Leaderboard

Great American, fighter pilot and friend. He'll be greatly missed.

Is is ok to try to stop people from breaking the law to sell Americans things they want? Yes - reference illegal drugs, fake / counterfeit / stolen goods / child pornography / etc... and spending billions of dollars is one of the ways we keep an orderly law abiding society where your freedoms, property and personal protection are provided. The law and order argument or a society with the rule of law is the real reason for our prosperity and hence the reason why everyone wants to come here or other countries with strong rule of law / low corruption, which is basically the opposite of their nations. If you ignore the law and just shrug when it is broken very soon you will be just like the countries these people flee from. The free market is great but it only exists when it has a place where rules are enforced and standards are universally applied. Disregard it and we will inevitably decline to place where factions impose their will on others other than by the rule of law adopted and applied thru democratic means with boundaries to protect minority political views and ensure basic rights. You assume that one these people will contribute more in taxes than they will receive in services, that is highly unlikely as they are likely to be in low wage occupations, have a higher chance due to the nature of their occupations to become disabled, use more services than the native population as they immigrate and establish themselves in the US and yes, if leaders, cultural and political, from countries where people come from say hostile things not only "mean" to the US but to Western Civilization we should think twice about allowing large numbers of them in. It is naïve to an extreme to believe there is not some residual affinity for the mother country and it's culture / politics. Not racist but realistic, societies particularly free & tolerant ones are fragile things in reality and can be damaged easily, we need to be very prudent and cautious with ours. As to excluding people from around the world from the American Dream, not everyone can come here. We have finite opportunities and finite ability to absorb and it is not me by myself to decide that but us as a nation thru our democratic process. More jobs not less are going to become automated, we have enormous amounts of our own population we callously gave up on and a tight labor market is better for more people in a nation rather than a saturation of workers putting a disproportionate amount of power in the hands of employers.

Conditionally approved yesterday. 11m asking 5 months 13 days off, submitted for the second time in February. Gotta find a job in 60 days.

Island time is no joke.

AMEN!

Cajun was the best of us. This is a huge shock. Nickel in the grass, Big Cat. You’ll be missed.

Note that Title 32 technician program will most likely die in the next decade. NGB is converting 10% of Title 32 technicians per year to AGR coupled with the mandated Title 5 conversion until we get a 65/35 split between AGR and technician force. So in essence, being guard will look no differently than being active.

...and a Harrier in DJ. Here's hoping for a good outcome at Nellis.

Any estimate on how much longer?

1. Not sure if all adjoining urban areas are fenced, if not then they should be to the standard of the San Diego Fence & Security System. Pushing them into rough terrain may not stop all but you don't have to score 100% on a test to have a good score / passing grade. Pushing illegals crossers into open desert / rough terrain will deter, drive back some and impede those that attempt. Aggressive patrols that apprehend and assist will get the majority of attempts, some will slip thru but it will turn into a manageable trickle. 2. Military Patrols will add more coverage (boots, air and electronic surveillance), deter TNCOs with some military equivalent capabilities and equipment and use our military to actually defend in daily operations our borders, not someone else's. If anything, it increases military readiness as we will daily perform missions to ensure our sovereignty and security. Our military exists to not just deter aggression and win conflicts abroad but primarily at home, just because we have not had to do this using military forces in a while doesn't mean we should not now, it is that bad in some places on the SW border. 3. Immediate return to country of origin or processing station to relieve pressure on local detention facilities, could be expensive but so are F-35s, which one on a daily basis would do more to maintain sovereignty, deter and remove threats to the USA? 4. No argument that E-Verify needs investment and effort to implement but I reject the argument that criminal illegal aliens (committing ID theft and fraud) trying to fool this system and that sometimes they will be successful in their criminal activity is a reason to give up. Also, it is not a victimless crime, if I cheated on my taxes I doubt anyone on this forum we be ok with that, why is it ok for illegal aliens to commit a financial crime but not for citizens to? US Attorneys may not want to but they work for the US Attorney General and if he makes it a priority with the intention to make some examples, it will have a deterrent effect. Give someone a 10 year sentence with the news widely broadcast in multiple languages and in foreign press, word will get around the US is not screwing around anymore. 5. Disagree. This is military readiness and our primary mission to secure the homeland, we do it in a variety of ways and this is one of them. 6. Not nativism, just sovereignty. I keep coming back to that concept as it is the basis of freedom actually, we control our lands, laws and destiny not others. If we can't or won't we are not a free nation anymore but just Marty McFly to the Biffs of the world doing their homework. It is different than 1907 for several reasons: - The magnet of the welfare state. - The culture of 1907 did not tolerate the divisiveness of grievance culture, the antagonization of identity politics and the false accusations of racial & ethnic bigotry towards immigrants as they are legally being allowed and supported in immigration to the USA. - The pernicious and subversive actions of somewhat hostile foreign governments in exporting populations to the USA, encouraging non-assimilation but political activism for benefit of their mother country, essentially setting up a remittance and advocacy colony in our nation that will divide and destroy our politics for years to come. - The immigrants of 1907 were closely culturally aligned with the existing native population, ergo it was possible (although not easy) to assimilate relatively large numbers of them in a reasonable time. You can assimilate people from very, very different cultures but only in far smaller numbers and over a longer period of time versus people that are culturally similar that will more readily fit in. This is not racism it is just realism. I think you overestimate the benefits that are touted and I think are false for tolerating a class of people who work for subsistence wages, in aggregate it is a wash at best and likely a minor net loss when you factor the amount of social services they consume as they make little money and you underestimate the net social and cultural cost of having an unstable poor population that are used and abused by wealthier native peoples for financial gain. Besides, what does that say about a nation that tolerates that? There is no moral argument persuasive to me that thinks it is ok, moral, good or acceptable to allow worker exploitation because it provides my nation with cheaper goods/services while simultaneously decreasing the wage bargaining power of the lower & working classes of my own nation. It is immoral. The cost I argue is too high to pay, it immorally exploits the illegal immigrants, it exploits the poor and working class of this nation, it allows the corrupt and apathetic ruling classes of immigrant exporting nations to not address the systemic problems with their nations, cultures and economies by exporting the people that eventually would get sick and tired of being sick and tired and it leads to the erosion of our nation. It's an all of the above situation, illegal crossers at the border and visa overstayers are the problem Agree with you 100% on the rejection of jus soli citizenship, it is without need nor rationale in the modern era.

Except I know a ton of fighter guys who jumped at white jets to make a better life for their family. Bottom line is that people are motivated by different things. If the AF was smart they would try to leverage what motivates people instead of trying to fit everyone into a standard mold of what they THINK should motivate people.

Who cares? If you joined to build time for the airlines, more power to you. Just do your job while you're in, and be the best military aviator you can be until it's time to punch, whether it's 10 years, 20 years, or more. As for wanting to stay in AETC to dodge deployments, I don't really see a line for people looking to volunteer for deployments. Maybe if there weren't so many worthless deployments out there, people wouldn't try so hard to avoid deployments. For every dude that tries to hide it in AETC, there's probably a dude that would rather stay out in an ops assignment. That's a win-win-win: the AF keeps 2 guys on the books filling positions that need to be filled, and each guy is happy with their assignment. And maybe, just maybe, if they're happy with what they are doing, maybe they'll stay in past their commitment, improving retention. Letting each of those guys do what they want is better than forcing the guy who wants to stay in ops to AETC and vice versa. But no, let's go with one size fits all for everyone's careers, and everyone should have the same goals and desires as me, and those that don't aren't mission hackers. Because that's worked so well in the past.

Quite contrary. I appreciate the amount of work that most FAIPs put into the pilot production process. That being said, I have no respect for people who would FAIP for the sole reason of trying to pad an airline resume. Simply a matter of opinion, and mine is that the AF has a combat requirement to fulfill. Cheers.

New stage in the Border Crisis, mass waves from Central America allowed to move thru Mexico uncontested: https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2018/04/01/mexico-allowing-direct-attack-u.s.-border/ Repeating the mantra: - Fences / Walls in strategic locations (adjoining urban areas, Points of Entry and major roads coming from the border) with augmented CBP patrols. - Military Patrols in rural locations with no ROE restrictions on engagement, arrest, detention & transfer to LE. - Expedited legal proceedings and no release on their own recognizance for illegal border crossers. - Huge fines for employment of illegal aliens ($50,000 per infraction), prosecution under RICO laws. It is conspiracy, tax evasion and enterprise level crime. Businesses under investigation will have privilege licenses suspended during investigation, under RICO the accused must prove first what assets are not / were not gained thru illicit activities. - Bounties paid to local municipalities for arrest/detention of illegal aliens guilty of or arrested for felonies. $10,000 per + flat rate reimbursement for days in detention will start draining the swamp quickly. Use National Guard to expedite custody to ICE, this is DSCA not military members in the CONUS performing law enforcement. - Reasonable period of reduced legal immigration with a merit point process and end to chain migration, reduce to allow assimilation then assess. If the left can stomach watching sovereignty being asserted and the rule of law re-established, then the political climate will become benign enough that a serious negotiation on the status of illegal aliens that have some sympathetic cases (DACA, refugees, long time resident non-violent illegal aliens, etc...) can be had. I can't speak for everyone on the right but you can't work with someone you know is lying, grandstanding, breaking and bending the rules and is trying to subvert our democracy as it stands now. Allow control to be asserted again and there is room for debate and negotiation leading to a compromise that all sides will find minimally acceptable, in other words a fair deal. Keep down this path and we are on the road to ruin...

Strictly my opinion, but if you FAIP with the intention of being marketable to airline...fvck you. I know we are trying to generate pilots, but we’re not trying to make airline pilots. I’m with the other AFSOC brains here...go out and cut your teeth while the war is still hot. After you’ve seen you fair share of shit and combat has lost luster, take your white jet tour. As an aside, I have to seriously question the word of a guy who says that his FAIP tour developed a greater sense of airmanship than a combat deployment to Afghanistan in a barrel-roll capable King Air.

Yeah pretty dumb to assume kids want to graduate UPT and go do a real mission downrange while there’s a “war” going on. It’s ok not your fault your SA bubble is low.

Uhhh...it’s the military? I like to think these kids joined the military to be involved in military things. Not just flying TP Stalls and lunch and backs to pad their resumes.

Hmmm, Democrat response to GOP memo disputes everything. For some, only those "facts" contained in one or the other are valid and the other "facts" are simply partisan talking points to score political points. Kinda like a kids' argument, "No it's not." "Yes, it is." But played with my money. I am not amused. edited to add: But not a word to the current Administration's actually releasing the opposition's memo, however redacted. Would've been mighty easy to keep it under wraps as a 'security' measure. But it didn't.

Dude, like everyone else has been saying, don't let some recruiter push you around. It sounds like they've bit hitting the blue kool aid a little too hard. If it looks bad for the squadron for you to turn down a selection, then maybe she shouldn't put arbitrary requirements on you. If you still feel like fighting that battle, dip your toe into the world of Air Force queep for a minute and reference AFI36-2013, which is what governs the OTS selection process. https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a1/publication/afi36-2013/afi36-2013.pdf Nowhere in that document or on the AF Form 56 does it say you're required to apply for any specialty you're not interested in. I'd politely bring that up and, if she still wants to be a douche about it, move on to a new recruiter. You could always try to push up her chain, but even if you get your way it's just going to make her resentful and less willing to work with you. Technically, she's within her rights to not submit your application because she doesn't think you'd make a good officer due to that, it's just a really shitty reason to pull that card and she should choke herself. Its your life, not hers. Your scores probably aren't that great, but the good news is you can retake the tests. Even if you don't, scores are only one component of your application and there's a long list of people that have gone on to pilot training with scores people would generally consider less than ideal. I'd still encourage you to apply if you can find a recruiter that will submit on your terms and let the board decide, but otherwise I think you've got the right idea in biding your time a little bit. Declining a selection for a job that you've listed is going to DQ you from future boards unless you get a waiver which most recruiters probably aren't going to push for (As opposed to turning down something you didn't list that they offered you anyway. That's totally kosher.) It'll give you time to study, retest, fly towards your PPL and get super smart on the whole process so you can submit a baller application. The PPL isn't mandatory, but I think it will help quite a bit based on the way things have been going. It won't necessarily pay huge dividends in UPT or anything, but having a license exempts your from IFS. That means the Air Force doesn't have to pay up for you to go to Pueblo and it saves money and time, thus making you a more attractive candidate. Plus, the boost you'll get on your PCSM is a nice bonus. Finally, just a plug from personal experience, if you do end up pushing with this recruiter and her absurdness, there are worse things that can happen to you than getting picked up as a CSO or something. I had a crappy GPA but a strong overall application and ended up wtih a CSO/Nav slot at 28 years old. I've done some awesome shit in the Air Force, had a blast, got the chance to apply for UPT once I was in and got picked up with an age waiver at 31. That may not be the route for you and that's more than okay, but keep that in the back of your nugget if push comes to shove with all of this. Where there's a will there's away, you know, and if you get smart enough on stuff you can make some crazy stuff happen. Good luck and if you have any questions PM me.

https://www.nellis.af.mil/About/Press-Releases/Display/Article/1485146/thunderbirds-aircraft-mishap/ Him Him

Pretty dumb response right there

1. AFAIK we already have fences/walls/rivers in every urban area. The unfenced areas tend to be incredibly rough, desolate terrain. If a fifty mile walk through the Chihuahuan Desert doesn't deter a border crossing, a small fence probably isn't going to, either. 2. What are military patrols going to accomplish that 20,000 sworn Border Patrol agents aren't doing already? Illegal border crossings are at a 50 year low as it is. Seems like a good way to degrade military readiness. 3. Expedited how? And, sure, that makes sense, but seems extremely expensive. 4. We sort of already have this with E-verify (varies state to state), but absent a massive increase in enforcement apparatus you aren't going to see much of a change. All E-verify did was ensure that illegal immigrants got a fake identity before going to work. It's going to take a rare US Attorney who wants to waste his time proving that an employer knew his employees weren't legal. 5. Seems expensive, and again, you're hurting military readiness to accomplish a law enforcement goal. 6. Just seems like nativism. We allowed about the same number of legal immigrants in last year as we did in 1907, when the population was less than a third what it is now. And somehow we managed to assimilate them. Reducing legal immigration is just about the one surefire way to increase illegal immigration. Basically, most of the things you mentioned might reduce illegal immigration somewhat, but at a huge cost. What's the point? Illegal immigrants only come here because people want to hire them. If you want drastically more expensive housing and food, and pay for it with higher taxes to boot, go for it, I guess.

May 17, 2017 was nearly 2 years ago? Also, 4 people pled guilty and took a plea deal and avoided sentencing. Who knows what will come of this but I don't see reason for a facepalm yet.