Guest Globetrotter Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 I'm not arguing with you. His comment just didn't make sense to me, since "forgetting about 1947" would put us back in the AAC. Big shift in logic to "forgetting 1947.....oh, and the 30 years before that too" when we'd be back in the signal corps. Like saying the navy would have to resort to using sails if they retired the nuke reactors instead of just going back to gas turbines, oil, coal, etc. I see what you mean, but I said forget about 1947 to stress the fact that we became a separate service. I said signal corps because in those days they were the bastard children of the army.
Herk Driver Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 Tried to post this earlier, but it got all F'ed up and now I've had more than a few beers. Long ago, the USAF had a mission statement that made sense to me and I knew an O-6 that had a business card that had a pretty realistic saying on the back of it. It said "The mission of the Air Force is to Fly, Fight and Win. Those who don't Fly and Fight support those who do." Still applies today. 'Nuff said. Yeah, I know deliver sovereign options...cyberspace...point being that even I know that Herks are not the ones that are at the pointy end of the spear and I support others by delivering bombs from Point A to Point B, dropping crunchies into a DZ, taking beans and bullets to those crunchies or hauling rubber dog sh!t out of Hong Kong. The fact remains that shoe clerks are shoe clerks and I've had more than one <insert REMF here> cop an attitude because I'm a pilot. And no he didn't give that attitude to everyone. There are those people out there. Don't be fooled.
Guest Xtndr50boom Posted June 15, 2007 Posted June 15, 2007 Asses are asses and they are asses to everyone. Which is exactly why Aircrew must be the dicks that fvck these asses into submission!
Guest Xtndr50boom Posted June 16, 2007 Posted June 16, 2007 Lower the boom, lower the bar. Jack of all trades
Steve Davies Posted July 30, 2007 Posted July 30, 2007 Is there any truth to the suggestion that the decision to force everyone to wear their PT gear was to stop people wearing gang colours? I ask because there has been some speculation that this issue is what prompted it: (CBS) U.S. Army Sgt. Juwan Johnson got a hero's welcome while home on leave in June of 2004. "Not only did I love my son - but my god - I liked the man he was becoming," his mother, Stephanie Cockrell, remembers. But that trip home was the last time his family saw him alive. When Johnson died, he wasn't in a war zone, he was in Germany. "He had finished his term in Iraq," his mother said. "I talked to him the day before his death. He said, 'Mom, I'm in the process of discharging out. I'll be out in two weeks'." On July 3, 2005, Sgt. Johnson went to a park not far from his base in Germany to be initiated into the 'Gangster Disciples,' a notorious Chicago-based street gang. He was beaten by eight other soldiers in a "jump-in" - an initiation rite common to many gangs. "My son never spoke of joining a gang," Cockrell told CBS News correspondent Thalia Assuras. Johnson died that night from his injuries. His son, Juwan Jr., was born five months later. "I feel like I didn't prepare him enough to deal with this and I should have," his mother said. "But how would I have known there were gangs in the military? I could have had that talk with him." Evidence of gang culture and gang activity in the military is increasing so much an FBI report calls it "a threat to law enforcement and national security." The signs are chilling: Marines in gang attire on Parris Island; paratroopers flashing gang hand signs at a nightclub near Ft. Bragg; infantrymen showing-off gang tattoos at Ft. Hood. "It's obvious that many of these people do not give up their gang affiliations," said Hunter Glass, a retired police detective in Fayetteville, North Carolina, the home of Ft. Bragg and the 82nd Airborne. He monitors gang activity at the base and across the military. "If we weren't in the middle of fighting a war, yes, I think the military would have a lot more control over this issue," Glass said. "But with a war going on, I think it's very difficult to do." Gang activity clues are appearing in Iraq and Afghanistan, too. Gang graffiti is sprayed on blast walls – even on Humvees. Kilroy – the doodle made famous by U.S. soldiers in World War II – is here, but so is the star emblem of the Gangster Disciples. The soldier who took photos if the graffiti told CBS News that he's been warned he's as good as dead if he ever returns to Iraq. "We represent America – our demographics are the same – so the same problems that America contends with we often times contend with," said Colonel Gene Smith of the Army's Office of the Provost Marshal. The U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command reported 61 gang investigations and incidents last year, compared to just 9 in 2004. But army officials point out less than 1 percent of all its criminal investigations are gang related. "We must remember that there are a million people in the army community," Smith said, "And these small numbers are not reflective of a tremendous, pervasive, rampant problem." The rise in gang activity coincides with the increase in recruits with records. Since 2003, 125,000 recruits with criminal histories have been granted what are known as "moral waivers" for felonies including robbery and assault. A hidden-camera investigation by CBS Denver station KCNC found one military recruiter was quick to offer the waiver option even when asked, "Does it matter that i was in a gang or anything?" That is well within military regulations. "You may have had some gang activity in your past and everything ... OK ... but that in itself does not disqualify...," the recruiter said. Military regulations disqualify members of hate groups from enlisting, but there is no specific ban on members of street gangs. Sgt. Juwan Johnson's family says such a prohibition is long overdue. "Just maybe we can save someone else's child ... somebody else's husband ... somebody else's father," his mother said. "I would have loved to have seen him with his child, I really would have -- that part is hard, that part is hard." This month a military court sentenced two of Juwan Johnson's attackers to prison.
Ram Posted July 30, 2007 Posted July 30, 2007 Is there any truth to the suggestion that the decision to force everyone to wear their PT gear was to stop people wearing gang colours? I ask because there has been some speculation that this issue is what prompted it: Wait...he was in a gang? And his name was "Juwan?" No way. What are the chances of THAT happening???
Ill Destructor Posted July 30, 2007 Posted July 30, 2007 My understanding is that gangs are more of an Army problem.
Herk Driver Posted July 30, 2007 Posted July 30, 2007 Is there any truth to the suggestion that the decision to force everyone to wear their PT gear was to stop people wearing gang colours? I ask because there has been some speculation that this issue is what prompted it: Steve, are you asking if the Juwan Johnson beating, specifically, was the reason. If so then, no. The decision to wear PT gear was before Sgt Johnson was killed in K-town. Overall, the reason may have had something to do with it, but I would find it hard to believe that anyone in the USAF was looking that far ahead. Anyway, the story as I hear it was that the higher ups at desert Base x toured the SECAF and some others around the base. The CENTAF/CC at the time, was appalled at the civilian attire that some of the troops were wearing to the bar. Some of the females were wearing what some females wear to bars (i.e. short shorts and shirts that exposed their midriffs, ect). Also, there were stories of some females bringing several large bags of civilian clothes (one was said to have brought an entire suitcase of shoes) to the desert. These extra bags were, of course, either extra weight that burned more gas on MILAIR or extra bags which costs more taxpayer money on COMAIR (contract flights included). They made the policy about civilian PT gear that ultimately was to be replaced by USAF PT gear when it became available. You know more professional looking, etc, etc. This actually makes perfect sense because it is the typical knee jerk reaction to a few boobs hanging out. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Guest Technique only Posted July 30, 2007 Posted July 30, 2007 That's interesting. For about a year and a half after his death there were commercials airing on AFN offering a reward for anyone who had information about his death. I think it got up to $50,000 before the commercials went away. I guess someone cashed in. Meanwhile, the rest of us never heard anything else about it.
HerkDerka Posted July 30, 2007 Posted July 30, 2007 (edited) Is there any truth to the suggestion that the decision to force everyone to wear their PT gear was to stop people wearing gang colours? No. It was a standard AF deal. "Hey, the Army looks snappy in their PTs. We should do that." So it was done. HD Edited July 30, 2007 by HerkDerka
Scooter14 Posted July 30, 2007 Posted July 30, 2007 Some of the females were wearing what some females wear to bars (i.e. short shorts and shirts that exposed their midriffs, ect). Also, there were stories of some females bringing several large bags of civilian clothes (one was said to have brought an entire suitcase of shoes) to the desert. These extra bags were, of course, either extra weight that burned more gas on MILAIR or extra bags which costs more taxpayer money on COMAIR (contract flights included). Two weeks into a Died trip. Sitting @ the DEL. Saw the same chick there every night...we'd land anywhere from 2000-2330 local-ish and we'd ahve enought ime to make it there for the 0200 (at the time) closing time. Nice body, kind of a butterface, even for the desert. Always hanging out with the fellas around the worn out pool tables. Anyway, sitting there this night and she's in a short, loose pair of shorts shooting pool. Cue ball lands kind of towards the middle of the table, so her best shot is to lean over with her back(side) to me. She leans forward and lifts up one leg...well whadya know, she must have tried to save weight on that COMAIR flight and left those heavy panties back in the states. Took her the better part of 69 seconds to line up the shot, all the time vertically smiling to the stunned tanker clowns at my table. Problem is, now the AF PT shorts are short and loose fitting on everybody.
Champ Kind Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 +1 for the narrative, Scooter. I felt like I was there!
Techsan Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Just curious, anyone else out there in the AOR have to tuck in their Air Force PT shirts?? Its policy now in Dhafra, and I think CENTAF in general. We also have to salute when wearing PTs...is that the gayest thing you've ever heard? Maybe we need a "Dumness in CENTAF" thread. Why does the AF have to make things so painful while you're deployed? Also, there is also a policy in Dhafra that you cannot wear any morale patches. I understand on some of the patches, but I was stopped just the other day by a O-5 type for having a KC-10 morale patch on. It was funny that he told me to take the MORALE patch off. We wouldn't want any morale in the AOR!!
Champ Kind Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Here at OKAS, shirts must be tucked in, and no morale patches on uniforms. Thankfully, they are not making us salute in PT gear. Funny story, in reference to the tucking in, we got an email from wing leadership saying that the wearing of the PT gear was "out of control", in reference to some phenomenon called the "fake front-tuck", where apparantly you do tuck your shirt in, as per the regs, put then pull it out (as they say) to give it a little to give it a more "un-tucked" appearance. Yes, this was the actual subject of an email, and surprisingly, it was NOT from a shoe-clerk Chief or anything... Man, people have way too much time on their hands.
okienav Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 When I was at Bagram last year (right when the PT gear was being issued to everybody) they said you should tuck the shirt in, and saluting was required. However, how the heck does anybody know what rank you are while in PT's! So unless you saw an O-6 and above you generally ignored the saluting requirement while in PT's. The Army acted much like the AF in that if they felt like it they would salute while in PT's if the AF guy was in uniform.
Scooter14 Posted September 20, 2007 Posted September 20, 2007 Saluting is an official greeting.You must salute in the AF PT uniform.There is a reg governing the PT uniform.The only thing I can wear off duty is the PT uniform.My question is this:When am I ever really in crew rest? I guess it's never. That's fine, but let's just get that out in the open.in reference to some phenomenon called the "fake front-tuck",I think I saw that on Silence of the Lambs...wait, nevermind.
Guest PilotKD Posted September 21, 2007 Posted September 21, 2007 Hey now. There is NO common sense allowed in the AOR or anywhere else in the AF for that matter. Don't try to make sense of it all. It'll only make you more pissed off.
HerkDerka Posted September 21, 2007 Posted September 21, 2007 Yes, this was the actual subject of an email, and surprisingly, it was NOT from a shoe-clerk Chief or anything... Most shoeclerks speak through their wing commanders. HD
LT4Life Posted September 23, 2007 Posted September 23, 2007 Currently at the Deid...Tucked in at all times (even in the gym) and salutes. I was at Manas for a few days a month ago and they are the same except you can untuck it in the gym while getting your swell on. As bad as it sounds, it felt pretty good to untuck your shirt while working out since I'm so used to having it tucked in. I actually got called out at the gym here in the Deid by some guy because the back of my shirt was untucked. On a separate note, a buddy of mine was sent back to his dorm room from the chow hall at Manas because they were doing "sock checks" and he had white socks on while in a flight suit.
Guest SATCOM Posted September 23, 2007 Posted September 23, 2007 they were doing "sock checks" and he had white socks on while in a flight suit. An all time low has been reached my friends......
Boxhead Posted September 23, 2007 Posted September 23, 2007 I am getting soooo excited to get back over there! I think I am going to keep a little log book of every time I see/hear/are involved with this stuff. Then I am writing a book. Retirement taken care of!
Toasty Posted September 23, 2007 Posted September 23, 2007 An all time low has been reached my friends...... My sock ends a full 4 inches below the top of the boot, how the f*** do you check something like that? "Sir, please remove your boots. I have to check the color of your socks before you can eat a meal." Jesus Christ...I REALLY don't see why the answer can't be a simple "No, Sergeant," end of story. WTF is next? Mandating a type of underwear? And why doesn't the senior leadership have the brass to stop the nonsense?
HerkDerka Posted September 23, 2007 Posted September 23, 2007 I REALLY don't see why the answer can't be a simple "No, Sergeant," end of story. That is the answer. A simple "No" or "I don't have time for this" is all it takes. The problem is some people are afraid to say it. HD
MD Posted September 23, 2007 Posted September 23, 2007 My sock ends a full 4 inches below the top of the boot, how the f*** do you check something like that? "Sir, please remove your boots. I have to check the color of your socks before you can eat a meal." Jesus Christ...I REALLY don't see why the answer can't be a simple "No, Sergeant," end of story. WTF is next? Mandating a type of underwear? And why doesn't the senior leadership have the brass to stop the nonsense? Its for exactly this kind of dumbass crap the AF does that makes it the absolute laughing stock of the armed services. Sock checks and being called out at the gym? Postively pathetic. We keep this up, we won't need to work to lose wars, we can do it ourselves with our own asinine rules and regs. We're well on our way even now..... Why won't leadership do anything? Because we have to have actual leaders first, not square-filling place holder REMFs that we seem to always have.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now