FourFans

@Internationalmesa I've got some thoughts to share...but give it a second...

Meh. If every missile our country created and fired in the last 50 years had performed exactly as advertised, warfare wouldn't exist anymore.

I'm sure they appreciate you quoting that image so it shows up twice on this thread. You Ass.

1970's - 2020's Reagan - Desantis Russians - Chinese/Russians Severe 'self induced' Inflation - Severe 'self induced' inflation ('self induced' reads: "democrat controlled legislation induced" seriously...read history) Negative Media Bias - Negative Media Bias...with a heavy Left tilt High waisted pants on my wife for no reason - High waisted pants on my wife for no reason Entitled generation of toddlers hanging in the balance - Entitled generation of toddlers hanging in the balance Just exited unpopular war that left a bunch of vets really unhappy - Just exited unpopular war that left a bunch of vets really unhappy. So, this is what the 70's were like? Cool

So which side ARE you on?

Good to know. Thanks! EDIT: Reading @hindsight2020 above, and applying general common sense... WHY THE F IS GETTING A MILITARY BENEFIT SO F'ING HARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Seriously. We gave you our prime years for skill learning. We gave you our prime years for child rearing. We gave you our prime years for career development. We gave you our prime years for physical output. We gave you our prime years for finding a co-level partner for marriage. Yet some 67 year old impotent congressman/senator-who-has-never-seen-so-much-as-a-parking-ticket (his driver took care of that) gets to decide what your benefits should be. I'll admit that I am one of the few lucky individuals who came out of this meat grinder with my sanity, my marriage, my self-esteem, and my perspective in tact. That's not normal. We need more veterans in congress. I argue we should have a MAJORITY of veterans in congress, most decidedly from both sides of the aisle. Dirty confession: I sincerely want many progressive veterans fighting for veterans rights. I've heard the most convincing and most accurate arguments from that side! OK OK OK yea....wrong thread... got it

Original commission was May. Transfer with no break in service was Aug, but my anniversary in PCARS and on my record is May. Most importantly, the retirement order says 28 May 2023 in the grade of O-5. I printed that in triplicate, framed one, put one in the safe, put one in my wallet, and left the digital copy up on my desktop for 69 hours so the text is burned into the pixels.

...so long as you're looking for hostile re-naming fodder...

Do we need to run a drive like this in support of @Biff_T and @filthy_liarfighting each other? Let me know where to send the Fireball.

I've been personally wrestling with this. The answer for traditional reserve retirement: As a TR, if you retire with paperwork that says O-4, you get O-4 pay when you finally get it at age 60. My MFP troops were kind enough to show me that in writing...no idea the reg...to make sure the fight was worth fighting. After being twice passed over, I pinned on O-5 shortly before separating for the AFRC (long story). Fast forward to me with 20 good years (a few years after joining the AFRC) and ARPC started claiming that my DOR was my accession date into the reserves, NOT my actual DOR when I pinned on while on AD. Our personnelists were entirely perplexed, but it turns out that they can't call ARPC directly. Yes, you read that correctly. There is no pipeline for base level AFRC personnelists (at least mine) to contact ARPC directly. They had to submit a trouble ticket, just like I did. They got the same answer I did: "you need 3 years TIG" with no reference or reg that states your DOR becomes your accession date. Four months and much pain later: My personnelists finally found the AFI/AFMAN/REG that states with no break in service, you keep your original date of rank. POOF! Magically my retirement order is published to retire as an O-5 at my originally requested date. ARPC is a completely corrupt clown show run by GS's who will suckle at the teat until they literally die, all the while stating as "fact" what is actually "I think I remember from back in my day the reg said..." Two UTA's left.

Hey look: Science from the Gold Standard of study review organizations. BL: there is absolutely no evidence that masking limits the spread of viruses. Weird when science backs up common sense. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full

Neither do I. But I met an Eagle driver once.

Try this phrasing on for size: Forcible insertion of anything into a 14 year old against the will of the parents or the child. Yeah. I get that vibe too. Apparently "No" doesn't mean "No" if COVID is involved.

I heard it was called snoodling...

Wow

In my defense...that statement is also true in many scenarios...

I think I disagree on that...but it's a near thing. I don't think a well regulated militia has ever been used to enforce the 1st amendment...or any other for that matter...in modern history. I think show-of-force has been an excellent use of the 2nd amendment recently. The deterrent influence of a good man with a guy gun cannot be understated. There is also the tactical truth that only a good man with a gun stops a bad man with a gun, but that's a low-level fact that rarely actually changes real legislation. Beyond that, I don't have the history data on whether or not an armed American citizen force has ever stopped or reversed a federal or state law enforcement action in modern history. Our citizens simply don't go armed and organized toe-to-toe with state or federal forces. In any case, I think freedom of the press and freedom of the speech is incalculably more important at a morale and practical level. History has shown that the ability to freely exchange ideas is immensely more powerful than the ability to display raw military force at least in the long game. Free exchange of ideas can in fact generate military force, even in an oppressed society.

Fascism according to Mr Webster: "A political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition." Yeah, allowing constitutional carry is clearly aimed at putting nation and race above the individual (who can now carry his own weapon more easily) and DEFINITELY empowers a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader...who almost universally in history have depended on the removal private gun ownership. ...just on the off chance there's anyone here who cares about words and the means they have...

I stand corrected!

@filthy_liar Just so I've got this straight, you were an ALO in Oct 2001 who went into Afgh with the first wave. You claim to be a prior A-10 pilot, which means you're a early to mid-1990's commission - UPT - first assignment - then on to be an ALO. Following that, you had to immediately transitioned into B-1s as you were at Diego launching sorties into theater in 2005. With those combat feathers in your hat, you'd be a sure thing for O-6 in the early 2010s, and then possibly retire in the mid 2010's...which O-6's rarely do. So, as an ALO, a position attached at the hip to the DIV CG, command staff, and most definitely the DFSCOORD, who was your CG during the first push into afgh? I know that's decidedly not classified. The ALO never goes first unless the Div staff goes first, and they didn't. Most definitely not on 19/20 Oct 2001...even with that 30 minute time difference. Where were you during all that? What unit were you attached to? When you went into country, what herk unit hauled you in? I probably know them. You also claim to have been through Ranger School, when we didn't start sending ALOs through that school until...never...and didn't send hardly any AF (there were a very select few) through until post 9/11, most of whom were TACP and an enlisted troops. After that, how'd you transition over to the B-1 at a time when competent and experienced A-10 pilots were at a premium? Sounds like a rather unique path. You don't sound like the kind of guy that would be hungry to hear other peoples war stories with so many of your own to tell. The fact is: Your cavalier perspective and voice don't match any of the individuals I've personally known to tread the paths you claim to have tread. They were all solid, respectful, continuing-to-self-educate professionals. You come off as none of those. Those of us who've actually seen the elephant up close rarely come back story-thirsty. Prone to drinking...definitely. But never thirsty to relive most of those harrowing experiences in so slovenly and exaggerated fashion as you put on. Beyond that, you admitted to being banned here at baseops several times. Care to share the previous handles? If we're to have a solid thread of war stories, I think we'd all prefer to keep the BS out. You seem to fit that bill.

In other news: "Retired sweaty beats the tar out of retired force support flight commander."

I'm fairly certain all of us know exactly how you feel...

go re-read and edit your last posts...AFTER you sober up.

Fair enough. That's hardly the rule though. It still seems to me like taking gripes public via social media invariably generates unintended consequences. It's a sad commentary on the state of our leadership that toxic situations like that one had to make it to social media to get solved.