Leaderboard

Shameful. Absolutely shameful. As a heavy Bubba the weapons lifts into Poland have been one of the highlights of my career. If not the highlight. I watched the live feeds of the Russians pouring across the border and next thing I knew I was in Poland. Watching pallets get moved off my planes onto trucks and knowing within the week it'd all be gone. Used to put a Russian into an early grave. It was an action that I can proudly share to any westerner. It was an action that put our country back into a well respected light with any European. We've nearly dismantled one of our two biggest geopolitical enemies of the last 80 years without costing a single American life. Spending a fraction of the snafu that was Afghanistan/Iraq. Boosting the American defense industry immensely both through our tax dollars being spent and through a massive influx of international sales. And now we're tossing it away? This war has been an Intel,strategy, and systems testing goldmine as well. A goldmine we're just going to walk away from. We're alienating ourselves from our closest allies. We're ceding soft power left and right all for what? A few billion in savings? Billions that were going to our own military industries. Check the stock market. LM, GD, etc. have all fallen 10% or more over the past month as a result while Rheinmetall, BAE, etc. are seeing 20% growth as Europe realizes they can't trust their oldest and strongest ally. Can't wait to see how many more skilled workers we add to the unemployed list next to the other 10s of thousands who've been fired recently. Don't even get me started on our brothers in arms that will die as a result. We've trained with many of those men and are abandoning them now for no reason. How we as a nation have come to the point where materially supporting a war against an undeniable tyrant is a bad thing astounds me. Can you imagine if we had stopped the lend-lease act and told the UK "good luck with the war buddy?" This is the nation that stuck with Afghanistan and Iraq for decades despite the lack of progress, yet we can't stomach 3 years of monetary support? Rant over. I'm off to go get drunk and pray that I don't have to explain to my grandkids one day why grandpa stopped helping. Why he stepped aside and let Russia walk across the fledgling democracy of Ukraine.

Backpedal much? You clearly said we should we should shovel weapons into a war so a society could be fed into a wood chipper. That indicates a choice on our part to achieve a desired outcome. Either own it or admit it was a poor choice of words. This is a pro-war position at best, straight up evil at worst. Anytime a choice is made to cease hostilites... that's backing down? Are for or against minimizing bloodshed? Your language is ambiguous, but you most definitely don't care about anyone's bloodshed. Well I can see how a two-sentence statement can be fodder for your backpedal comment, but I'll add a little more context since you're obviously not a fighter pilot. I mean them both. There. I'm owning it. It was, in part, a cavalier response to the devil-may-care attitude some of you show, by regurgitating Russian talking points while representing yourselves as US military officers. Yes, we should funnel weapons into this war so the people who are defending themselves can continue to do so. No, it doesn't matter iF tHEy're nOt a dEMoCraCY. Putin along with his criminal army should be the ones who bear the brunt of the cost. That cost should be maintained at a high enough level to continue taking a toll until he cries uncle - which he eventually will - that much should be obvious to anyone who has paid attention to just how well his military has fared in this conflict. Maximizing Russian bloodshed to enable that end, should be our explicit goal, as that is the only way this war will justly end. I'll let me be the judge of what I do and don't care about, but to get to the crux of your provocation, yes, I have accepted that war is two things - wrong in an absolute sense, and two, part of human nature. I'm sorry that human kind has decided that some shit is worth killing people over - but that's not a decision I get to make. It's part of the reality I inhabit. And I know you're using "pro-war" as an insult, but if you are in the military, and you can't have seen being pro war at some point or another, than I don't even know what to think about that. Maximizing the bloodshed of those who are in the wrong, and who simultaneously have the full capacity and responsibility for ending the war is the fastest, and most moral way to resolve it. The only reason Putin won't, is because he wants to save face, and now sees an opportunity. And on that topic - our lack of unanimity and moral clarity on that point helps enable Putin. That is why attitudes like yours are met with such derision. The part of this whole thing I find most incredulous is that you think that by terminating support for Ukraine, bloodshed is going to end for those people. That's inexcusably naive. The only thing you're going to get is a reprieve from seeing it on the news. In fact, the cost of the war will still be fully borne out. That's the unfortunate part. You'll get to turn the lights out, click your brain off, take an internet victory lap, and pretend everything's hunky dory.

This is why American corporations going the DEI route was so poisonous. They planted the seeds for the general public to not trust who they are putting in the front of airplanes by openly stating they would prioritize immutable characteristics as part of their hiring practices. The crazy speculation and blow back you’re seeing on social media is a direct fault of their choices and actions in the post 2020 world. It will take a long time to reverse the distrust; and it may never go away since so many out there still worship at the altar of DEI.

Word inside the beltway is CQ Brown and a few others get the axe tomorrow. List likely includes CNO Admiral Lisa Franchetti. Hoping Slife is on the list as well.

That the some in the CIA predicted Russia's actions does not justify Russia's actions.

Those be some fancy @hindsight2020 words

Well, yeah. And no. Plenty, two at current count, of people here will not type sentences like "Russia is the aggressor," "Russia is wrong," "Russia should give back the parts of Ukraine they stole," etc. And that is precisely the structure of Bashi's argument. He absolutely thinks Russia is justified. Gearhog, in his old age, best I can tell, has just discovered his inner pacifist. That's less concerning from a moral standpoint.

I'll be your huckleberry (again). The arguments on this board basically break down along two lines. Side one (my side) is that people like Steven Kotkin conclusively point to all the treaties and legal agreements between NATO countries, Russia, et al. These treaties go through things like "no restrictions on member states," "all nations have sovereign rights to join any alliance they choose," and so on and so forth. If you read what I've written before, or have a look at those interviews again, you'll be up to snuff as to what those legal agreements cover and what nations' rights and responsibilities are under them. Interestingly, Russia has signed all those documents - which is a fact in the world you have never addressed in all these long pages...but I digress. It's clear that doing that would not be conducive to your argument, so I don't expect a substantive or direct response to that bit of reality. Moving on. Argument two (yours) breaks down along the lines of "there were secret meetings between Russia and the US and 'guarantees' were made that certain things wouldn't happen. Like Ukraine joining NATO. Like NATO moving eastward, etc. Your argument is basically this: Party R telegraphed to us that they would beat up party U if X, Y, or Z thing happened. X, Y, or Z thing happened, therefore, party R goes and beats up party U. Hence it's justified because we knew about it ahead of time. Your argument is literally that someone told us they were going to do an immoral thing, then they did it, now it's justified? Like my favorite tennis player famously lamented: you cannot be serious. Now, if X, Y, or Z constituted legitimate bases to conduct a beating, then sure. You could argue that party R is in the right. Problem is, there's nothing there. If you want your argument to hold water, you need to provide a moral justification as to why NATO moving eastward, or Ukraine joining NATO, provides Russia a moral basis to conduct an invasion of a sovereign nation. I won't hold my breath. Anyway, to wrap this up. No one here is denying the 2008 memo or Bill Burns or whatever. It's just that being forewarned about an immoral thing doesn't invalidate that thing's immorality. i.e. your argument doesn't provide a moral basis for the invasion. You think predicting something or declaring something outright makes it moral. That's what and why you're wrong. You telling your wife to expect a beating when she gets home doesn't justify it. Your argument structure suggests you think it would. See, we're not arguing about facts. We're arguing about the moral basis for conducting this conflict. Your facts are there, they're just immaterial and irrelevant to the underlying question as to who is at fault, who has moral culpability, and who is in the wrong. In essence, you're Michael Scott declaring bankruptcy.

SECDEF explains Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Negative homie. We've been through this. Here it is again for you. "No limits on NATO expansion." etc. etc. etc. This is about eliminating a competing energy state that can easily supply Europe. It has nothing to do with NATO besides the excuse Putin uses to scapegoat his actions.

Kash Confirmed. Reports of crowds scrambling to empty supermarket shelves of popcorn nationwide.

Therein lies the prime issue. We’ve fucked up for too long, time to rip the bandaid off and start fresh, which means there will be short term pain in a lot of ways, but as a society we’ve been way too focused on the now and barely even aware of what does 5, 10, 20 years down the road look like? As Tree said in another thread, we’ve already fucked unborn generations - it has to stop now. If we do, maybe 3-4 generations from now will be free of the financial impacts of their predecessors idiotic decisions.

LOLOLOLOLOL. OMG https://x.com/WarClandestine/status/1893016797118427203

Or maybe Putin can read too and used it as rationale to invade. "Look, this book predicted it, I'm invading. As for the energy argument, I think the world market would prefer Ukraine maintain control over its energy, not Russia. Yeah, China prefers Russia. Also, anyone that thinks more energy reduces prices hasn't paid attention to supply controls used by Oil Companies/OPEC. Remember when Obama released strat reserves just to see oil companies hold it or sell it? PS. Russia started the invasion, they fired the 1st shot. All the excuses played out don't justify it and giving them consideration for all those excuses makes them appear more justified. When Russia says a reason, say bullshit. Which is why many of us BODNers call bullshit to any Russian justification.

almost like they were busy doing other things ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I'm not expressing an opinion that elections shouldn't ever be held. I'm expressing incredulity at the prospect of conducting a proper election under true, wartime conditions. How do you suggest the 90% of displaced residents in any given bombed-out apartment building get to participate? Where even are they? Could they hope to participate? How would you ensure rampant fraud isn't injected by some sort of, you know, hostile counter-intelligence force? In short, all I'm saying is that the drum-beating about how Ukraine isn't a democracy because they're not holding elections right now is nakedly cynical. And that's coming from someone who is pretty cynical. Especially considering most of the "democratic advocacy" is coming from people who don't bat an eye about the legitimacy of Russian "elections."

Much like gun laws that we have and just need to enforce appropriately.. the primes need to be held accountable. Financially and probably criminally. The primes may have a monopoly on the product, but the US government in many ways has a monopoly on consuming the product.. time to start exercising that monopolistic power.

Allright allright, I'll give in. I can tell this is killing you. 😆 First, me having a different opinion than you isn't dangerous, malicious, or harmful. You being a Nav, or RPA guy, or whatever means little just has me being a pilot/military officer means little. Here's the deal. When I got to my first assignment, one of the first guys I flew with was a guy named Rich Hauben, God rest his soul. We became friends and squadronmates. One of the first things we talked about was that he had worked very hard on building a website so that we when showed up to fly, all the information was there. PDF files of flight plans, mission worksheets, calculators, weather, etc. Super proud of it. It also had a forum he encouraged me to join. He experimented with some early waterfall type message boards that were successful, then he bought a site address at DynamicTruth.com, where he sold calling cards, cigarettes, and other stuff online. Made some decent money from what I remember. He hosted two forums on the server. One was "Military Aviation" and the other was "Socio-Political - The Michael Savage forum", of whom he was a fan. It was off the rails. Rich liked to show up to that forum and argue about controversial subjects. It was full of non-military liberals who hated the Michael Savage radio show. Rich posted under an alternate name and liked to get the liberals all worked up over controversial subjects. He'd talk about it often. That forum was absolutely wild. Anything went. http://web.archive.org/web/20020602142642/http://www.boards2go.com/boards/board.cgi?user=baseops https://web.archive.org/web/20040325141830/http://dynamictruth.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=9 For the most part, the non-military usernames stayed over in Socio-Political, and most all the flyers stated in Military Aviation except for Rich, me, and a few others. Then the streams started to cross. Some of the rabid liberals started coming over here and injecting their leftist garbage into this forum, getting us military fliers worked up. Rich tried to keep those intense political discussions at the other forum but it didn't work. It's a little fuzzy, but at some point I think he just deleted the entire socio-politcal/Michael Savage forum one day. He had gone over to the other side of the runway doing secret squirrel stuff by that time. Anyway, that's just some fun history of the forum. As for me, I've been here since near the beginning. Over 25 year now, I guess. Thousands of screen names have came and went. Lots of good conversations here, info, help, but there is always sport-bitching, controversies, meltdowns, drama, guys wanting to meetup and fight, etc. It's been fun. Don't take it too seriously. Just words on a screen. Nothing more. I've been moderator. Administrator here for years and quit that. At that time I got a gig that required an SCI and I had thousands and thousands of posts here. I decided to delete "gearpig" from the server, not realizing it would completely remove the hundreds of threads I started here. Caused a bit of a problem. My bad. Sorry bout that. 😄 I am proud that I never banned anyone that I simply had a personal disagreement with or an opinion I didn't like - but it was tempting. A year or so in pilot training. I spent 19 out of 22 years in the Herc. Did white jets for a while. Did all the quals, all the sq jobs, chief of SE, all that. Only wanted to fly but I was made deployed SQ/CC once. First deployment was Oct 2001. Last was 2018. A bunch in between. Started the airlines back 07, been a Captain for several years now. I paid over $160K in FICA, SS, and Medicare alone last year, not including all my property and business taxes, so that motivates me to share my opinions a little. I live on a large rural farm surrounded by family. We raise cattle, show horses, buy and sell tractors, etc. It's fun. I'm not Russian, and I'm not going to hurt you. You don't have to beg others to silence my free speech because you disagree. 😄

Bros and nsplayr, troll anti-virus is free.99. 1.) Click the dropdown next to your display name in the top right of your browser 2.) Select Ignored Users 3.) Input the aforementioned troll’s name in the container such as gearhog, I mean torqued, or whatever grinder display name he’s using these days 4.) Select the content you want to ignore 5.) Click add user 6.) Profit.

You making that comment is one the least shocking things you could possibly have said. You did the meme. However, a Nav repeatedly demanding "Go with Quals!" is one of the most shocking and funny things I've read on BO.net lately. So that's it? Just you and nsplayr abandoning your positions in favor of feeble attempts to denigrate my "quals"? That's kinda sad.

LOL

Who typed this post, a nav or a fighter pilot? 😆

yeah no shit genius thanks for that brilliant commentary. maybe if i have a question on how to use the weather radar i'll reach out. you guys refuse to even see the russian perspective or rationale for their actions. just blindly want to commit our nation (AGAIN) into literal WW3. i would like our nation to stop doing provocative things that we KNOW will cause conflict.

Here’s hoping, but I believe it was Rainman that said “rule 1: there is no justice”

This is Putin's CHOICE! I'm not desiring a bunch of dead people - characterizing our enabling of a lesser, defensive, Army as "pro war" is ludicrous. Putin started this thing in 2014, and then he really started it in 2022. This is and should be the painful consequence of his decision to FAFO. As we back down, now, we will have encouraged far more bloodshed elsewhere. It's real-politic. First, it's a complete misappropriation to place responsibility for this conflict on Ukraine. They have every right to defend themselves from Russia/Putin. It is Russia feeding generations of Ukraine into the wood chipper - not anyone else. I don't have too much to say about "suspending elections", but I will say it's possibly, just possibly, a little bit disingenuous to think that the should hold "elections" while they're in a fight for the very existence of their country, when it's been under assault for the last decade. In more ways than one. You think Russia interfered in our 2016 election? What about in Ukraine right now? Yeah, let's hold "elections" and see what happens. To the second part, I agree, and have said as much on this thread. It'll wind up with some sort of armistice. That is obvious, however, what we don't need to do is give away the whole kit and kaboodle. Russia's not exactly been able to take ground rapidly, in case you haven't noticed. Guaranteeing Ukraine's security when we suckered them into giving away their nukes may come back to haunt us in terms of the broader US project in the world. Turning our back on them may have other dramatic consequences. I wasn't happy when we surrendered in Afghanistan. In many ways I blame Biden for that because he signaled to Putin that we were weak and he took the opportunity. In a similar fashion, I can't wait to see what's behind door number three when we surrender Ukraine...

I was enlisted, a good majority of officers are retarded.

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202411/1322762.shtml?id=11 Two seater 5th gen

i don't have to go with shit. the facts are you guys absolutely REFUSE to even consider to think like your enemy. you take ZERO account of your enemies motives or what will push them to do things you don't like. know thy enemy. know WHY putin took his actions. you don't have to agree with them, hell i don't! but i understand why he did it. https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08MOSCOW265_a.html "1. (C) Summary. Following a muted first reaction to Ukraine's intent to seek a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) at the Bucharest summit (ref A), Foreign Minister Lavrov and other senior officials have reiterated strong opposition, stressing that Russia would view further eastward expansion as a potential military threat. NATO enlargement, particularly to Ukraine, remains "an emotional and neuralgic" issue for Russia, but strategic policy considerations also underlie strong opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia. In Ukraine, these include fears that the issue could potentially split the country in two, leading to violence or even, some claim, civil war, which would force Russia to decide whether to intervene." - former CIA director Bill Burns 2008 it's fucking spelled out for you in 2008. and yes they are fucking facts.

So no one wants to address the CIA memo from 2008 predicting this? I guess Bill Burns must have been a Russian troll when he wrote it. nsplayer you still jerking off to your (NAV) quals? Wanna address the actual argument or just play high school “bro card” games? thats what I thought. Typical liberal who wants to censor points of view counter to yours.

You're ashamed of your nation. Noted. Bye. I covered this earlier. "Article 19" is not part of the original Ukrainian constitution, but statutory law that abridged the original constitution in 2015, after the coup. You should spend more than 2 minutes on Google to understand what you're talking about. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law_in_Ukraine Backpedal much? You clearly said we should we should shovel weapons into a war so a society could be fed into a wood chipper. That indicates a choice on our part to achieve a desired outcome. Either own it or admit it was a poor choice of words. This is a pro-war position at best, straight up evil at worst. Anytime a choice is made to cease hostilites... that's backing down? Are for or against minimizing bloodshed? Your language is ambiguous, but you most definitely don't care about anyone's bloodshed.

WRONG and root cause of you guys being deceived. this goes back LONG before 2014. NATO caused this. specifically the US. when you analyze what russia/putin have said the last 35 years you can connect the dots. i'd point you to the Biden Admin's CIA director's memo when he was a ANALYST (aka analyzing what the russians will do and WHY) the famous "no means no" memo. it clearly spells it out.