HeloDude

Regardless how the jury finds him, it just further drives these important points: 1) Don’t live in an area ran by progressives 2) Limit travel to areas ran by progressives 3) Definitely don’t go to an area to help people who won’t help themselves, an area which welcomes “mostly peaceful protests”, and who don’t want the police attempting to establish some sense order/put down lawlessness, etc. The decent people in these areas need to see #1 above. For those who disagree, keep in mind this is what our current president tweeted out shortly after the event (not to mention the crap spewed by other leftist politicians):

Judge kicks out MSNBC from his courtroom for “allegedly” trying to photograph jurors. My bet at this point is for a hung jury, possible acquittal on one or all the charges. If it’s a hung jury, I don’t see the state trying him again given the evidence and considering how bad the prosecution performed in trying the case. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.abcactionnews.com/news/national/judge-bars-msnbc-from-court-after-person-allegedly-tried-to-photograph-rittenhouse-jurors%3f_amp=true

They’re transitioning to green energy to create jobs, so it’s all good.

Exactly—so when is he getting the boot? If he sticks around then I don’t believe much will change. He’s sorry his bosses are upset, not because he believes what he and his team did was wrong.

If tradition goes against anything even possibly labeled as offensive, unequal, hurts someone’s feelings, etc then it’s being, or soon to be, squashed. We’ve gone from righting our past wrongs (which needed to happen) to agreeing with almost everything the woke progressive left desires. So with that being the case, why are we still having separate standards for men and women? Can anyone honestly give me a non-emotional/pissed off answer?

Unfortunately the joke is on everyone who applied for a religious exemption, as I’m definitely not surprised. Big blue never had any intention of seriously looking at each individual case for valid concerns, if they did, we would be hearing about quite a few getting approved, and instead, I have yet to hear of a single one (though here might be a handful that I’m just not aware?). That being said, I’m not a fan of religious exemptions for anything when it comes to the government, even if I’m for or against the directive…that goes for head wear, shaving, etc. If the mission calls for X, then we should all have to comply or no one should have to comply. Likewise I think it’s interesting that in this culture of “equality”, why can’t men have the exact same grooming/uniform standards as women? How does it hurt the mission to allow men to have long hair, earrings, etc?

This was regarding Iraq, but we’ll see if 2007 Sen Biden would also have been right wrt Afghanistan.

Sounds like you weren’t canceling when the vast majority others would have flown. If you’re confident in explaining your decision to the bosses, then most likely they’ll back up your decision. It’s those who won’t…and we all know who those people are.

How dare someone have to explain their decision why they can’t do their job when others (trained exactly the same way) can. Accountability is so tough these days…kind of sad. Sucks to suck I guess.

A board can’t reinstate, take away wings, etc. The board merely makes recommendations and the MAJCOM CC (or delegated authority) has the call. Off the top of my head I’m aware of two instances where the board recommended one action and the final authority did the opposite—in these two cases I’m referring to, one board recommended keep their wings and one didn’t. I’m fortunately not an AMC guy, where I have heard stories of guys getting Q3’d for minor issues/things mostly beyond their control, but I have seen some serious buffoonery and just overall weak flying abilities not met with adequate consequences (ie some sort of Q3). I’ve been a school house IP a couple times and have seen studs only receive a downgrade on an eval for something clearly outside the realm of Q1 criteria…this has more so been evident over the last few years vs 10-15 years ago. To the discussion above regarding the E-3 debacle a few months ago, I’m all for an AC saying the risk factors don’t justify the mission, but this should never be met with “whatever you say, it’s your call”/no repercussions, regardless of the situation. If you’re an AC and you refuse to fly (first off, you’re probably better to QC your decision with some other/older experienced guys/gals if you can), then that decision should always be reviewed by leadership afterwards…and if you made a solid call, then I’m fairly confident any “decent” leadership will back you up and there’s no repercussions. But if someone is canceling just because they don’t want to deal with some extra work or challenges (ie they might have to divert on a local training sortie) then those decisions need to be met with some conversations/possible adverse actions. I’ve been sitting ops sup and kindly tried to “understand” why guys didn’t want to go fly and I always said you have the final call but I’ll have to report it to the DO, etc…funny how if I started questioning why they didn’t want to fly (because I and others wouldn’t have canceled) most guys would decide to go.

Air Force pilot: I don’t feel comfortable flying a mission I was told to fly because I perceive risks that could possibly jeopardize my safety and it doesn’t matter that my leadership thinks it’s totally safe to go fly. Air Force pilot: I don’t feel comfortable getting a new vaccine that I was told to take because I perceive risks that could possibly jeopardize my safety and it doesn’t matter that my leadership thinks it’s totally safe to take. Either we trust our people to be able to make their own call when it comes to their safety and how it affects the mission or we don’t. Full disclosure—I think if you’re in the military and are ordered to get the covid shot then that’s part of the job, whether I personally like it or not, and if you refuse when the leadership thinks it’s safe, then there should be consequences. Likewise if you’re ordered to fly a mission you’re qualified to fly and you refuse, and leadership thinks it’s safe, then there should be adverse consequences.

Haha. Then say that and show us the awesome pumpkin!

Yes, you did miss some something. Not too long ago the Air Force decided to post this Airman’s picture under the headline of “Diversity Makes Us Stronger”…not that he won some award, that he was doing great things in his job, helping out with the community, etc…literally just because he is a minority and that by that fact alone, he makes us a stronger force. And now we come to find that the same Airman was arrested for being involved with a murder. Now think of all the great Airman at Ramstein that were doing great things that weren’t highlighted by the Air Force…and who aren’t being arrested for heinous crimes. I don’t know if A1C Peralta was good at his job or not before his arrest, but the only reason the Air Force have to the public that they wanted to highlight him was for minority background…no other reason, and it turns out that he’s obviously not that great of an Airman. There are plenty of Airman, minority or not, doing great things that are worthy of PA posting their picture and telling us about them, and yet that’s obviously not what happened here. Still confused?

I’ll just put this right here… I definitely think we need to bring in the brightest and hardest working from all backgrounds and walks of life and in doing so brings greater diversity of thought and talents, but when the focus is on changing the demographics of the force just for the sake of doing so, then recruiting, promoting, etc based on merit is no longer the top priority. https://www.ramstein.af.mil/News/Photos/igphoto/2002546376/fbclid/IwAR3FOGm-DOXiozcIbxZo1Fn4zKSalRVW-xk4Fs_47w7FIBgOE2KLe9Z-Hgw/ https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2021/11/02/travis-airman-arrested-in-connection-with-alleged-murder-of-19-year-old-woman/

Good post above by Dirk. So in the end, who takes responsibility for the failures? And I don’t mean Bush, Obama, Trump, or Biden…they’re politicians, not military strategists, and unless they were the ones feeding the American citizens lies, then they were just doing what most other politicians would have done in their shoes at the given time. I mean who (that does this for a living) in the DoD takes the public hit that they either manipulated the data (ie lied about the the capabilities of the Afghans) to make it look like what we were doing was working or who takes the public hit that they (DoD officials, military or civilian) were so incompetent they truly believed the Afghans were capable when we were going to leave? Or is just a complete failure at all levels of our DoD from the lowly CGO/NCO all the way up the top? That’s the problem—there’s no public accountability for this huge failure and we are left with people shrugging their shoulders. And our country is so politically divided that Biden and/or the Dems in Congress don’t truly want to get to the bottom of it because it’s making Biden look bad to keep it in the light (I’m sure the same could be said if Trump/the GOP were in charge). So in the end, no one is publicly held accountable, strategically our military’s ability to achieve it’s future goals is decreased, and American citizens lose even more faith in the integrity/capabilities of our military. Yeah…if I’m China, I’m definitely invading Taiwan if they believe it’s in their best interest to do so. The US isn’t going to stop them.

I don’t disagree—unfortunately we’re at a point where if a person doesn’t agree with someone else then said person is a fascist, racist, communist, anti-science, libtard, bigot, blah blah blah. And when you label someone one of these, all forms of decency towards each other goes out the window. This is what people resort to when they can’t just argue with their ideas. Don’t worry…we’re soon going to learn that economics doesn’t care about name calling.

Is it wrong/inappropriate for journalists (or anyone else for that matter) to do so?

Yeah, what do I know.

Yep—I understood your original comment. Our culture has become one where the majority of Americans want to not hold people responsible for their bad decisions, their lack of effort and willing to fight for what they believe in, etc. This culture shift has also affected the military, hence why so many members don’t blame Afghans for their country’s failures and likewise believe it’s the job of the USA to make their lives better. Not surprised at all.

Simple—I would tell someone to join if they believe it’s in their best interest to do so, and not if it isn’t.

Have you seen what has been happening to our military over the last 10-20 years? I definitely can understand, unfortunately.

Having/not having 60-80 hours of T-6 time as student won’t make/break an AF helo pilot getting to the airlines as it will still be more challenging to get to a legacy compared to our fixed wing brothers and sisters. That all being said, Army helo pilots get there eventually if that’s what they really want, it just takes a bit longer and usually means cutting your teeth as a regional pilot. See the link below. https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1PH0CO

It literally goes against the concept of a commitment, but ok.

I want to know who was involuntary separated because contractor fitness assessors back in the day didn’t count a few of their push-ups on one of their many PT tests. But I agree that I was a big fan of when they went to military assessors and even more of a fan of when they allowed guys/gals in the squadron to give PT tests. It was frustrating when a random assessor said they wouldn’t allow me to do my run first, followed by the push-ups/sit-ups…even though the reg allows it.