Azimuth Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Timbonez said: It wasn't taken down because of opsec. The guy who created the video was told to take it down because he didn't ask for permission. He is turning it over to PA so it can be "vetted" first. The people who were on the ISIS hit list had done interviews and stories for PA. All they did was Googlefu their name and what base their from and they eventually found their address. I wouldn't want PA vetting anything. Edited January 28, 2016 by Azimuth 1
Fuzz Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 3 hours ago, Lawman said: But if PA doesn't vet and publish the video how can any of them get a bullet for their next evaluation out of somebody else's hard work? If PA produced videos with 1/3 of the quality of this instead of interviewing Col. X or Chief X for some article that nobody will read about resiliency/SAPR/Uniforms/Suicides/Masters/PME/Volunteering/"the mission" (that's not actually the mission) etc. nobody would ever give PA a hard time. But no they'll continue to cover the latest road clean up/bake sale project or write more stupid articles about shit nobody cares about while ignoring the actual things that go on around base to kill bad guys and break their stuff. 2
Stitch Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 On 1/28/2016 at 1:10 AM, Fuzz said: If PA produced videos with 1/3 of the quality of this instead of interviewing Col. X or Chief X for some article that nobody will read about resiliency/SAPR/Uniforms/Suicides/Masters/PME/Volunteering/"the mission" (that's not actually the mission) etc. nobody would ever give PA a hard time. But no they'll continue to cover the latest road clean up/bake sale project or write more stupid articles about shit nobody cares about while ignoring the actual things that go on around base to kill bad guys and break their stuff. Nailed it! 1
ThreeHoler Posted February 27, 2016 Posted February 27, 2016 Wow. The Syria situation reaches another level of potential US/Soviet escalation.
SurelySerious Posted February 27, 2016 Posted February 27, 2016 Because we're backfilling one bomber with another? I think the intensity of the proxy war has little to do with that.
Fuzz Posted February 27, 2016 Posted February 27, 2016 8 hours ago, SurelySerious said: Because we're backfilling one bomber with another? I think the intensity of the proxy war has little to do with that. U.S. Supplied TOW Missile against Russian T-90
SurelySerious Posted February 28, 2016 Posted February 28, 2016 Because we're backfilling one bomber with another? I think the intensity of the proxy war has little to do with that. U.S. Supplied TOW Missile against Russian T-90 RUS making a big deal out of this would be like us throwing a tantrum every time an RPG was fired at our helos.
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