FLEA

Yeah, the lack of air power is really whats going to kill the Ukraine. They have defensible numbers otherwise and their military is in a much better state than 2014. But only 50 fighter jets against several hundred 😕 not good...

Here are some interesting things I've picked up working heavily in NATO/Europe. Really opened my aperture for how I see the world. 1.) Europeans do not see the US as the winners of WW2. They believe WW2 was largely won by the time the US entered and US entry just accelerated the end. They view the war through the cost paid to attain victory and the majority of those costs were paid by the UK and the Soviet Union, especially the Soviet Union. They do recognize that the US was in a prime position to delineate peace outcomes though; see our earlier conversation about world leadership. 2.) Russia and many FSUs don't believe Russia lost the Cold War. They believe the Cold War ended mutually after Gorbachev initiated a series of actions to approach Bush about de-escalation because Gorbachev realized the Cold War was upsetting the global order. They literally cast their own leader as the hero, and see the entire affair as a draw. The US and NATO betrayed these outcomes when they began rapidly expanding NATO eastward despite promises they would not. 3.) About half of senior German officers in the German armed forces were East German officers when they joined. They usually came from astute, pro party families to attain this position and as such they largely see the world through Russia's lens and not ours. They are larger dissenters in most situations than other FSUs, who's entry into NATO was under different circumstances. 4.) There are LOTS of people in the world who DO NOT WANT to live in a democracy. This is really hard for us to grasp as it's such a central value to us we can't see how anyone wouldn't want it. But you have to imagine first, how they are educated, then second, think for a minute: when they turn on American cable news, what do they see? BLM protest burning cars, rioting, looting stores. The January 6th riots taking over the US capital. Extremely unpopular leaders like Trump and Biden winning elections. Thats how they see Democracy, and they legitimately believe Democratic states are filled with political unrest, violence and instability. They believe a strong authoritarian government is necessary to enforce rule of law. 5.) The Cold War has been over almost as long as the Cold War lasted now yet we still continue to frame our foreign policy through it's echos. One thing I have difficulty explaining to civilian family and friends is the geopolitical nuance in war and how it's never clearly black or white but usually lots of grey. But people want easy answers because they want to know "who to support, who's the good guys?" Of course it's never clearly simple and in war good guys are rare. Good sides are rarer because states by nature do not have morality, just interests. That's something our US education system doesn't teach in enough depth for people to really comprehend the underlying levels of it. On another note, Tulsi Gabbard made a tweet today that she believes war could have possibly been avoided if the US agreed to address Russia's concerns about Ukrainian entry into NATO. This tweet was largely condemned by pundits which I think is a shame because I think she is right. Historically it's been European tyrants invading Russia. Not Russian tyrants invading Europe. And until we recognize that Russia doesn't want another Hittler or Napolean getting within 60nm of Moscow we probably are going to struggle to understand their interests and foreign policy position.

Man, how big of a parachute do you need to slow down a literal falling tank.... Wonder what size canopy that things rigged with....

I'm not selling it short but your placing too much emphasis in our role of leadership on that. Nuclear weapons were being developed independently of our own efforts and were inevitable, gobal trade was already taking root and was a natural consequence of mercantalism, it is why the Japanese sequestered islands in the SE Pacific, democracy was already spreading in Europe. The US had hands in all this sure, but I think its far fetched to call it "the leader." The world was going this direction, with our without us. Rather, we invested heavily to stay slightly ahead of the curve and tailor some of these things to our benefit. The best and most important leadership the US provides though is leadership by example. And we best maintain an example when we show other states that dabbling in outside your immediate sphere only causes prolonged chaos.

Yeah if this is me we are waiting to get on the ground. I'm climbing to 400 and depressurizing the plane with oxygen on, lol.

I think you give too much credit to the US for it's role in world peace. Let's not forget about nuclear weapons making war too costly, globalism, capitalism, decline of monarchies and mercantilism, rise in telecommunications making the cost of war more visible to civilians. There's a lot to attribute to peace. 3000 years ago tyrant kings would cross an ocean because some dude on the other side stole his bottom bitched and walled her in a city. Today you need some moral justification for war even if you're a dictator.

Personally I would like to see some protections instilled to allow more people to do public service while still maintaining moral congruency with their religion. I was a supporter of turbans and beards as well. I don't understand this mentality that you give up constitutional rights when you join the service. The supreme court has repeatedly struck down that argument and said as much. And while I realize the military wants to make arguments in favor of uniformity and esprit de corps, very hard to do that when you make a very public ad campaign that "diversity is our strength."

Some additional context, what really shot the DoD in the foot on these lawsuits was they did grant medical exemptions. So the law says they have to provide a reasonable accommodation to a religious issue unless no reasonable accommodation exist. The plaintiffs argued before the court that a reasonable accommodation did exist because the DoD didn't have the same concerns about deployment of mobility for medically exempted personal and they could simply accommodate religious members similarly. The DoD by and large never tried to deny a religious exemption based on the sincerity of the belief. In nearly every denial (at least everyone I've seen) the DoD recognized the belief as sincere. In fact the organizations that I've been following who are helping to litigate it have reviewed thousands of denials and in every case the religious convictions were agreed to be sincere. Because of that, it painted the DoD in a corner. Now they can no longer say the belief is not sincere, because they already agreed it was and new evidence hasn't been presented to say it wasn't. The DoD also can no longer say a reasonable accommodation does not exist because they did grant a reasonable accommodation to people who were medically waivered. What the courts are interested in and what the DoD is failing to make a case in is why would a medically exempt service member deserve an accomodation but a religious member doesn't. Unfortunately the only conclusion easy to reach with that is senior leadership in the DoD discriminated against religious members by failing to treat them on equal standing as those unable to take the vaccine for medical reasons.

Only two days ago I had the feeling that France and the UK were close to brokering a peace in secret where Ukraine would publicly withdrawal interest from NATO indefinitely and succeed the contested territories. But now it doesn't seem so sure. (That's all just speculation based on what's being said publicly and what's not, no data to back any of it)

Thanks for posting this. The above post reminded me EXACTLY of this video and I couldnt remember who produced it.

Honestly, I think dealing with Russia is more nuanced than that. One of the things I've heard talked about among senior staff is its not enough to beat Russia or win against Russia. Victory for the US requires coming to a mutual win for Russia and the US. What they're getting at is that the only thing more dangerous than a strong and aggressive Russia is a weak and timid Russia, and it will always be that way so long as they own stockpiles of thousands of nuclear weapons (that likely wont go anywhere). The US strategy with Russia is to keep them regionally influential but deny ambitions to become globally influential. This is really a thin line to tow and requires a good compromise of firmness followed by appeasement.

I mean they forced Disney to include a "historic" map of the 9-dash line in Mulan to allow it to release in China, an audience Disney knew it would excel in. Now 60 million American children will grow up with a sub conscience thought that China has historically owned those waters and territories, despite the fact that no map of the 9-dash line appeared prior to WW2.

Both are easy if you're CONUS. The class 1 takes less than a half hour and is not nearly as intensive as a military class 1. The radio operator permit is largely an excuse for the US govt to collect fees. You literally just fill out a form online and click pay.

I don't want to believe that the US scores high for political corruption compared to other countries, but that is exactly where we are at. We've gotten to the point where it is acceptable for both sides to try and overturn or rig election results in an effort to keep power. It's not just Hilary and Trump either. This was a trend I've seen worsen in every election I've been alive. It involves the coordinated effort to delegitimize the sitting President as a means to erode their power.

Eh, I don't care if they block roads/highways. Protesting is "supposed" to make people feel uncomfortable.

Ok so I thought I was set on the Airlines but something just came up and I'm just doing my due diligence to weigh it. I may have a pathway to an M7 MBA program (Booth). However, I would be finishing it at 38 years old. I'm not really sure it would be the "oompf" i'm looking for to take my career to the next level. Anyone not doing airlines care to weigh in? Would this be a huge opportunity for me? I've heard it both ways. 1.) By the time your in your late 30's you are much older than typical MBA candidates and employers expect you have already held the entry level positions an M7 MBA would grant you access to. 2.) For a transitioning vet an M7 MBA says you possess both the skills and the talent to function well in a high end corporate environment.

I know but let's face it man.... Most of us don't have Tom Brady genes.... The spice......the spice melange.

Had someone recommend that if you are a male you are missing a proverbial gold mine if you don't have a full hormone spectrum done before you get out since most males are easily diagnosable with low testosterone by their mid 30's. Anyone have experience with this?

Haha I actually was at Columbus in 2009. And also not trying to shit on the U-28, definitely have a good impression of most those bros. Just that one line made the whole program out like a joke at that time.

Omg I about barfed in my mouth on career day in UPT where the dude with a 20# beer gut said "we are pretty much the Navy SEALS of the sky."

Prozac, when people talk about the deep state they aren't discussing global cabal or conspiracy. That is something the democrats inferred was meant. Most people referring to the deep state are discussing endemic incompetence, cognitive biases and massive group think to uphold a status quo that is no longer healthy for our country. It is the enormous momentum behind government employees who can not or will not understand that the administration is trying to change direction and so they press on what they were doing with complete disregard for the national strategy.

That is a phenomenal article thanks for sharing. This is definitely the mindset ive run into time and time again. It's also a gentle naivety that anything bad could happen to them. A complete forfeiture of vigilance in exchange for the temporary sensation of stability.

Also speaking of dossiers, the Steele Dossier, and the "Intel" that Trump was a willing Russian asset. To Clark's point though, am eerie realization I've had while living in Europe is that the majority of Europeans have no recollection of what the lesson learned with pre WW2 Germany was. They've slid right back to an appeasement strategy with this misguided idea that if they let Russia have Ukraine that will be enough and they'll stop there. They simply aren't willing to go to war until it threatens their country personally (and even then iffy)

Sometimes yes. Remember when we waited until after Russia was completed speaking at the UN to show high altitude photos of their missile sites in Cuba to the whole UN floor, a capability they didn't realize we had? War is information now, and sometimes you have to sacrifice a pawn to get to the king. In the press's defense he's right. This may as well be a made up allegation and I certainly wouldnt risk my journalism credibility on publishing it. Not after WMDs, ISIS in Iraq and the collapse of Kabul. Our intelligence machine is about as trustworthy as evening backup weatherman.