hispeed7721

At best I'd chalk it up to you not communicating what you mean very well, but I agree much more with the quote from the article than from your posts. Maybe it's just a clearer picture of what you are trying to get across. Real question... I thought that is how the current immigration system was intended to work (obviously not how it is in practice)...so please, educate us on the how it's designed to work Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Shack. THIS is exactly what we've all been trying to say. Which, if you think about it, is exactly how our current immigration system is SUPPOSED to work. But Vertigo, the way you've been explaining things makes it seem like you want anyone to just be able to wander in wherever and whenever they want. As long as it's not private property. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BINGO! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Going back to what Tree has been asking...why not open up your house and let anyone and everyone stay and use all your stuff until it's so run down and there's so little left they all just leave? By not allowing that to happen, you're limiting human freedom for your own selfish reasons. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk So now you're talking about legal immigration, not just opening the border and letting anyone wander in. Pick a horse. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I should have been more clear in what I was thinking I guess They will definitely self deport, but not until the point that our country is in worse shape than they countries they are running away from right now, in which case the US won't really be the US anymore. Lawman's analogy was spot on

This statement is one of the most delusional things I've heard in a LONG time. And given the current executive administration, that's something to be proud of. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Legal immigration (a policy that shockingly currently exists) is not the same as simply opening the borders and saying come one come all Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand there may be semantic differences but wouldn't you agree that generally an obstacle IS a disincentive? So let's say they are different...I'm pretty sure if we (the US) unequivocally kicked out every illegal immigrant and didn't waiver from that policy just to garner voters that it would be a pretty big turn off to illegal immigration, regardless of what you call it. Aaaand no...I never said open the border. I said legal immigration. Those are two very different things... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You mean if we actually kicked out illegal immigrants and made it a disincentive to be here illegally, it would help? What a concept! That's what I've been trying to say...

Now you're talking! Change the system so that illegally entering the country is much worse than "oh you're here illegally? Here's tons of free benefits" I'm confused how what were talking about is being lazy Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah look at how many immigrants are carrying their own weight. Great idea dude Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Legit question... Are you suggesting getting rid of all borders and having free movement wherever/ whenever? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let's just get rid of borders entirely and let anyone wander wherever they want to for work/living. Everyone will be happy and prosperous, so everyone wins. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're one of the few people I've seen who likes them. The gortex lining makes them way thicker (sts)...everyone in my sqdn has had to go up at least 1.5 sizes because of it or deal with having no circulation to their feet. I'm just happy I can still wear my Rocky's...hopefully the waiver gets approved again this year Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Shack Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As a 2Lt? Pretty quick turnaround... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think there is a lot of legitimacy in this statement WRT the IADS of future possible environments. At the very least it's something to take a good hard look at WRT training/effectiveness in a contested environment...there's a very good SIPR discussion to be had and good points on both sides of the aisle for the survivability in different types of said environment I would argue that OEF had zero to do with the AC130 being a legitimate CAS platform; it's legitimacy was proven well before that. I think that other platforms have been secondary CAS assets, but would tend to agree that OEF has made CAS a more necessary skill set within certain communities where it was not so much in the past Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ummmm.... If that's the case for you then I'm very, VERY sorry for you. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I took it shooting and wanted to try out both grips and just hadn't decided which one to keep on there and which one to remove when I took the pictures Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The other piece to this is that 99% of top brass has no idea how situation-x is "supposed" to go anyways (from a protocol perspective)...so as long as whoever is in charge makes a legit effort to get it right and it doesn't look completely ass backwards it's fine Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All your petty insults aside (which are a great tell btw), I'm not going to derail this thread to argue with you and go into a quoting war. Hopefully someone other than Joe can see what I was trying to get at Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For those who have been in/seen this situation: How is the dynamic between a rated SRO and Flt/CC? I'm certainly not trying to insinuate or expecting they get treated better than any other stud w/o pilot wings...I'd just think there is a little bit of a different relationship than with a brand new butter bar. I'm not sure the best way to say/ask that, but hopefully someone understands what I'm getting at Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really...really?? Who's making a strawman argument now? Quote me where I said "any mission outside CONUS couldn't possibly protect America". I said it's more important to protect our own country than to protect other countries. I know exactly what I wrote. Please read and actually understand what I wrote before making incorrect assertions. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk