Leaderboard

Animal, I haven't read the T.K. book, but I'll put it on my list. My last thought here, but I'll keep monitoring. There are a ton of numbers being dissected daily at the Pentagon. Additionally, those numbers are being examined by your peers; fighter guys, heavy guys, helos, RPA, mx, cyber...EVERYONE is represented. These folks have been in the fight the last 12 years; only recently have most of them entered the staff world. They understand your pain, and they're doing their best to work the mission and the people. Occasionally mistakes happen, but a vast majority of the decisions being made are the right ones for the right reasons. However, keep posting ideas here on all of these topics, because your innovative idea might be seen by an AO and run up the chain to the highest levels. If you're on here just to complain, I can understand some of that, but find time in your day to reflect on why you're unhappy, and if it's institutional rather than personal, come up with solutions, keep posting here, and work it through your chain if able. Re: the bonus, it really is simple: am I willing to continue to serve in uniform for the next x number of years in any position the Air Force throws my way (to include a potential 365- you should always tell your spouse to expect one 365 at some point in your career, and if it doesn't happen, good for you) AND HAVE A GOOD ATTITUDE DOING IT (no matter what "it" is). If the answer is no, you'll be fine- officers are extremely talented--go chase your dreams; a heart felt "thank you" for your service from the bottom of my heart. If the answer is yes, sign the papers, go out there and LEAD! YOU will directly influence whether your airmen have a good day or bad, just through your attitude and leadership. This holds true if you're supervising one or 100- trust me, I've done both. If you see problems, try to fix them. But don't be a "woe is me, my life sucks" obstacle. We have far too many O-4s and O-5s like that now. If you can't do this, please don't sign the bonus. Thank you for your service. Young guys...this is an amazing Air Force with amazing opportunities- dream big, do your primary job to the absolute best of your ability WITH a good attitude, and watch how doors start to open for you. And if you ever end up on the "wrong side of the ledger" on an issue, don't take it personally- the Air Force is doing what it must to stay the best that ever existed. Sit down with your family and make your decisions together, with an eye on the future, not on past wrongs. And, when you decide to leave...thank you for your service. Keep the faith.

Grandfather = "Greatest Generation. I'm good...

It's not supposed to be up for debate, regardless of how her constituents feel about the 2nd Amendment. I respect her military service and appreciate that she stands on her principles...but she, like almost all politicians, have selective outrage and are hypocrites. Just realize that they don't truly care about your Liberty when it's in conflict with their ideology.

They most definitely had the right to be offended by integration. It's acting out on those beliefs in a discriminatory way that crosses the line. Like the man said, equal rights is a two way street and people seem to forget that. If you want to be gay have at it, but I don't have to like it nor should I be forced to "see" it. Kinda like non-Christians being offended by Christmas trees, crosses, etc and getting those items removed from public areas.

Depends. Was the OP uncomfortable because the troop was gay? Or was he uncomfortable because, along with the uniform violations, many would consider the over the top effeminateness to be inconsistent with acceptable military bearing? I don't have any problem whatsoever with gay troops. I have a huge problem if any group is going to be held to a different standard (and yes, this includes different PT standards for women).

You might not consider yourself an idiot but you are. If you believe it is a phobia for a man to be uncomfortable around another man who is hyper-effemenite then you are pretty far down the road of idiocy.

Don't get me wrong, but that was the kind of comment that virtually everyone on here would have cheered until a senior leader showed up. I pretty much agree that that attitude is bad overall, but I find it funny that a bunch of people who three days ago were super cynical are now jumping all over themselves to appear in agreement with a guy who claims to be in a high level position. I also believe in allowing people to change their minds when presented with a logical "other side" of the coin. I'm not saying Chang and Liquid aren't the real deal, and I find the info they're putting out there very, to be redundant, informative. I do remember though, that this is an Internet forum. I'll take the nuggets they're giving us, apply some common sense, pass it through my AF propaganda filter, and try to then make educated decisions based on what passes those litmus tests. Some things they're saying pass muster, some seem like leadership that still just doesn't want to admit just how bad their predecessors let the situation get. I hope everything their saying is on target. I don't believe they'd lie to us. Not intentionally anyway.

If this is going to be an argument over the sanctity of marriage, defined by Christianity, then we need to also stop atheists, agnostics, Unitarian Universalists, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, celebrities et al from getting married. I have atheist friends that got married in a church, and nobody had a problem with that. The bottom line is that as much as some of you guys claim, marriage is not a religious matter, unless you practice a religion. To everyone else, it is really just a legal contract. When I got married in a courthouse in CA, there was nothing religious about it. Hell in my Oath of Office I said God more times than my marriage ceremony. When we later did our church wedding, it was a religious event that had a lot of meaning for everyone involved. But I had been legally married for almost a year by then. As a Christian the last thing in the world I want is for the Church or Bible to dictate our laws. There are places where that's the case: Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan...and women are stoned for being raped. Sure it's nice that Christianity is the dominant religion now, but what happens in 30 years when it's not? I completely understand freedom of religion not freedom from religion, but religious freedom stops the moment you try to control the freedom of others by projecting your religious beliefs on them.

You mean all those guys who had multiple wives in the bible? Sure sounds like that's exactly how ancient Judaism defined it.

I haven't ran into this, yet..... But I can be as unconfortable as is want to be if I am, homophobic or not. I can be offended or not at my choosing, I can be disgusted or not at my choosing. If they can be, I can be, that is equal rights....this cannot be a one way street.

Nice work. It is too bad that she doesn't believe that we peasants are worthy to own an AR-15. https://startingpoint...arget-practice/

I'm against gay marriage (Wow! Did he just say that?). That should have been pretty obvious already smart guy. The argument against gay marriage has been very well documented and I'm not going to regurgitate it for your understanding. You simply choose not to listen and fall back on the common liberal tactic of belittling your opponents discussion: "playbook has been whittled away." Now we are stuck with the illegitimate decisions of the SCOTUS Prop 8/DOMA ruling. You can read Scalia's dissent for a real decision. I am not the one that brought up bestiality and inanimate objects into this discussion but thanks for putting those words in my mouth. I was specifically discussing polygamy and incest which involves consenting adults. And YES, I will look at you same sex marriage advocates and homosexuals in the eye and ask "Why is it okay for you to marry another person of the same sex yet not allow someone who loves multiple people to wed?" Again, if loving someone else is the sole criterion for marriage then how can you dare deny others that same right? Perhaps you belittle that argument because you realize it reveals your hypocrisy regarding civil rights. What it boils down to is that we draw a different line in the sand between right (male and female; the natural law of mankind that led to the creation of you and me) and wrong (everything else). The sad thing is that you are willing to fudge that gray area and deny the "rights" of other people's sexual desires yet insist that we are the ones that are close-minded. At least Vertigo is consistent and not a hypocrite. Finally, for your edification regarding the flawed 50% divorce stat: https://psychcentral....-divorce/all/1/

Maybe use a darker shade of pink?

Ummmm... got it; so box checking at specific gates to attain a completely useless AAD at taxpayer expense equates directly to getting promoted early and O-6! It also seems that you equate the Masters degree from IDE to being even more useless than the ERAU Masters he got in the box checking process. If you say that being selected for IDE guarantees both a Masters and PME then how do you justify the all but unwritten requirement to have both completed before then? You said yourself that in order to progress past O-5 you need both done prior to IDE. In times of massive budget cuts, sequestration and furloughs I'd love to hear from the perspective of someone more senior than 95% of the guys in this forum and sitting up at the Pentagon how you justify that expense for the sake of box checking? Serious question! There are very few people on here that have heard a valid reason from AF leaders for us to continue funding diploma factories. Do you have one? In fact I'd venture to say that there is a vast majority of folks here who got the same talk from their bosses that I did, "I know it is stupid, but just knock it out to check the box so you don't close any doors." I've heard the "educated force" reasoning countless times from GOs, but I can say without exaggerating at all that my AAD "education" was probably the equivalent of high school level academics. The really scary thing is that even though you will get a large percent of officers ranging from O-1 to even O-10 (reference Gen Jumper) including almost every Sq CC and OG CC I've had in the past 10 yrs who thinks this is either a useless requirement or a distraction, but when Maul complains about it your reaction to him not falling in line is, "...do us all a favor and leave at the 20 year mark. Thanks for your service." One of my past DOs is an O-7 now and a few months ago he was telling me about how much of a colossal waste of time and money he thinks AADs from online schools for box checking are for our officer corps... should he have done us all a favor and left at the 20 year mark too???

I love this.

You know what else gets annoying... "leaders" at the Pentagon telling the guys who are trying to actually do the job how "misguided and wrong" they are. I like to hear the perspective from guys like Chang, but when I see statements talking about all the guys at the Pentagon making these decisions saying they have been in the field for the past 12 years, well it just isn't true. For example... a recent Sq CC of mine was a 2 BPZ guy who went from a first tour pilot in one MWS to early staff to Intern (real Masters paid for by big blue BTW) to a qual in my MWS (about 18 months on station and managed to become an IP in that time after only being an AC in his first MWS... hmmmm) before shipping off to SAASS followed by another staff tour at the Pentagon for 2-3 yrs and then straight to being a flying Sq CC. No doubt a sharp guy, but don't tell me that this guys has been in the fight for the past 12 years... he hasn't! Was he smart... yup! Was he a leader... not even close! Less than 2 yrs on station and off he went. Don't get me wrong, he was a nice guy and a good manager of the Squadron... but if I had to list in order all the pilots in the Sq I'd want to fly into combat with he would have been in the bottom 25% for sure. If I were a betting man I'd say that a lot of the guys at the Pentagon that Chang is talking about who are making these decisions and running these numbers have similar resumes as the Sq CC I was talking about... in fact he is actually one of them right now (again). We certainly need guys like that, but being smart and knowing doctrine really well doesn't mean you "get it". Like I said in a previous post... guys like that a who were those super fast burners a few years ago were the ones who made the decisions that put us in the situation we are in now. I'll bet they thought they had it right back then too...

Because their lawn would be nicer than yours.

Yeah, my timing is off--damn it, I was wrong, my bad. I knew it was practiced in times of David, etc but I thought Jewish law had outlawed polygamy by the time of Christ (ie ancient Judaism) because the Romans were't really cool with polygamy. Further research (ie google) gives a more common answer of 1000 AD and also of note, polygamy wasn't non-existent in the very beginning of the Christian Church. Thanks for the correction.

Because the fighter community doesn't need (or want, just in my opinion) a bunch of senior capt or maj selects showing up as wingman to their squadrons with no experience, and preds isn't experience in a fighter.

I hope every straight E marries their roommate, moves into a sweet place, and splits the increase in BAH. Following rules for personal gain is nothing to be frowned upon. People get butthurt because Apple evades taxes, but it's legal. As Rainman would say (although probably not about this), know the threat and notch accordingly. And to stir the pot some more, I'm willing to bet a bottle of Makers that 90% of people here against gay marriage follow some form of Judeo-Christian religion.

You mean the one who screams at you for not calling PINAX?

Well said HOSS. To take it a step further, you guys realize you don't have to become gay now and marry a man right? I'm not really sure how this even affects you. I didn't want to marry a man, so I married a woman. If my neighbor wants to marry his boyfriend how the fuck does that affect my wife and I? And what if a gay couple adopts a child? Are you guys going to go out and adopt that child in the orphanage to stop that? I'd rather live in a gay home with loving parents than an orphanage if I were a kid.

Yup... and there are lots of parts to that machine. Seems to me that we spend lots of time waxing/polishing the hood to make sure we look good (AADs, PME in COR, inflated OPRs), but completely ignore what is under the hood (Being good at your primary job, family life, actual leadership). Very few young pilots are looking towards the 2 BPZ Intern Sq CC for mentorship... they are looking at that crusty Maj or Lt Col crew dawg. They are also taking a very close look at how those crusty old guys are treated by "the machine". Big Blue hasn't treated them very well over the past few years and the VSP/RIF fiasco for the mid level guys only made things worse. You want to tell the "leadership" in DC how they can help things get better with retention for pilots? Stop making pilots feel like they have to apologize for wanting to actually be a pilot and for wanting to be good at it. Stop making every pilot feel they have to lie to their boss by pretending they want to be the CSAF or their career will be over as a Capt. Stop associating crew position with promotion (gotta send him to IP school because his PRF is coming up). Just to name a few... How about this... US Air?!? Better??? Once again... completely missing the point!

You and I must have been in the same UPT class. It freaks me out that somebody would keep track of numbers like this. I hope I'm not on your bad list. (j/k)

Rusty, Lots of officers are trolling this site that you wouldn't expect to be. The site itself has been around and thriving for what, 14 years? Back when I was flying the line, I loved the tools that baseops.net provided. It only stands to reason that officers who found utility in the site during the early 2000's would have naturally migrated over to the forums in recent years to see what crew dogs are complaining about. Generally good entertainment. Like the majority of folks, I logged in for quite a while as a guest, content to read the threads for insight and fun. However, seeing your frustrated post a couple of days ago on this thread caused me to come out of the shadows and give my thoughts, much like what happened with Liquid in the Promotions forum. The Air Force is an amazing organization with absolutely top-tier talent, as Animal alluded to, but it is a government organization, not a club, and it will move forward like a machine. Sometimes you benefit, sometimes you get screwed; in the end, if it's not about the service and you get screwed, you will naturally get emotional and negative, and you'll end up leaving the Air Force frustrated, pissed off, and killing the attitudes of many subordinates along the way who look up to you for guidance and mentorship.

My guess is this is a good "pulse" for those in the building to check. Honest feedback that could never really be attained by talking to people face to face during a dog and pony show visit. All it takes is a browser, and you've got an instantaneous reaction to nearly all AF decisions. It's also a great way to get a senior perspective out to the masses. How many bases/squadrons are represented here? A ton. Liquid and Gen C post inside gouge, and the rest of us take it around our squadrons. One personal recommendation for a business is worth millions of dollars in advertising. Whatever the reason, I think the relationship could continue to be symbiotic. Edit: Fat fingers, small iPhone.

FIFY

We didn't redefine marriage. The church did. Marriage was around before Christianity. The rest of your post is right. A contract between two or more consenting adults should be honored if the government is going to be in that business.

Yes. It is written in most standards that when a pilot is sanitized during mission planning and debrief, they can not be bothered with other tasks.

But it works for fucking marriage licenses. You guys are being ridiculous here. So who among us here has had their marriage declared null and void just because the state you're stationed in doesn't do things exactly like the state of your residency, or where your marriage was executed? It hasn't happened.

Baseops is educational as well as featuring breasts...

Perhaps some of the issues will be satisfied by the "home of record" process the military has. So, if one half of a gay marriage dies then the state with "home of record" would deal will issues related to the marriage. Assuming, of course, that the home of record is the state which conducted the gay marriage.

It sounds like you have a pretty balanced view, but the Air Force of late does not. I'll give you an example: As I've stated publicly, I am of the opinion that women should not be in combat roles. I also let the f-bomb drop from time to time. I'm sure some women at work have heard me say it, although definitely not directed at them. During the last SAPR training we received, we were briefed that cursing creates a "hostile sexual work environment", which is a form of sexual harassment. See what they did there? Men who don't agree with woman in combat + dropping the F-bomb = Sexual harassers who degrade women because they doesn't feel they're equal. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I curse, drink, sing fighter pilots songs and raise hell from time to time as generations of fighter pilots have for decades because it goes with the territory. The ideal of the warrior monk is a nice idea, but it just ain't realistic. Warriors will find ways to deal with war as they always have. As for women in combat, my view is that combat effectiveness is more valuable than pandering to the wishes of a very small segment of society (women who want to be in combat roles). I have yet to hear an effective argument for how women in combat units can increase effectiveness. But at the end of the day, the feminist lobby and their friends are interested only in the emasculation of men, and the Air Force continues to find new ways to reach that goal. Regardless of what popular culture says, I believe there is value in men defending and protecting their wives, their children, their country. The idea of a woman being blown apart on a battle field is revolting. What would happen to them in the hands of the enemy is even worse. Where did we go so wrong as a country to believe that women would be elevated by putting them in foxholes?

Tasteless post removed.

We are now talking fucking airman BTZ promotions. Can we just lock the thread already?

My thoughts as an 11F after 20+ in the AF: - Promotions up to Lt Col generally get it right. But occasionally blows it big time. - Continuing education SHOULD be a good thing...implementation in the form of our current slate of PME offerings is horrible and is NOT continuing education. After IDE in res (after correspondence of course!) and SDE correspondence, all 3 programs, IMO, were years behind the times, taught by out of touch, irrelevant instructors, using terrible courseware. Each felt like a huge waste of time. - Command selection process at the Squadron level leaves a LOT to be desired. Many good, far too many bad. The good seem to retire afterwards at too high a rate. My reaction of "WTF?" happens WAY too often. Too many baffling picks for Sq/CC in the CAF. Same holds true for OGs and FW/CCs, many good but still too many not. How do the crappy ones continue on when their Groups and Wings can't stand them? At the Squadron level, too many GO-directed disruptions of 'gameplans' to ensure 'their guy' got hooked up. - Too much career risk-aversion from senior leadership. Too much unwillingness to do the right thing for fear of what might happen to them if doesn't turn out roses. So many missed opportunities because someone with Stars was unwilling to trust their subordinates... - SOS DG after a 7 week program as a young Captain carries WAY too much weight in a career. Guys ride that strat all the way to Squadron Command! Crazy. - Combat experience SHOULD be a discriminator. Unfortunately, our "system" has passed out combat medals for the most mundane stuff diluting their significance. - AADs add nothing to the experience and if the AF feels they are necessary for senior command, they should send you to get one after a squadron command tour. I have my ERAU degree and it is useless outside the AF. Aerospace Technology? I think I was able to re-use the same paper 3 times. I was just trying to get through and survive the load flying the line at work, keeping the family happy (failed) and chugging through the masters at the same time. Having guys flying the line, going through IPUG, working scheduling in an undermanned squadron while attending night or online classes is stupid. Family is so important to the AF? People are our biggest asset? Bullshit. The AAD is too important to the machine. Get it or get out. Your family will understand...makes me fume! Actually stood in a FS MBR and heard a General tell one of our pilots that he just wasn't good enough at time management if he couldn't juggle everything. We thought he was joking. He was dead serious. YGBFSM. - Good leaders and pilots punch out way too early because the requirements of the machine are too onerous. And then there are the 365 iTDYs... Really? To WHERE??? I've seen way too many guys bail who would have been great for the AF. Too bad. At least the Guard got their talents. I sound bitter. I'm really not. I was offered command "opportunities" but they didn't match up with my family QOL requirements so I bowed out. And I'm very happy about it. But my list of observations about the AF machine still frustrate me on a daily basis.

Don't read this unless you've seen the new Star Trek movie. If you have...laugh away.