Jump to content
Baseops Forums
M2

STRATCOM Has a Sense of Humor, but No Balls

Recommended Posts

The snowflakes (and CNN) get triggered by a humorous tweet, so STRATCOM pulls it (STS).  Pussies.

Quote

Military Tweets About Dropping Bombs On New Years, Internet Explodes

In a since-deleted tweet, U.S. Strategic Command caused a bit of a stir after they blasted out a New Year's Eve message playing on the "ball drop" tradition.

U.S. Strategic Command, the unified command that oversees global strikes and strategic deterrence, joined in the holiday celebration Monday with a tweet one Democratic member of the House Armed Services Committee decried as "tacky" and some particularly outraged folks online said made them feel "unsafe."

"#Times Square tradition rings in the #NewYear by dropping the big ball...if ever needed, we are #ready to drop something much, much bigger," U.S. Strategic Command tweeted from its official account... (Rest of article at title link)

us_strategic_command_tweet.jpg

 


 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, herkbum said:

I am so tired of this PC culture. They literally tweeted about what they get paid for and people freak out.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Sadly this is nothing new and hopefully the USSTRATCOM CC doesn't get shit-canned over this. I remember when USAF Chief of Staff General Dugan was fired in 1990 for what I considered an appropriate level of "smack talk". 

General Dugan got fired for stating the following/excerpt;  "He stated that the U.S. military had plans to bomb Baghdad relentlessly and "decapitate" the Iraqi leadership by targeting Hussein personally, along with his family, his senior commanders, his palace guard and even his mistress."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" We train young men to drop fire on people, but their commanders won't allow them to write "f*ck" on their airplanes because it's obscene! "

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...some particularly outraged folks online said made them feel "unsafe."

Yeah, welcome to the real world, there are bad guys out there.  Geezus...Heaven forbid we ever have to fight WWIII, because with this PC, thin skinned, hipster latte swigging generation, we might as well just throw in the towel now.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, 08Dawg said:

"...some particularly outraged folks online said made them feel "unsafe."

Yeah, welcome to the real world, there are bad guys out there.  Geezus...Heaven forbid we ever have to fight WWIII, because with this PC, thin skinned, hipster latte swigging generation, we might as well just throw in the towel now.

America will adapt. Hipsters are just bottling up their rage right right now.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hopeful that this PC culture is about to experience a massive backlash. If the momentum the "intellectual dark web" movement is gaining with people like Sam Harris, Eric Weinstein, Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin, etc, is any indication, we'll soon be able to relax a little.

Edited by torqued
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm hopeful that this PC culture is about to experience a massive backlash. If the momentum the "intellectual dark web" movement is gaining with people like Sam Harris, Eric Weinstein, Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin, etc, is any indication, we'll soon be able to relax a little.
It's a good sign, but as Rubin says, it'll get much worse before it gets better
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The worst part about this is not that some snowflakes got all offended, but that the Air Force caved to them and took it down. And then put up a weak apology post...

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Women, somewhat ironically, will straighten all this PC stuff out. When they sense a threat, they seek out protectors. When the nation and our existence seems threatened, they’ll be the first to demand men that defend them. The men’s attitudes lag a little, but the vast majority will adjust and go fight or risk not having a mate. 

IMO, it’s all just monkey group behavior.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Women, somewhat ironically, will straighten all this PC stuff out. When they sense a threat, they seek out protectors. When the nation and our existence seems threatened, they’ll be the first to demand men that defend them. The men’s attitudes lag a little, but the vast majority will adjust and go fight or risk not having a mate. 
IMO, it’s all just monkey group behavior.

Isn’t that the title of the topic and what we are talking about? No Balls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Majestik Møøse said:

When they sense a threat, they seek out protectors. When the nation and our existence seems threatened, they’ll be the first to demand men that defend them. 

Sounds like something Peterson has said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds like something Peterson has said. 
Well that man might be the hero we need but don't deserve. He's hitting his stride now, and like he was saying two years ago, this is where he'll implode if he's not as strong as the impossible situation he's been called to demands.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

Uhhh, wtf are you guys talking about?

Start here at 21:35, then watch the entire interview:

Then here:

Then checkout the Sam Harris and Joe Rogan Experience podcasts with Peterson, Weinstein, Dave Atilla, etc.

Edited by torqued

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jordan Peterson is the Noam Chomsky of what passes for conservatism these days. He may have once been a reputable academic psychologist, but at this point he's just another outrage salesman telling people what they want to be pissed off about.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not particularly conservative.  Like much of the internet, too many dumb people just listen to what other dumb people say about topics/people and draw the same conclusion they had from the beginning.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is taking a wild and crazy voyage.

I offer this piece of gold for the New Years Nukes turned Back to the Kitchen exhibit.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Disco_Nav963 said:

Jordan Peterson is the Noam Chomsky of what passes for conservatism these days. He may have once been a reputable academic psychologist, but at this point he's just another outrage salesman telling people what they want to be pissed off about.

Totally disagree. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2019 at 1:30 AM, waveshaper said:

Sadly this is nothing new and hopefully the USSTRATCOM CC doesn't get shit-canned over this. I remember when USAF Chief of Staff General Dugan was fired in 1990 for what I considered an appropriate level of "smack talk". 

General Dugan got fired for stating the following/excerpt;  "He stated that the U.S. military had plans to bomb Baghdad relentlessly and "decapitate" the Iraqi leadership by targeting Hussein personally, along with his family, his senior commanders, his palace guard and even his mistress."

So I'm going to make some conjecture here but I'm willing to bet he was actually fired for openly stating on national TV that the US had plans to assassinate a foreign head of state which is commonly interpreted as perfidy under IHL and the Hague conventions. This was an extremely sensitive subject at the time, as was bombing of Gadaffi in Libya. Assassinating a foreign head of state is also a violation of executive order #11095. I just learned about this recently in an ethics course I took but the US was so concerned about how the world would look at the targeted killings of Ghadaffi and Hussein that they struggled to find nearby military targets to justify the strikes. The situation was illuminate further when one of the C2 compounds we thought Saddam was in was actually a bunker protecting his and other high ranking families, and had no actual members of government or the military in it. 

I wont debate the morality of it here but I was surprised to learn the taboo against assassination was really really strong all the way up until about the year 2000, and only recently, has it started to shift. 

Edited by FLEA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol I can see how that firing went...

Dugan: why am I being fired?

Brass:  You admitted that we fully intend to break a bunch of laws/executive orders.

Dugan: well that's exactly what we're doing.  

Brass:. Well...ya...but that's beside the point.

Dugan : ...........

Ethics rep:  Hey guys, whatcha talking about?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just a kid back during Gulf I, but I remember during OIF in 2003 that Saddam was the head of the Iraqi military and thus a legitimate target. I mean, the guy paraded around in military uniform quite a bit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, DirkDiggler said:

Why the fuck is STRATCOM tweeting at all?

Testing the lines for a new method of EAM dissemination. 

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×