Leaderboard

Am I the only one that thinks we need (and could have more immediate impact with) a cyber force more at this point?

We’re still planning to sell these bastards the F-35? We should get out of Incirlik and work our damndest to get them removed from NATO. That prick leading their country is nothing but an Islamofascist. If we let them touch an F-35, they’ll have Russia and China closely examining it in short order.

I want everyone to have access to health care. It sucks to hear stories about people who go bankrupt over medical costs or who suffer permanent or prolonged poor health because of the barriers to care. I want universal health care to work. I especially feel for those with expensive pre-existing conditions. Most people point out the tough financial realities of such a government, or single-payer, program. I don’t disagree that the costs would require a significant increase in taxes from one or more sources. Depending on how much it cost, I wouldn’t necessarily be opposed to it. For example, if taxes went up 4% and everyone was covered, cool, I could live with that. If they go up 15-20% overall, that’s a tough pill to swallow, sts. But my opposition is primarily tied to two other issues that I think are more important long-term. The first is my concern about government creep, a historical near-certainty. Imagine that the government runs health care and sees costs starting to rise; or maybe costs are going down but Congress wants to fund something else and needs to cut its health care costs to fund this other project. Meanwhile, people are pissed because their taxes are going to treat people who smoke, drink, and eat crappy all the time. So, government does what it always does and tries to “fix” this unfairness. Maybe this would result in limiting cigarette purchases, or banning them altogether. Alcohol is unhealthy, so that eventually goes down the same path. Unhealthy foods are taxed more with the idea that these taxes will go to fund the health care system. Over the course of a couple decades, small, almost imperceptible regulations that are passed in the interest of fairness lead to a situation where the government controls (more or less) what you eat, drink, and perhaps even how you act (ie. extreme sports have a higher correlation to injury and long-term health care costs, so even they are restricted). I know hyperbole and the “what-if” game is a poor argument, I’m just trying to suggest that government-run healthcare could EASILY be an invitation to the government to enter the most personal aspects of your life and freedoms. Second, profit-motive is a very hospitable environment to medical advancements. The U.S. is unquestionably the leader in world medical breakthroughs whether that is measured by private and public research expenditures, Nobel prize awards, or published articles and research in medical journals. Today, for a company to bring a generic drug to market it costs between $600-800 million dollars. A brand new drug costs between $2-3 billion dollars. This is the cost of the research, chemistry, FDA wickets, studies, wait times, etc. The reason a company is willing to spend billions is the guarantee of patent protection that allows them to exclusively sell that drug, once it is approved, for a given number of years. (This year, Viagra loses its patent protection FYI) So, Pfizer pays $2 billion for drug X, they have a patent and sell it for whatever they want to recover the costs of development and to make a profit. Government health care necessarily uses price fixing methods to control costs, which removes the profitability of medical research by private companies. If you take away a company’s patent rights or exclusive pricing control, they don’t make money and they don’t research and develop new medicine. (By the way, this isn’t just pharmaceuticals, it’s relevant to medical devices, procedures, techniques, etc) It sucks that medicine might be too expensive for people who need it, or some jackass buys the patent and increases the price 100 fold; I agree they are playing with people’s lives. But I also know that if they didn’t get paid, they wouldn’t have invented or developed the drug in the first place. So I don’t know, I don’t have an answer, just thoughts. But I do think two good places to start would be to look at policies surrounding patent duration and also cutting the cost of FDA approval, thought I know that’s a health and safety concern. Nevertheless…

I knew it. Griswold was just a cover!

Only one suitable logo.

Substitute AFOSI for FBI and WG/CC for Deputy Attorney General and imagine the "harrumphs" that would be filling the thread.

- The appointed Special Counsel is friends with one the primary players in the drama - The Deputy Attorney General signed one of the FISA renewal applications that led to the appointment of the Special Counsel. - The Deputy Attorney General is the one who selected this specific individual to be the Special Counsel. - The lead FBI investigator for the Special Counsel was fired for the appearance of bias. - The FISA warrants themselves were based, at least in part, if not large part, on political opposition research that is unsubstantiated. - The number 4 guy in DOJ had continuing contact with the dossier's ex-spy author even after the ex-spy was fired by the FBI for lying to the FBI about media contacts. - The wife of the number 4 DOJ guy worked for the opposition research firm who funded and disiminated the opposition research dossier. Shenanigans = a duck? If you, personally, were in the crosshairs of a federal investigation with these issues, would you be good with it?

Puhleezzz...if your liberal utopian vision of universal healthcare is what they are doing in the UK I sincerely hope you never need medical attention. The NHS system in the UK is in full on meltdown, they themselves have stated they are Condition BLACK. Analysis by the Royal College of Surgeons found that over the past year an average of 193,406 people a month did not get surgery within 18 weeks of being referred. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jan/13/193000-nhs-patients-a-month-waiting-beyond-target-for-surgery

Joint Base Balad, Iraq SNCO: Sir, your mustache is out of regs. Capt (F-16/Guard): And you're fat, which means you are out of regs as well. Immense laughter erupts from gaggle of F-16 pilots. Next day, everyone was required to shave their mustaches by the Gp/CC. Man..this story was epic.

You mean HAF is doing a "review" after the AFI mandatory review/coordination A1 had to do in order to publish the new version? Aka: We've investigated ourselves and have found no evidence of wrong doing. Lip service because while this "review" goes on it's the letter of the law.

Pilot got a silver star. Hell of a good dude. The AF, as I was told, covered this up. And wouldn’t accept that a WW almost shot down a buff. Based on hearing the AC’s story in person, I don’t believe they were shooting at something else or that anything else was close by. Not insinuating that they intentionally shot at it. But they shot at what they thought was the bad guy which turned out to be the good guys. There are some pictures on the inter web of the aircraft. Amazing it made it back.

I’ll share this with the group. It was posted on the MAF fb page that the AFI is under review at HAF. Once that review is complete it will be shared with the group. So hopefully all of our gripes and issues with this change can be at least heard and possibly addressed. However I’m not holding out much hope for this change to be reversed. While with the number of folks saying that they are going to 7 day opt and walk hopefully that will open their eyes to the stupidity of this new change.

"They told me on Facebook that I wouldn't have an ADSC!"

Get it in writing ....

make no mistake: Big Blue is indeed the bandit.

Sounds like the approximate percentage of dudes that get picked up for major's school (which includes an ADSC of 3 years post-school). So... the only dudes that are staying are dudes that are staying anyway. At least that's what I see in those numbers. Chuck

Yeah, well given how the AFPC folks responded back when the AFI had two conflicting notes (always pick the note that kept the member in sts), I'm pretty sure that now if it it came down to the AFI vs "a guy at the porch told me" there is a 0.0% Pk of being let out of an ADSC. I won't believe it until there is a written change to the reg.

Yeah so I actively pulled my wife out of Tricare prime specifically because there were better options available when I’m not dictated by my government what form of care she would receive during her pregnancy. But hey maybe the 3 year fight to get her knee surgery or watching my retired father (who works for the VA after a 20 year medical career in the AF) have his standard of care eroded every single year under “tricare for life” is all just an illusion. Do you seriously want to sit there and tell us our benefits haven’t gotten worse as the belts have tightened? You think something as well funded for as low a population it has is going to work better when you dump a couple hundred million more people into it and leave them with no real recourse against it that it’s all gonna work better?

If anyone wants to re-hack your cyber awareness training.

Obviously, you are not a golfer.

well when you put it that way.... 😄

To HAF from the peons To HAF from the proletariat ”Where’s the money, Lebowski?”

Allow me to break it down. From the 1980s to about the mid 2000s... Army aviators wore a green flight suit. Air Force aviators wore a green flight suit. Soldiers wore the woodland camouflage BDUs. Airmen wore the woodland camouflage BDUs. ....and everything was ok. Then we went through a shit storm of uniform changes and ended up with the disasters that were the ABU, ACU and I’ll even throw the Navy blue shipwreck in for good measure. Now, starting on 1 Oct 2018 Army Aviators wear A2CUs. Air Force aviators wear either green flight suits or A2CUs. Soldiers will wear OCPs. Airmen will wear OCPs. ....and everything will be OK.

...oh the things I can't say because I'm NATO right now...

I'm not doing your homework. You want it changed, you propose your solutions complete with how it's funded. I've got popcorn to make...

Wasn't there the same ruckus at KAF.

While Congress certainly shares blame, I call bullshit on this. If the AF really wants to pay us more, and it’s just mean old Congress stopping them - then why in the name of God does the AF elect to pay LESS flight pay than Congress authorized them to pay?

Of course, that old-timer was also in at a time before Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram allowed the most junior airmen to throw spears at their most senior leaders in a public forum...

Details irrelevant. RUN.

Time to leave Incirlik? https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016/10/get-ready-walk-away-incirlik/132585/ My suggestion for a new location...