Motofalcon

All valid responses. Again, my answer was “Yes, due process does apply”. What exactly does the “right amount” of due process look like? That’s the million dollar question, and I don’t have a perfect answer - which is why I’m not running for public office. I would think that the “right amount” of due process is somewhere between “Do you have your papers on you RIGHT NOW? No? Deportation to El Salvador immediately” and the Supreme Court hearing every single case. In my non-lawyer brain that read it somewhere, “due process” means you get to plead your side of the argument - to what level, that depends. Pulled over for a speeding ticket? Yeah I guess you can go to the judge and argue. Murder charge? You get a full jury trial with a chance to defend yourself. So maybe something like ICE agents can ask you for some sort of papers (but they have to have probably cause, and it already has to be agreed upon what “valid papers” are - passport? Real ID? Green card?) and if you can’t produce them (they’re at home because nobody carries their passport around, etc) then they follow you home and allow you to get the papers? I get that we don’t want to ask for ID, a person can’t produce one, so they are released with a court summons in the future…because that hasn’t been working. Maybe something like that? But whatever it is, I think it needs to be voted on by Congress, because to me it seems extremely close to a law (if not a legal procedure subject to governance just like a cop pulling you over, etc), versus done via Executive Order. Plus, if it is written into law, then we can all sleep easy at night knowing it met judicial review and has a majority of the representatives of the people (where the real power of government should be coming from) behind it. AND we are meeting the intent and text of the constitution by following the law (vice an EO) therefore nobody is being deprived of their due process. And maybe that is already what is happening, I don’t follow ICE’s current procedures - I just know that every person in this country is afforded due process and protection under the law. What that is needs to be decided BEFORE the agents start rolling out and kicking in doors. Good discussion, I appreciate the lack of snark.

Well the question wasn’t about the senate, it was about the constitution. And last I checked the senate doesn’t interpret the constitution, the Supreme Court does. So I’ll stick with my current assessment until the text or the court’s interpretation of the law changes.

Yes, and both. Assuming these illegal criminal invaders are humans, then yes. The 5th amendment states that “No PERSON shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law…” and the 14th amendment states “…nor shall any State deprive any PERSON of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any PERSON within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.” It doesn’t say “citizen”, it doesn’t say “legal resident”, it doesn’t say “American”, it doesn’t say “English speaking adult” or anything other descriptor. It says PERSON. So these PEOPLE have a right to due process; in your example, this would actually determine if they are in fact “criminal” and/or “invaders”. And it was decided in Plyler vs Doe (1981) that according to the Supreme Court, “Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is a ‘person’ in any ordinary sense of that term.” Further in the court documents reads “Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as ‘persons’ guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.” If you don’t like it, then get the law changed - but until it changes, I would expect people who take an oath to the constitution to follow it as currently written/interpreted.

No, it isn’t. She didn’t ask “Does the constitution apply in this situation?” Or “Are your current deportation rules constitutional?” She asked “don’t you need to uphold the constitution?” It’s right in the presidential oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the constitution”. Hell, it’s pretty much the ONLY thing in the oath - read the text of it, it’s only 35 words and 17 of them are about the constitution. It doesn’t matter what the situation is, it’s right in the oath that he took and that the officers on this forum took to support/defend/preserve/protect/uphold the constitution. That is not conditional or situation-dependent. If he had said “Yes, I have to uphold the constitution but I don’t know if it applies here” (hint, it does) it would still be terribly disappointing that he doesn’t know what the constitution says, but this is a ing travesty. And yes, it has been decided in no uncertain terms that the 5th amendment and the right to due process applies to every single person in the US, legally or not. You can bitch all you want about the logistics of it, but the solution is absolutely NOT “scoff the constitution, just deport them all and let someone else sort it out.”

I guess it could have been worse if they dropped all 18.

Valid. However, in my defense, I had to read through 5 different news agency’s articles before I found the AF’s quote that you wrote. What I did find in the task and purpose article was this: ” An Air Force official said in a statement that “Historical videos were interwoven into Air Force curriculum and were not the direct focus of course removal actions.” However the memo specifically notes three videos, one each on the Tuskegee Airmen and WASP, as well as another titled “Breaking Barriers,” as reasons for the removal of the airmandedness course. “ The way this reads to me is that the “Airmandedness” course (that word is also a “what’s wrong with the AF”) was removed because it had those videos in it, not the other way around. And the next paragraph says that the 37th TRW would not comment on the videos falling under the DEI stuff as opposed to history, which I take to mean the article is accurate and the AF does not see a need to correct it, or they would issue a statement. So maybe it did just get wrapped up in the great purge, but the words I’m reading indicate that those videos are the reason the lesson is being purged.

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/air-force-curriculum-tuskegee-airmen-cut/ So even though they fought against prejudice, discrimination, AND Nazis, if it ain’t white males it’s not worth talking about and there’s no lessons to be learned.

I have seen this, but also thought it was tied to the “large” vs “small” sq - for what I know, those fields have the designation (which is why you’ll see awards for “Top Small SF Sq” or “Best Large CE Sq”). So folks would be a CC of a small sq as a Maj, then go on to command a large unit sts as a LtCol. Still means multiple commands, which I would bet is a love/hate kinda thing, either you love commanding and want to keep doing it, or you hate it and are forced into it by your AFSC.

In my little corner of the viper world I haven’t seen a maj as a CC, but I have seen O5s who finish their 1-year command tour at Kunsan get asked by big blue if they would like to command a squadron again.

As proud as I am of being a proper single-seat, single-engine, single-tail fighter pilot… I can give respect where respect is due. You’ll never hear me say it out loud in a public forum or at a Flag, but I know Eagle drivers are goddamn good at their job, and I wholeheartedly hope they are my escort team lead on night 1, no matter the theatre. I am proud to be 4G4L with them - 4th Gen 4 Life!!! Happy Birthday fellas!

Actually, what he said (from the article you linked) was: "Every federal government employee will be asked to attest to their vaccination status. Anyone who does not attest or is not vaccinated will be required to mask no matter where they work, test one or two times a week to see if they've acquired Covid, socially distance, and generally will not be allowed to travel for work," So the vaccine is NOT mandatory, but if you don’t get vaccinated you will still have to mask and be tested regularly, along with no work travel/TDYs. Which is already how some bases were operating before this statement was made.

My data is about 6.9 years old, but I was able to get a full-up Masters in Mechanical Engineering through Colorado State University, 100% distance learning. They may now have an aero program? They accepted TA, AND at the time I was “attending” a generous benefactor was offering scholarships to military personnel/vets that maintained a high enough GPA; between those two programs it was 100% paid for.

Shack. His other fb post from earlier seemed worthwhile at face value, especially the phrase about not saying “our punks suck” but actually trying to find the solution to make them not suck. Sounds great, I’m on board (I mean, I’ll still tell them they suck, but also have the resources to make them better.) Then he comes to visit the viper FTU and continually pushes the 6 month syllabus, fully acknowledging that it shortchanges our wingmen and puts more of a training burden on the CAF (overall reducing our tactical ability as a fighting force), but that is overlooked because we MUST produce our way out of this shortage. When all the pieces are put together, it’s the same message that all GOs are pushing, “We value you, but not enough to pay you more, listen to your suggestions to improve, or make any large changes to your quality of life. But we will publicly say we value you! That and your sense of duty should be enough.” To me, it seems like the conversation goes like this: AF: “Please stay, Major Instructor Pilot! We need your experience and IPness! You and your millions of dollars of training are really valuable to us!” Aircrew: “Well, okay, but can you maybe fix this one thing? (Insert your instructional fix here - pay, promotion, ops tempo, etc). Because I like serving, but this one thing is making it difficult for me and/or my family.” AF: “No. Stay or go, we don’t care.” ??????

“I can’t think of a worse scenario than staying because of the money.“ Isn’t...isn’t that the point of the bonus? It’s an incentive to get people to stay who otherwise would leave? The stay/leave pro-con scales are tipped just enough and they literally stay for the money?

Speaking of stress and flying training - I’m not on the facebooks, but I recently heard of a video from either AETC or 19AF that was “selling” the new UPT program/mentality/mindset that was low/zero stress, to include the phrase “no more helmet fires!” You guys/gals seen it? I’ve heard the page is full of comments calling BS for all the same reasons above and that stress in training is important... Things like this make me think having a Facebook would be worth it, but I still haven’t pulled the trigger - Maybe it’s time...

Sorry, can’t help with the non-offering/holding back of continuation, but as far as the 5-year promotion window, I don’t think that will be a factor for a bit. I got an email from the WG/CC that says “the USAF is not implementing the 5-look window for officer promotions for at least the next two years.” Which I guess means that now you only get three looks for promotion? Your former in the zone and 1 & 2 above the zone; I’m tracking that the next O-5 board will look at 07, 06, and 05 year groups. *with the caveat that the board is not supposed to use year group/time in service/time in grade as a discriminator (ie there are no more zones, just three looks) but who knows if the board really follows that.

Well we just started a 4-8 week night phase (all dependent on student performance), so you may be in luck!

Not in the 2.69 years I’ve been at Luke, but it sounds like it worked well and I wish they would bring it back. Get a bunch of reps in a short time period, because seeing something multiple times is good, but seeing it multiple times in rapid succession is even better. This could especially be helpful for Holloman - us at Luke at least have the 161st Guard bubbas out of PHX that we can work with pretty easily (our normal AR tracks are also their local sorties). Not to say we haven’t graduated a student without them ever seeing a tanker, but it’s rare...

“...promote the general welfare...” is probably the catchall. Is it good if Americans are healthy? Yes. Is it good if Americans are wealthy? Yes. I’m not saying that everyone just gets to be rich because America is rich (a la UAE), but to me, healthcare is like the road system. We all pay for it, some people happen to use it more than others, it helps us all. Isn’t that the point of government? To help the majority of the populace?

Fingertip, yes; form landing, no. Why? Short answer (and applies to 4th and 5th gen) - Aerial refueling in the weather. Gotta fly close without killing everyone. Long answer - Fingertip isn’t used tactically, but it is a good skill to have, as I have simply rejoined my wingman to fingertip to get through a cloud layer as opposed to drag him to radar trail only to have him rejoin 6-9k’ later (when going to/from the airspace in 2+2 route or even offset container it’s a lot faster to rejoin to 1/2 and 3/4 in fingertip with 3 maintaining radar trail, rather than string the whole 4-ship out). Note: this is when the weather is good enough to depart/recover VMC but a layer is between you and the airspace. You can easily depart in trail, but to go to trail on RTB only to rejoin under the weather for initial is a lot of comm and work. They are both right answers, it’s just nice to have the option of rejoining two versus waiting for a “tied saddled” call. Also, being able to fly close in order to accomplish a BD check without scaring everyone else in the formation is desired. Finally, beyond looking good up initial (but tac arrivals at 500KCAS are also cool), being close is required when you have to do that formation approach through the weather - which is really the only time you NEED to do a form approach (but not landing).

Fingers crossed...my last acsc course finishes a week before the original board date. If it slips, maybe I can actually get “complete” on my SURF/OPB...

Also yes - we were supposedly that last fighter FTU still doing them (F-16s) and we just got rid of them (both form takeoffs and landings) because the CAF doesn’t need that skill set/hasn’t done them in years.

Sorry, I don’t have it. I simply heard about the video about 9 months ago from a friend at CBM. However, it fits the narrative my buds in the Viper community told me about her time at Kunsan.

Yeah, is this the same Wg/CC who got abysmal results on the climate survey, and then instead of holding an all call/open forum to discuss the results, made a video sitting at her desk explaining why the 14ftw personnel (and therefore survey results) were wrong?