it gives the UN the authority to appoint a military commander to enforce the sanctions using military force. In the case of nK, the USINDOPACOM commander is the UNSCR commander and is authorized under the UN to enforce maritime trade against nK. North Korea, operates a rice economy. In short, farm crops are traded for commodities more routinely than fiat currency. Under KJI, there was a massive military buildup through the 90s until his death. Specific of note he passed an ordinance through the party cabinet that allowed military commanders the authority to sequester a farmer's crops to feed their battalion. The problem is, this led to corruption, because more often than not, commanders were taking the crops to use as currency and not to feed the battalion. Obviously this caused a lot of starvation. When KJU came to power, there were questions about his legitimacy, as it is with any ascension to power in a monarchy (or dictatorship, its not clear what nK is right now). This led KJU to consolidate power by purging but he also realized his father was deeply unpopular with the military and with the working class due to the mass hunger. So KJU led a massive expansion of internal economic expansion and gutted the military. The ONLY military capital he continued growth investment in was his nuclear and SOF forces. This was because DPRK probably assessed they can no longer win a conventional war against sK, even without US support. Therefore, asymmetric capabilities as deterrence became their only option. To fuel this growth faster, KJU sought to bring an end to to the war by finally signing peace accords and permanently ending the UN mission to the Korean peninsula. (Different UN mission, this is the 1950's UN mission to maintain the armistice) This would have had major geopolitical effects on the peninsula, but in short he assessed he could further divest his military into the economy if he needed to. And its what brought nK to the talking table, in and of itself a major step. The reason the peace talks failed is because nK was insistent that they maintain some nuclear capability because it was their country's only form of defense after gutting their forces. However, this is basically a red line for the US because as one of five benefactors of the NPT, we do not what other country's having nukes. We also we uncertain what allowing nK to continue to hold nuclear weapons would mean for other NPT signers who were not party to the talks. That said, there is still hope. nK has temporarily withdrawn but their internal economic policies seem to still be in place. Iran is a bit of a different story and I'm less smart on it. Iran was cooperative sanctions that were not backed by a UNSCR. So we relied on the participation of Germany, France the UK and a few other European traders to enforce the sanctions. This arrangement did work and also brought Iran to the talking table. Whether the agreement was good or not is immaterial now because it was simply the best agreement we were going to get. Withdrawing, in my opinion, was a massive mistake. The reason is because Europe largely supported the agreement and they were reluctant partners on the sanctions to begin with. So when we withdrew, the sanctions became unilateral and became near useless. Because of that, when we returned during this administration to the talking table, our bargaining leverage was extremely low. It is being reported by media that Iran is likely going to get away with a steal in this next agreement. I would say its shortsighted to say Iran didn't go our way though because it did go our way and then we withdrew from it.

I agree. And in that case, I fully support NATO sending other aid if they determine its not in their interest to send something that could threaten their own interests. Edit: Sounds like we are sending patriot batteries though!

One of the important aspects though is this is what Ukraine asked for. We may assess they need something different but it's a bit irrelevant. If we give them fighters and it's a total disaster it's on them, but at least they were responsible for the decision.

Was actually very effective in Iran and N. Korea. nK even more so because sanctions were backed by a UNSCR.

Thats fair and a criticism of any poll. But there is only so much you can do to eliminate selection bias. No polling is perfect, just ask Hilary!