Leaderboard

I happen to know a number of badass army dudes with a decade long track record of ballsy and successful operations. The problem isn't a lack of competant and qualified people, the problem is a system which views a front line SF team leader with dozens of deployments as less capable of higher rank than a never deployed staff officer with a masters from Harvard. Very similar to our AF problems.

Surprises or Wonders Never Cease... About a month ago, my wife surprised the absolute sh1t out of me by saying she wanted to get her CCW. This is after some years of practically calling me paranoid or a freudian gun nut for carrying, collecting, and shooting. So, who am I to argue? Set her up with a state-mandated CCW class which she took today. From what she described it was very much like the lowest-common denominator class that I took with another place when I got mine in Nebraska last year. Academics, test, basic qual on the range (essentially able to pull the trigger and make a hole appear on the paper target...) But, to add to this turn of events was her choice of handguns. We went shooting/shopping/trying different ones on Friday. From .22LR, .380, 9mm, we went through numerous guns trying to find what she liked and would actually shoot and carry. Naturally, my challenge was/is to not overwhelm with advice or even talking (since I'm only the husband), but eventually she came to the realization of a snub-nosed revolver due to ease of manual of arms. She did listen when I encouraged something larger than the .22 which she liked because of the no recoil. Being retired USAF, she had shot the Beretta M9 but hated it. Too big/heavy, too intimidating in the mass class that Big Blue runs, etc, etc, etc. And she went with a .38 special. I am not unhappy. So, I will be welcoming a S&W Model 642 Airweight into the family by next weekend after doing the on-line purchase and FFL transfer dance. Range report to follow.

In no way, shape, or form do I like the current CINC, or his administration, but this is so beyond stupid. It's crap like this that makes the GOP look like they're searching for any reason to belittle the President, thus hurting their own cause. There could be any number of reasons for the way people were in there. Pure speculation that hits no nail or even the board the nail was going in to. Talk about pandering to crazy old white men... Keep this crap up, and you might as well hand the dems a third term in the WH. ETA: there's about a thousand legit reasons to critique the guy. Why go after a made up one? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

To be fair, they have changed their name 7 times in the last 2 years.

Wait...what?

Our good friend Wikipedia says "The United States Coast Guard (USCG) is a branch of the United States Armed Forces and one of the country's seven uniformed services. The Coast Guard is a maritime, military, multi-mission service unique among the U.S. military branches for having a maritime law enforcement mission (with jurisdiction in both domestic and international waters) and a federal regulatory agency mission as part of its mission set. It operates under the Department of Homeland Security during peacetime, and can be transferred to the Department of the Navy by the President at any time, or by Congress during time of war." "I'm not saying your mother's a whore... I'm just saying she has sex with lots of people for money!" In between asking your question you threw out a lot of insults; I'm not a smart man, but I'm pretty certain that's what swanee was referring to.

Whether you like Mr. Beck or not I think he hits the nail on the head with a view I hadn't considered until this latest revelation.

They are commissioned officers. Treat them with the proper customs and courtesies that they rate as such. Don't be so short sighted and closed minded.

Interesting to note the hypocrisy as well; progressives weren't advocating that a homosexual first sergeant profess loudly his personal disdain for gay marriage a year ago..... No, no, they all thought it was a foul that he was forced to lie about himself just for a job. But now a heterosexual first sergeant must really and truly believe in the rules he administers, it's not enough to just do so competently, he needs to be a true believer or the thought police come after him. This isn't about equality, never was. This is about power eradicating other points of view. You can't argue with hypocrites, they'll always have a reason why it's ok to justify their way of operating. There will be more of this stuff, anytime I hear talk about tolerance it's always a cover for "give me power so I can be intolerant towards other beliefs."

Gotta love the "support mind, body, and soul" mantra for gay rights and marriages within the USAF being displayed. Ok, the rules now are it's all good and everyone's equal. Right, play by those rules or get out. Fair enough. But enthusiastically support, even in your private opinions, something you find objectionable? Being a professional is not good enough in that you carry out those rules despite any private thoughts on the matter? Did and would you make the same argument when gays were getting kicked out for being gay and the 1st Sgt was involved in that process and may have thought differently, i.e., "I don't agree with the 'no gays' rules, but I have to do my job." It appears that only one view is permissable, let alone acceptable now. 'Tolerance,' indeed. Off to 're-education' camp for you. Also regarding the "cheerleader" first sergeant theme: True, that individual is supposed to help sell the commander's, and Big Blue's, policies and rules to the troops (BTW, not just the enlisted). But he or she is also supposed to be the voice of the troops back to the commander: "Hey, boss, got a minute? Lemme close the door..." Sad what you think of them and sadder still if that is all you've experienced.

Those are just the potholes.

I guess someone has to kick in the doors of people the NSA is listening to. With tanks. In a residential neighborhood. Hopefully the get the right house. Surely they'd never kick down the wrong door with one of these things, right? They certainly wouldn't shoot an innocent man's dog after raiding the wrong apartment. And even if they did kill the family dog after busting into the wrong house, they'd never handcuff the kids and sit them next to the dog's corpse. I guess you just have a lot more faith in our government than I do. After watching the IRS used as a weapon against political enemies, and after seeing the NSA turned on every American who uses the internet or a cell phone, I'm a little wary of pairing those agencies up with this kind of firepower and putting it all in Eric Holder's hands. Call me paranoid if you want, but the few isolated terrorist attacks don't warrant the kind of power we've turned over to the government.

It takes me less time to log on to the crappy computer outside of ETAR AMCC and print my own paperwork than wait on them to do it. I simply call them, sit at the computer, get my sh!t, then call them back to let them know we're on our way and to please pass our block 10 to MOC. Worthless is an understatement.

This mantra gets rolled out every incident, maybe our crews are actually ######ing up? I'm tired of this attitude. We are professional aviators, when did we lose the ability to call people out? Every incident I hear the "it could happen to anyone crowd" fire up the propaganda machine. Sorry to burst your bubble, but it won't happen to me because I take my job seriously and still expect excellence out of my crew. These aren't act of god incidents, landing short, wrong airport, no gear are all pilot error. And before you say microburst, reference ground speed check, do we not look at this stuff anymore? *Waiting with my popcorn to find out how I'm going to eat crow on this one*

I don't always land at the right airport with the gear down, but when I do, I land short...