fire4effect

Interaction with law enforcement in general. How often do we interact with law enforcement that doesn't have the potential to cost us at least a couple hundred bucks with a ticket? Honestly the only time I want to interact with law enforcement is if I'm engaging more than 1-2 active shooters. Up until that point I'm pretty good at protecting myself. Like with the AME and your medical. No one comes out having a better day than when they went in.

There's a lot to be said for living in the Midwest where we don't live on top of each other or have to depend on a subway or other mass transit (and the pathogens they can harbor) to get to work.

I remember the talk of the stealthy Predator-C a long time ago and I would think it would be effective in some roles. That said I'll leave it to the 100lb brain types to determine how stealthy it would be with the external stores shown in the picture.

I'd say our greatest vulnerability is our decidedly non stealthy tanker fleet. As for Musk I would say put your (Musk's) money where your mouth is and develop something you think can beat the F35 and if its as good as you say it is we'll buy it.

We complain about our government/military but need look no farther than Iran or a multitude of other foreign sh!tholes for what truly effed up looks like. On a side note never under estimate the effect of paranoia in the minds of the Quds/ Shiite militias (and its effect on their combat effectiveness) now that a high level target was taken out so unexpectedly, precisely and publicly. Do ya feel lucky?

Can't get the link in here but you can Google Col Gavin Marks firearms policy at Offutt Afb to see a step back from common sense on this subject.

When I heard it was a Katyusha rocket (piss poor accuracy under the best of circumstances) my first though was the Shiite Militias got their wires crossed and somehow hit their own boss. Which would have been poetic justice of the highest order. Still it couldn't haven't have happened to a nicer SOB whatever ordnance is was. Now the Quds/Militias are probably a little paranoid about who sold them out for targeting. USA...USA!!!🤣

They do need to stand on their own two feet. Whatever that does or doesn't amount to. I don't LIKE us there either. I guess I worry that a complete washing our hands leaves it open to someone else moving in to fill the space whether that's ISIS or more radical Taliban elements or another nation-state. I like the enemy of my enemy as far as that goes but those loyalties can change like the damn wind. I've seen that first hand. Quoting an SF (Special Forces) troop helping the enemy of my enemy was called "Pimping the Flintstones" and it was one delicate balance. Speaking of Nation-states in the region I'm sure Iran would be very happy to see us leave too whether anyone talks about that out loud or not. I certainly can't prove it but having us on two sides of their country can't make them too relaxed. And yes I've comingled two AOs namely Iraq/Syria Afghanistan somewhat in this discussion as I've been to both and I recognize there are similarities and differences. I like deterrence/prevention as much as possible and I like to say nobody remembers the attack/ambush/mishap/random Sh!tstorm that never happens. Even if/when do completely pull out I do hope we keep a sizable RPA force overhead to keep an eye on things.

No argument here. Google the Pub Money as a Weapon System. IMHO too much went to the Ministries in Kabul to distribute to the provinces not to the Provincial Governments directly. That meant that the kingmakers were the ministers in Kabul who funneled the money to the ones they favored. Of course giving it the to the Provincial Governments directly would have shifted the responsibility and headaches more on the US's shoulders but it would likely allow a little better oversight on where the money went. I seem to recall somewhere that about 60-70 percent of Afghanistan's budget came from foreign donors. Even India gave to curry some favor in Afghanistan and stick a finger in Pakistan's eye. Of course Congress here is anything but perfect with the power of the purse but we have a little better judicial system to stop the more blatant abuses. I do vividly recall an FBI agent who stated bribery is an acceptable business practice in Afghanistan but we in the US military will get the long course courtesy of the Federal Bureau of Prisons/Leavenworth if we do it.

No sir not at all. Only enough conventional force for the battlespace in and around the base to maintain security. Sorry I wasn't clearer. The downside to having discussions online versus in person. My overall goal would be to deny sanctuary/freedom of movement in the area to isis and their ilk with the minimum footprint. Keep them looking over their shoulder. I think if we had done more of this at the conclusion OIF rather than a complete withdrawal we might have stopped their takeover in the first place. That said I somewhat understand the SOFA agreement or lack of one forced our hand.

I agree you'll need some conventional forces to hold the battle space. I oversimplified a bit. I'm really saying stay away from the megafobs like Balad/LSA Anaconda. Keep the presence in more remote areas consistent with availability of a water supply etc. You'd need at least the capability to handle rotary assets and C130 type aircraft for resupply too. More remote ares also help keep the prying eyes of the locals out of your business. Absolutely on the burnout risk so save them for things like the Baghdadi mission and other HVT missions.

This. I've argued for a long time. Place RPAs over Iraq Syria and Afghanistan in as many numbers as we can muster. This avoids a large ground presence that pisses off the locals and denies the enemy our ground troops to target. Bad guys have hard time massing/moving in any real numbers without risking ordnance on their heads. No more Taliban public executions on the soccer field in Kabul without the threat of justice from above. I would say add a robust SpecOps presence in the regions to the mix as they can keep to a relatively small footprint but be available to do bad things to bad people.

Hypothetically speaking I think you're absolutely right. I think many have probably starting to carry very discreetly especially in states where the culture off base supports it. Like the great state of Texas and its surrounding neighbors. Again hypothetically speaking. The first responder to any crime is the victim.

Engaging the suspects in that crowded environment really should have been left to the guys with the long guns with proper sights (say red dot) and proper ammo. Handguns just aren't accurate enough in that situation and they'll probably keep finding rounds that went long all over the neighborhood for weeks. James Bond can probably bring down a helicopter at 300 yards with a PPK but most including myself aren't nearly that good. I thought I saw a couple cops with longer weapons in the video. I do know the UPS truck surely took a lot of shots and I don't know which side did the most damage but the lack of marksmanship appeared to be appalling. Not quite a (******) ambush but close. I'm sure they'll be a whole ton of lessons learned in the AAR/Investigation. My 0.02