Leaderboard

I think the most important tribute any of us in the AF can make to men like Raz and of the AF's Vietnam warrior generation is to not allow the heritage they made (and which they carried on from the warriors who had gone before them) to die on the vine because of political correctness. I have a collection of about 60 years' worth of USAF songbooks, going all the way back to Korea. Warriors singing obscene songs -- despite what some might have you believe to further their own agendas -- is most certainly not some kind of recently-manufactured-invented heritage. Turns out, when warriors came back from risking their pink butts in MiG alley and killing enemies to freedom, they liked to unwind by drinking, smoking, and singing off-color songs.

Do you talk this much in real life?

Well there goes my appetite.

I think I'm gonna build one of these for when my wife spends too much time getting ready when I want to go out!

You think the majority of AF pilots don't already privately consider (via a combination of their motivations and aggregate actions) the AF the best paid regional airline? How much do you think the going rate for civilian pylet is at a regional? The majority of people didn't join the AF pilot ranks to pursue non-flying employment the day after their initial commitment. It is what it is. This is at the heart of the tragedy of the common AF pilot. I'm not particularly interested in the particulars of the Army WO program, I just wanted to use it to illustrate that limiting AF pilots access to a technician track has done jack shit to help with the leadership deficit. As such, the 'up or out' is a fucking failure. In the ARC side of the house they have started with the business of "vectoring" people who check a box in vPC-GR saying "I want my career managed for senior leadership". I think that's great. Unfortunately the rest of the ARC is still expected to act AD-Lite and jump through the PME 9th grade intelligence-regressing content, but that could be changed. If the 'vectoring' implementation had more teeth to it, volunteering to be vectored would keep the vast majority of AF pilots concentrating on their SQ level progressions and leave the senior level stuff outside of the spectrum of "flying planes, fvckin and earning a check". As an added, the OPR system would almost instantly see a natural grade deflation that could now be better suited to have the kind of visible graduations required to stratify few people for few jobs as opposed to a whole bunch of OPR-clones for the same few jobs. The savings on PME/AAD/AT/school TDYs would be significant as well, if fiscal restraint is of consequence to you. But the system has too much inertia to let that happen. As such and as you see displayed in the attitudes of many on here, nobody will sidestep their personal motivations in order to attempt to change something for the benefit of their peers and at the cost of his/her job/vocational satisfaction. Look, keeping somebody at Major for the price of "we won't fuck with you" is an incredible motivator for the majority of these AF pylet types. I could be so brazen as to suggest O-3 caps and you'd still have takers, though the numbers would dwindle due to what I call "all AF wives are O-5 wives" syndrome, but that's for another thread. There really isn't any decent reason to write off the technician track so flippantly as the AF does. You'll never get quality out of somebody who doesn't want to be there. This is basic dynamics of rational motivators. Why pay through the nose for said deficit?

I think nobody in this forum gives a shit because changing the PCSM algorithm is about as relevant as changing the SAT.

Agree with your post. I think the problem most of us have with this policy is the inevitable problems that will arise upon injecting jaded females into these types of environments. What happens when a female gets half of her pushups or sit-ups counted? Yep, she was treated unfairly because she's a female and gets a pass. What happens when she fails because her peer evals suck? Yep, she was discriminated against by the majority for being a female trying to break into a male dominate career and gets a pass. We agree, it is extremely unlikely that women will pass these tests in significant enough numbers to make a difference either way -- so why introduce the problems? Why, yet again, do we have to bend the masses to pander to the extreme few? Why invite all of the problems that history tells us are certain to arise? I'm not opposed to progress, but I'm also a fan of the liberal application of common sense.

THANK YOU! Worked like a charm and I can finally enjoy the forum again. PM me your address and I'll drop that crisp $5 in the mail! BTW, I was able to make it through all the remaining 9 pages of this thread in no time after cutting out pages of liberal drivel.

It's a miracle he made Major with that mustache. Had he had the chance, what do you suppose he'd tell the Chief of Staff and TSgt Smith about banning songbooks?

Hacker, thanks for posting that. I went through 3rd Lieutenant's program June or July 1984 with the AT-38's there. I know his name from somewhere, and am guessing this might be the place.

Bitches be crazy. I don't want to understand them. They understand each other, and hate each other.

Agreed in principle, but if you can't come up with 20%, you need to compare the funding fee to the cost of PMI to get an apples-to-apples look. If you can't qualify for a conventional at all, then VA may be your best/only option (assuming you're set on buying vs renting). However... talk to the right lender (hint: not USAA), because no one's paying funding fees out of pocket right now (see the VA thread that Buenos Diaz referenced). Rates are essentially as low as they can go right now, which has had the effect that the lenders have extra money on the table. Prior to the mortgage melt-down, that could be returned to the borrower as cash ("negative" points); can't do that directly any more, but that money can be used to cover closing costs--to include VA funding fees....

Everyone seems to be using 'combat' as a blanket term. There's really a big difference between Spc. Joe Schmuck support person who gets in a firefight, and Spc. Tommy Toughnuts infantryman who walks around all day looking for a fight. I have a female friend from the Army who had been attacked on convoys in Iraq and had people shooting at her, and she shot back. That's combat, no doubt. I also have friends who were infantry, and a couple who were Rangers. One of them spent 18 months straight in Afghanistan dragging a sniper rifle up and down mountains, setting up ambushes and attacking Taliban. One of my Ranger buddies was in Iraq breaking into buildings and chasing down people in the streets and arresting them. All these people 'served in combat', but it's a big frickin difference. My female buddy was totally competent in her MOS, passed her PT tests no problem, and was generally one of the more squared away people in our unit. I was glad she was in my squad (we were marksmanship instructors in this unit mind you, not infantry). BUT I can tell you there's no way in hell she could have physically done what my infantry friends did day in and day out. That's just one example I guess, but something to think about. edit: spellinz

Amen, all things being equal, I'd rather have the gas.

Update: Lakenheath: 100 copies on their way c/o 494FS Panthers Beale: 50 copies on their way Hill: 50 copies on their way to 4FS, 25 to 466FS Cannon: Quantity TBC for SOF Nellis: Quantity TBC DM: Quantity TBC for 355FS Columbus - 25 copies on their way + 41 copies for 41FTS Tyndall - 20 copies on their way AK - Quantity TBC Dyess - 10 copies on their way Remaining copies: approx 75 True. I asked Ed Rasimus to review it. To paraphrase, he said 'Fine. So long as you know that I'll probably end up saying that it's shit. Most of these books are'. Here's what he actually wrote:

Just as an aside, the book Steve is giving away is an excellent read -- a first person account of flying a Thud mission in Vietnam.

Very, very sad. I considered Raz one of my mentors, having started to correspond with him in the late 90s via the old rec-aviation-military USEnet newsgroups, where Raz was a frequent poster. I corresponded with him frequently then, and continued to do so for years as I went to UPT and became a fighter pilot myself, including some very poignant conversations while I was deployed for OIF during Shock and Awe in 2003. Those of you that have heard the "A Night At The Bar With The Boys" CD of fighter pilot songs mentions Raz by name as one of the old-school songmeisters. Great fighter pilot...wrote some fantastic books....someone who will be righteously missed. How'd he go? Here's an excerpt from the old 435th FTS doofer book (RIP doofer books, too...) from the days when Raz was an AT-38B LIFT instructor at Holloman.

Ras is one of the "featured" LT's seen returning from his 100th North Vietnam F-105 mission in the USAF documentary "There is a Way".

Hey all, long time lurker, thought I’d join up for this thread. A few questions for NSplayr: You say that “I value equality of opportunity and don't support limitations based on gender or sexual orientation or race or whatever. That's the root of it and why I think it's the right thing to do.” OK fine. Then why not disabled people? We don’t even let them apply to the military. Are they not as patriotic as other Americans who can serve? Can you provide me a rational explanation, based on your logic of allowing women to serve in infantry units, why handicapped people cannot? As long as a handicapped individual, whatever ailment they have, can meet some minimum physical standard they should be allowed in, right? Why should they be excluded from the top tiers of military leadership because of some condition that is not their fault? And we should ignore whatever cost is involved with accommodating them because we don’t want to infringe on ‘equality of opportunity’. What about old people? I’m sure there are many patriotic 60 year old men who could probably pass the MINIMUM standards for infantry service. Shouldn’t we allow them the equality of opportunity as well? Is it their fault they’re old? Why should we discriminate against them? Many European countries have lots of older people in their militaries, shouldn’t we follow their lead? I’m pretty sure the average 60 year old man is tougher and stronger than the average 20 year old woman, why not give them a shot? These questions are not reductions to the absurd. I think allowing women, elderly, and disabled people into the infantry is entirely consistent with all of your arguments above. Remember, according to you, we have to at least give them the opportunity. How is not having “a penis between your legs” (your dim idea, not mine) any different than having gray hair or too many skin wrinkles? Does a liberal’s desire to have an effective national defense ever exceed their desire for equality? You also believe that because a politician has stated that “standards will not be lowered” therefore this will be true and standards will never be lowered. Where have you been living? In your time observing politics you haven’t developed any cynicism? No amount of pork-barrel spending, illegal immigration for votes, gerrymandering, farm bills, spending cuts that are actually increases and temporary taxes that become permanent have led you to realize that our politicians are not honest and do not have a selfless desire for our nation to succeed and prosper? Standards will be lowered, politicians will push Generals for results, it will cost more, our infantry will be weaker. The first female infantry soldier will appear on Oprah and President Obama will shake her hand in the oval office along with a bunch of other liberals and the media will gush about how tough she looks and how she could probably beat up Matt Lauer. It will be a proud moment for liberal america.

Goddammit. It's not about a fucking career, dipshit. It's about serving your country the most effective way possible. What is in the best interest of our country? Having snake eaters that kill people and break their shit, or lowering the standards so that people can "pursue the career of their dreams."? This would be all well and good if we had equal standards across the board, but we don't. Last I checked, a woman could run the 1.5 two minutes slower than me and get a better score. Fine, let her work in finance where no one gives a fuck, but the dudes kicking in doors don't have that luxury. Not being able to carry your weight (or the weight of a fallen comrade) is a liability. Have you seen some of the shit those dudes did in the mountains of Afghanistan? It really makes NFL/NHL players look like pussies. Being able to hack it is the difference between life and death, not just mission success or failure. On a different note, men and women are different. That's not bad, or good. That's just a fact of life. Men are built to fight, hunt, and kill. Women are not. Men don't worry about "mensies" at certain times of the month. And most importantly - the enemy is ruthless. They won't treat men and women the same in POW situations. Yeah, maybe guys can get raped in the Hanoi hilton, but they sure as shit can't get pregnant from it. It's one thing to see one of your bros go through that. But the men fight so the women don't have to. It's a natural survival instinct. Propagation of the species and all that crap. I cringe at the idea of what the Taliban or Al Qaeda or the North Koreans would do to women captives. It's just not right.

I think the most interesting part about that video is that they actually call their nav's CSOs.