FLEA

I used it a lot on -130s and they were also a brick 1 mentality. At the end of the day, it's a course, vertical guidance to a known point. Yes it is a visual maneuver and you should be 90% outside, but it's one of those things of have it, so might as well use it. It's 0 investment, you probably know the ILS data to your home field without having to look it up. So it takes all of 3 seconds to input it and just have another set of data giving your spacial information. Was useful for me at fields like Spang where you have huge runway terrain illusions on the approach end.

Definitely not useless. But if noones taught you how to use it in the overhead maybe that's your perception. It's not meant to replace looking outside. It's just another tool to take into your cross check.

No, but it's important to realise they didn't need to. The implications of Russia tipping the election scale were enough to shadow the legitimacy of Trumps ascension and fueled a movement of "not my president." It created an atmosphere where Trump had to spend more time defending his credibility than actually running the country. Same history is going to repeat here. If people believe Joe Biden's ascension to office was illegitimate, be will face the political upheaval of a stale government that will repulse his actions at every turn.

I don't think they can. Space Force was signed into law and is now under title 10 correct? They would need to pass a bill through both houses again to get rid of it.

Oh man the hypocrisy is just hysterical. Liberals in 2016: This is our election process, allegations of Russian interference should be thoroughly investigated even if the evidence is thin. Conservatives in 2016: This is our election process, allegations of voter fraud should be thoroughly investigated even if the evidence is thin. This isn't specific to calling you out Prozac. Your post just made me think of it. This is abundant on both sides.

This was a long but pretty interesting read. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/10/collapsing-levels-trust-are-devastating-america/616581/

Since 9/11 probably not much. But the entire Rapoport 3rd wave terrorism idealogy was centered around left extremist. Weather Underground being the most well known US example.

You're going to be really disappointed if you think Biden is going to get you to Europe. Dude, Germans can't even visit France right now. There's no way they will try to accommodate people outside the Shenzhen in the near future. I've lived and worked here since the start of this shenanigans. Its a fucking disaster right now.

Hahahaha. I've been wanting to post this all day but I haven't gotten to it. You beat me first. This dude claims to be able to change car tires but any person with a modest understanding of automobiles wouldn't be caught dead spending 70K on that piece of burning dumpster tampons. It's one of the worst reviewed SUVs ever. If he wanted to impress us he could have at least made up owning a vehicle people found respectable.

Hey just curious, was IDE selection for the FY20 board released yet? I thought it was but noticed in myvector that the board is still showing not public.

Why do we care about Russia? Wasn't the Cold War like 30 years ago? Remember when Obama called Russia a regional power and instantaneously overturned the reset in one remark? Cause I do.

I would say one flaw to your above arguments ViperMan is that part of the reason fighter squadrons aren't 50/50 is because the anthrpomorphic standards. I don't mean to imply it's the only reason, but by your accounts, only 3% of fighter squadrons are women. Ok, remove anthropomorphic standards, and now that goes up to 9%, remove something else, and it goes up to 15%. Keep removing enough barriers and over 2 decades maybe you're now at 40% or more which is realistic. We probably don't know all the barriers, we just know anthrpomorphic standards are one. The second error is since the T-6 adopted the ACES II, you now require anthropomorphics for any airframe. While female aircrew might be low on fighter squadrons it's much higher I think in other communities. (I want to say 21% across pilot field but I can't find where I read that recently.) I do personally know women removed from UPT selection for anthroporphics. One happens to be the most competent officer I've met in my life. She will get out now after 7 years and the AF is going to lose horribly on that.

Haha. No good answer on that one except that I have an overwhelmingly high faith in humanity that most people would just find naïve. I'm also looking at it from a rational stand point and he doesn't have a lot to gain by pushing the agenda the way he did. Only a very very small base of people actually thought mask wear was an infringement of their civil rights. Even if that group did exist inside his base, it was a small portion of his base at most, and he certainly wasn't going to lose them to a democrat over something as silly as masks. Regarding Joe's medical condition, I think we should all address the elephant in the room which is we really need to start thinking about an age cap on the presidency, and any political office for that matter. I do speculate on his health, but I think the more damning trend is that we keep electing people that really have no stake in holding this country together other than to set a legacy for themselves. They are also too far disconnected from the working class. (Shit most people their age haven't been working class in 20 years, they're retired!) I'm strongly starting to believe if you haven't started your first term by 65 you need to just step aside and let a younger actor take the stage.

I just finished a whole paper on the COVID-19 response and I'm convinced it couldn't have played out differently under any other leadership. Geographically, COVID played out in 3 regions. Asia, Europe, and the US. Asia had a fairly easy time suppressing it due to a combination of cultural and political factors. For China, it was a fantastic demonstration of Confucian principles for a better society and the suppression of human rights for the common good. This was a narrative they honestly wanted. In Korea and Japan, your average citizen has a higher level of social responsibility than in Europe or the US. So people have been comparing us to Europe. I've been in Europe since COVID began. (Almost, was actually in Asia as it started). What most people don't recognize, and if you talk to a German, Dutch, or Dane, they will tell you, is that they are tolerating lockdowns to the extent that they are because their countries run enormous social programs that have basically began paying people to not go to work. The effect on people's livelihoods has pretty much gone untouched. And because these countries do not have looming deficits, they have plenty of credit to borrow against to keep that going. The US is in a different pot. There is the balance of civil liberties and public health, the inadequacy of the CDC pandemic response plan (that was written under Obama by the way) and the inability to support masses of Americans long term from unemployment. I think the cards were against the US from the beginning to be the hardest hit. I do believe Trump earnestly was trying to not instill panic which is why he rejected visible signs of panic like masks. This is likely what his advisors were trying to tell him to do. However, I'm also strongly convinced that he has something like Asperger's syndrome, and he couldn't read the audience sensitively enough to realize this was having the reverse effect he thought it would. That said, Joe Biden is walking into a mine field and he doesn't realize it. The economic predictions are that the global economic collapse from COVID will actually function on a delay. 2023-2024 is the predicted year. The virus is also too far gone in society. He will never reverse the trends to a manageable level. Unless he somehow magically cures Corona in his first 6 months, I don't think he will survive the political fallout that is going to come from its wake.

I think one example Obama created an enormous divide was when he decided to engage in race relations following the legal shooting of Treyvon Martin. Whether he had a moral obligation to do this or not, at this juncture, doesn't really matter. What happened fallowing that was the state sponsored support of a racial narrative that was diminutive to suburban and rural whites and a refusal to uphold the law. Trump absolutely was a counter-reaction to that. The cancel culture that ferminated in the United States skewed polling statistics and the idea of a silent majority began to gain momentum in whispered circles. I think the reason Democrats have a hard time seeing Obama as an exasperation of the divide was because in their own echo chambers everything was peachy. Trump being elected was a shock but they saw him as a charismatic cult figure that swayed millions of voters against the US. They don't realize he didnt sway anyone. They already felt marginalized. They were free to discuss it until Trump took power and really only a year or so after that. To Sua Sponge's point, fair. But if anything 9/11 could have been a great oppurtunity for healing. We probably pissed it away with Iraq 2.

Yeah his statements on unity were extraordinarily tone deaf given he came from the administration that started the great divide. It's political theater. He has no intention of unifying the US public.

I like your thought process here but we really need to start processing the trauma that China has likely already obtained supper power status on peer with us. They may not have the covnetional military quite there yet, but , if we look at Hybrid state theory via their Economic, Cyber, and Intelligence platforms, they have global reach. A good example was how they forced airlines to recognize Taiwan as part of the PRC. Another good example is how they forced American super businesses like Disney to recognize their claim to the 9 dash line. They spend equally on their military us, (when calculated for price parity and personnel costs) and they are only a couple years away from tech superiority to us. I'm only point this out because it's really important our next POTUS realise this and realise the rules have change on the global landscape. We aren't the only bad boy in town anymore. Out next POTUS needs to be super cognicent of that and realize we have to take a different approach now than world police.

Trumps ploy will be to delegitimize Biden's Presidency the same way Democrats worked to delegitimize Trump's through Russia Gate. This will have an interesting outcome though. With Russia Gate, Trump was put in a peculiar situation where he needed to assert he wasn't in collusion with Russia but be careful to investigate the matter too deeply in order to avoid bringing credence to a claim for delegitimization. The same thing will happen now with polling. The Democrats will continue to deny fraud happened but this is dangerous because if any fraud is found its going to implicate them, even if its minor. It won't change the election outcome but it will continue to keep a base of Republican voters energized for 2024.

Here are my observations on Conservative fears: 1.) A second Trump victory would have indicated a historic rejection of the Social Justice principles that have eroded the unity of our society for the last 20 years. It would have made it clear that those principles were not tolerable to the US electorate. This is probably the largest loss in this election for Conservatives, and will likely keep the country divided for another 2 decades. 2.) Should the Democrats take the Senate, speculation is high they will remove the filibuster and pass an assault weapons ban. 3.) Also removing the filibuster would allow stacking the Supreme Court. 4.) On a whole though, 2 and 3 don't look possible for this term. Its unlikely Democrats will get a strong mid term showing, and first mid terms for new party are usually a correction in the other direction. So I think chances are good they will not have either house in 2 years. 5.) The Democratic electorate largely believes this was a major victory. However, the House and Senate votes say otherwise. Democrats honestly have a large uphill battle to pass any meaningful agenda. 6.) Even if Biden does tap out year #2 and put K. Harris in, she wont have the congressional support to push a far left agenda. 7.) As a military member though, I am concerned about foreign involvement. Especially since Biden sat deuce for Obama, who was a very hawkish President. 8.) I'm also worried Biden will play us back into NATO/EUCOM, refocus energy on Russia when it needs to be on China, and remove emphasis from China overall. This would be an enormous failure in Global Security. Other than that, I don't think much will change in the next 4 years. I really hope to god though he doesn't get us into a foreign quagmire. That was one thing I was at least very confident in with Trump. It was very clear Trump was keeping us out of overseas debacles.

It will be interesting to see if the Surpreme Court upholds their prior rulings on EO's when Trump tried to overturn DACA and several Obama EOs.

I definitely agree that names/gender/race need masked on PRFs and SURFs. There is 0 reason for a promotion board to need to know this data. I think most people are missing your point on board photos because the AF is the most progressive branch and did away with this in the 90s. (Still do it for certain awards and for-hire oppurtunities though)

I like to ask in these conversations if it's also important that the racial makeup of players in the NBA should also be representative of society, why or why not?

I do like Dan Crenshaw a lot but you are right that he has difficulty generating media coverage. Maybe Madison Cawthorn can be a face for younger Republicans as well but the dude has too many question marks in his background right now to be a sure face for the party.

I'm going to be honest. Politically I detest her. We couldn't be more opposite on so many things. I also don't think she has all of her platforms well thought out. I do not think she's stupid though, just not as expereinced. We take for granted sometimes as officers we have a broad understanding of government, and policy. But at the end of the day, none of us ran for office, and she did. Morally though I somewhat admire her. She was unhappy with her circumstances, ran an extremely fierce campaign as an under dog, and stood strongly in front of a wave of criticism on everything from her background to her looks from opponents that would not take her seriously. This ultimately backfired, because now you have to take her seriously. Whether you like to admit it or not, she has political pull and influence. That equates to power, and so long as she had power, she matters. Would love to see some younger Republicans generate the same energy but they largely just don't exist.

Meanwhile, in the UK: