Clark Griswold

Looking to hear other opinions and all valid points. Me, kind of on the fence about it and I don't have a problem with trying to bomb the shit the out of anything with an ISIS stink to it and I see the argument that they made a choice now they have to live by it with that meaning that their ISIS affiliation is probably a death sentence and / or they have forfeited their citizenship but.... if they were young, naive and stupid as a sack of rocks and went there then realized the err of their ways, is surrender not possible? I thought about this after reading the Atlantic article, pretty much it's a cult with a mega shit ton of weapons, cash and no morals, they brainwash their soldiers but even after all that, some of them wake up and realize it's all bullshit. If we give them an out, I think that could crack their facade that attracts the disaffected from Europe, ME, etc... Tacairlifter - haven't had a chance to see a presentation on out-briefs of former ISIS jihadis but that is somewhat surprising and depressing, if that's the case with someone and they freely admit that then the case can be made I think to strip citizenship and expel permanently from their country of origin. Also, I'll go back to an early argument I made that Assad was / is bad but he is an angel leading a heavenly choir compared to ISIS, Al-Nusra front, etc... it would be impossible for this administration to admit it and the govs of Western Europe too, but thru a proxy, funneling cash, weapons and intel to Assad is probably the least worst option available. Tell his neighbors who hate him to go pound sand and just deal with it, diplomatically of course.

Yep, hopefully. On the idea of continuing to encourage in-fighting, desertion, disillusion, etc... I found this article: Returning ISIS Fighters: Forgiveness or Punishment Question for the thread, is this suicidal or smart? Of course it is all in the interrogation / vetting when they return from Syria but even if you can be reasonably sure they didn't commit a crime against humanity, is it possible to trust / forgive someone who fought with an enemy of the civilized world?

ISIS rot http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/the-islamic-state-is-fraying-from-within/2015/03/08/0003a2e0-c276-11e4-a188-8e4971d37a8d_story.html?hpid=z1 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

At sea refuelling. Good article on Navy seaplanes of the 50's. The U.S. Navy Tried to Create a Far-Out Seaplane Strike Force

not a bad idea and on a somewhat related topic, there is some success with a common computer language, Ada. Very stable, open with lots of safety features built in and used by some (Boeing 777, ATC and traffic systems, ISS, etc.) in critical systems. Unfortunately, for whatever reason we do everything by committee now and it takes so much compromise to get everyone on board that the end result is not corrupted but comprised to a fault. It is a cool pic, saw the A (several) of them at Eglin, a bit chubby but still good looking. I think I should be more optimistic and the reference to the F-4 could be a good thing, despite all it's faults it turned out to be the most successful fighters (number of airframes) and one of the longest serving multi-role fighters and had a respectable record when improved technically and employed to max its advantages. Edit for grammar.

Valid points but the WTF of the article really was that they hope to have it capable of SDB II employment in 2022, not even sure if that is going to happen. These paragraphs pretty much sum it up: In the end, the lack of SDB IIs in the F-35's quiver till at least 2022 may not be a show-stopper for a jet that has fought one problem after another throughout its development, but it is just another 'wait and see' item on the F-35's growing list of 'wait and see items.' The truth is that, regardless of its price tag, the F-35 will not really exist as promised until the middle of the next decade, assuming development goes as planned and assuming that orders remain intact at current levels. This puts the existence of a fully mission ready F-35 close to 20 years after its first flight, and some 25 years after its technology demonstrator, the X-35, first flew back in 2000. For some perspective, you were lucky to be carrying an analogue Motorola StarTAC cell phone in 2000, now take a look at your cell phone now. If we can learn anything from the F-35 debacle it is that we need to find another way to design, test and procure high-end weapon systems. A 30+ year cycle just to get the weapon system as originally envisioned is totally unacceptable and in many ways the F-35 is already obsolete both on a sub-system level and on a conceptual level. I get it that we have bought it and it is going to be that mainstay of the AF, Navy, USMC, etc... but at some point there has to be a come to Jesus moment where we admit we bit off more than we can fully chew, the program achieved some of its objectives, some it missed and some it only partially achieved and it is time to curtail it responsibly. We have to get some operational aircraft out of it but to stop throwing good money after bad.

More good news. F-35 Can't Carry Its Most Versatile Weapon Until At Least 2022

IAF is buying more. Israel Buys More 14 More F-35s as US Denies JSF Sales to Gulf States

New year, same problem. Texas Governor: Since Jan. 1, 'We Have Had More Than 20,000 People Come Across the Border'

VIDEO - Gunman Shot by Armed Pharmacist Second Amendment Victory - Don Radcliff - West Virginia Action starts at 0:35. Cool, calm and collected, very good sir. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOq7iUFiXR4#t=56

All the time - every Sunday night on AMC Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Follow on quibble: I don't predict a horde of flesh eating zombies and the video imbed of Game Over man Game Over was about as appropriate as a fart in church while trying to be serious but I've been surprised by the skepticism expressed for the unlikely but possible crisis of a fast moving pandemic. Look at SARS, H1NI, Swine Flu, etc... fast moving via wildlife and air travel and now look at new diseases like West Nile virus that are endemic in the US, shit really can happen. An open society, reasonable and humane borders and concern for others are important but all of those things only can be if you operate from a place of security and stability, loose travel from areas that are experiencing outbreaks of a deadly, highly contagious, virus with a significant incubation period doesn't fit in the smart move column. Just my two cents.

point taken but where these crises tend to happen is where there is no security/stability, logistics infrastructure, we (military) can provide that and then outsource the touchy feely to the NGOs Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Truth to power or shouting into the void. Decent summary of what most officers see as the problem with promotion / leadership in the AF. An Air Force officer: The military doesn’t want to retain talent (or at least that’s the perception) Point made by an anonymous e-mail to the author specifically relevant to this discussion: – Officer performance reports offer no objective measures of success or mission accomplishment. Absent objective measures, officers are left with subjective measures — specifically, how much their bosses like them compared to their peers. When promotion and stratification depend on your boss’ regard for you, a system creates perverse incentives toward politicking, backstabbing, and whitewashing your record. This system should naturally select towards the selfish and power-hungry.

Coda (hopefully) Summary on the Ebola response from wiki, US is winding down our mission but I think we can put this one in the win column, with the media giving the response a passing grade only. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2014/10/04/how-ebola-sped-out-of-control/ http://www.npr.org/blogs/goatsandsoda/2015/02/11/385489704/the-u-s-helped-beat-back-ebola-only-not-in-the-way-you-might-think Basically their critique is: the world didn't respond fast enough or with enough and by the world they mean the US, Europe, Japan, etc.. NPR's view was the best impact the US military had was in presence and logistics. Critiques not entirely without merit but unless the usual suspects in our alliances (NATO, SEATO, UN, etc.) want to pony up forces, resources and manpower on a regular schedule like an on-call AEF for whatever disaster comes up that we feel compelled to respond based on size, severity or national/world interest, the responses are always going to be reinventing the wheel, ad hoc and slow to start.

Alive and well out of the bunker with my tin foil helmet - I'm sure my argument for stomping on the human rights of others to come to our country with a Level 4 biohazard so they can vomit blood and infect healthcare workers is completely offensive so I guess we can just agree to disagree. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good blog post on this subject (but pointed specifically at the DoD). Why does the military grow? Because the tail wags the dog. It references a 1955 article that is still available from The Economist. “It is a commonplace observation that work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.” — Opening sentence of “Parkinson’s Law“, C. Northcote Parkinson, The Economist, 19 November 1955. He describes Britain’s creation of “a magnificent Navy on land” to replace its fleet. History not repeating but rhyming quite nicely.

I see the point that a guy who is going to lead at Wing and above level needs broad based experiences to be an effective leader at that level, but do you really think changing happy to glad or getting a bullet all the way to the end of the block on an OPR is a consequential development in the process of an effective AF senior officer? I get that there is an administrative, day to day aspect to the role of a leader but there is a point that once a person is so involved in that world they loose sight of the fact that we are actually supposed to fly airplanes, man missile stations, patrol flight lines, fix airplanes, etc.... it becomes background noise while they are responding to another pointless email with the subject "Hot Tasker!" You know I am right.

Nuke your city - see if your house gets crispy or just well done. http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

Valid point on all the eggs in one basket and possibly being over tasked but will part company on the idea of a boom on a biz jet being a bad idea. IAI would not have proposed it if it was too heavy and cumbersome when installed to deliver an operationally relevant offload. Would that jet hang out for the post-strike RTB? Probably so, could it remain on-station for a follow on AR? Doubt it. Assuming (i know about assuming) the boom system weighs about 5,000+ lbs. (fairly realistic) then a modified G550 could probably hold around 45,000+ lbs while burning about 2,500 an hour. Decent offload for a small footprint jet. I would tell Gen Hostage that stealth alone is not favored in the long run. Some 20-lb. brains think it may take a while but it's decline (not demise) but decline as the dominant trait in aerial warfare is inevitable. A COLD WAR LEGACY: THE DECLINE OF STEALTH From the Hart-Rudman Commission report in 1999: The age-old interaction of capabilities and counter-measures will continue, of course, and physics probably favors detection and the ultimate demise of stealthy systems and large platforms. But “ultimate” can mean a long time, and, as opponents try to defeat existing U.S. technologies, new technologies and ways of employing these weapons will abet the continuation of current U.S. advantages. Now that is not necessarily gospel and they just said probably but a ground based IADS can scale up as required to make LO assets so painted by overlapping sensors that even given their small signatures it will be enough to be targeted when they are all combined for a solution, that necessitates another asset to degrade the EM environment to "smooth" the road for an LO to remain difficult to detect / target.

Remember reading that (AF wanting a biz jet replacement for the JSTARs) also. USAF Eyes Business Jets As Possible E-8 JSTARS Replacement Just playing armchair general, I would go with a partnership with the Israelis for their G550 family of AWACS & ELINT aircraft, developing an EA variant jointly. But the IAF is thinking way outside the container on a lot of ways to use existing biz / commercial aircraft for tactical support, not sure the Big AF could / would handle that kind of shift in the way to develop a major MDS. IAI brochure on their concept of 767 MMTT -AR-ISR-ELINT-C2 & Small Smart Tactical Tanker. Combine this SMTT concept with EA like the old EKA-3B Skywarriors, gas and jamming all in one, done.

Would not be a bad idea either. The Navy is not so sure the F-35's LO will be enough and are bulking up EW, the AF should take notice. F-35’s Stealth, EW Not Enough, So JSF And Navy Need Growlers; Boeing Says 50-100 More

2 But if we need a platform to get the AF in the mood then I suggest something like this: Raytheon successfully tests integrated electronic attack system on Gulfstream jet Missionize this kind of a platform but if that's a non-starter then why not an EB-1B? Range, speed, generator power and capacity. Now you just need a 10 billion to get it done.

More Chinese UAVs - inflatable ones. Tianjin expo reveals Chinese UAV innovations, aspirations

No problem -thought it was interesting that some countries are looking to and acquiring advanced systems from China and leap frogging into capabilities that we might not expect Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Glad to hear that. Hope they get it fixed and keep the -10. With the talk of a Pacific Pivot, the -10 would seem ideal for those distances between US / friendly islands.