tac airlifter
-
Posts
2,015 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
104
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by tac airlifter
-
-
57 minutes ago, Banzai said:
I have significant issue with using an event that should be handled with law enforcement and/or natl guard as a way to overreach executive power unconstitutionally, and I am honestly appalled at this forum’s complacency about it.
I had to sift through several childish posts to find a sentence worth engaging, it'd be nice if you were more mature.
The problem with your quoted point is the police refuse to do anything because the mayor refuses to do anything because the governor refuses to do anything. Fortunately we have a POTUS who disagrees with your opinion of constitutional limits, and unlike the LAPD will not allow this behavior. I'm glad you agree these dudes should be stopped.
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, Banzai said:
Currently threatening to deploy active duty marines to California. Thanks geniuses.
We should. We’ve been invaded.
-
1
-
1
-
8
-
-
I stayed 21 years because people were great and mission was awesome; I wouldn’t have stayed if we weren’t at war. Although the war was managed poorly and much was wasted, we were killing terrible people and I’m convinced my 20s and 30s were spent doing tasks worth my best efforts. That’s very cool and rare in life.
-
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
On 5/24/2025 at 5:53 PM, jorfy said:
All the drops are out of the T-6. The 5 T-38s are Phase 3 T-38Cs. Heavies are now T-6 direct to FTU with no more T-1.
Wow, what a change. Thanks for the explanation.
-
Trump spoke at length on Rogan about the style described above. Like it or not, it’s deliberate. He starts a point by taking a long winded trip (allowing opportunities to reference topical events, jokes, say random shocking things to get people like you riled up) but prides himself in having the mental wherewithal to return back and complete the point he was making.
It sounds bizarre and is not my favorite style, but hey he’s a 2x POTUS and I’m a random no one so clearly he’s got something. He also likes (and references) how much his style irks people like you. You’re bothered by the random things he references and can’t see he’s doing it on purpose to bother you: it makes you say he’s like Biden, whereas any clear thinking person can objectively assess that isn’t the case, thus making you look crazy by comparing his mild eccentric affectations with an obvious dementia case. This frustrates democrats thus advantaging him.
-
5 hours ago, uhhello said:
I'm predicting the tax goes away but registration and forms process stays. Maybe they'll surprise me
That alone would be amazing, but even better if we can buy a suppressed SBR at Walmart the way George Washington intended.
-
1
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, uhhello said:
Suppressors and SBRs squeaked into the BBB
Dose BBB bump them off the NFA registry or just eliminate the $200 tax?
-
16 minutes ago, Bigred said:
To you point, the answer is obvious, but the greater answer is simply having someone overhead is better than none.
Yea, I said that.
" If you can have a massive stack with gunships that'd be great, but these guys couldn't get it. Of course if you can only get unarmed aircraft to support you: something is better than nothing"
The context of my statement in this year old thread had nothing to do with strat vs tac ISR or what asset is best, and that's not a subject I'm interested in.
-
8 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:
And a shooter isn't helpful if there is no good intel/recce to get them where they are needed.
You appear to have a very myopic view of what "ISR" is.
Yes, there are some ISR platforms that can go kinetic. And there are a lot that those platforms cannot do, WRT ISR.
There are numerous instances where a non-kinetic U-2 was the only ISR platform over Americans, and it resulted in great success.
I completely reject your assertion that we should be armed to be effective.
You're responding to a post about the Niger ambush where they needed armed ISR to say the U2 can do cool things without being armed.... ok?
Can you tell me where I asserted ISR had to be armed to be effective? Or where I suggested one asset could do it all? You seem to be projecting onto my statements rather than reading words, and doing so absent context of the discussion.
for clarity: if American citizens are on the ground in danger and ISR is overhead anyway, it should be armed in order to PROTECT OUR PEOPLE. If you can have a massive stack with gunships that'd be great, but these guys couldn't get it. Of course if you can only get unarmed aircraft to support you: something is better than nothing. But in Niger the embassy made a decision to take weapons off aircraft providing tactical ISR to these teams despite the host country asking for it. This was a political decision for optics, similar to the Marines guarding their barracks in Lebanon being forced to take loaded magazines out of their weapons.
I can't believe I have to explain this to somebody who's been around a while.
To summarize-- If your kids were in an ODA working sources in enemy territory with an ambush imminent and could only get 1 aircraft assigned to them, would you rather have a U2 or armed ISR? The answer is obvious; I'm not disrespecting anybody else's platforms or jobs or usefulness, but the answer in that situation is obvious and this discussion is silly.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:
Agree to disagree Huggy; if US troops or citizens are in danger and ISR is watching, that platform should be armed.
Great as the U2 is, it's not helpful if you need a shooter.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Boomer6 said:
Did we transition to the what's wrong with the Air Force thread? This level of management definitely fits.
I know how it sounds as a headline. I'd win over most with details. If your commanders commanders commander has a specific combat requirement and you as a non-deploying less experienced EP take a stand against the culture change, prepare to get fired. Send it to a different thread if you want more.
-
Disagree Bif; If the goal is occupying Kashmir, Pakistan for the win.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:
Can Supreme Court Justices not be fired via impeachment? Stan Eval is a commander's program, however, as a commander when you R&C an evaluator, you are giving trust and confidence in that evaluator to follow applicable associate directives and technical manuals. Aren't you a MC-130 guy? Let's see what the MC-130V2 says:
Huh, weird it doesn't state "what the commander's directives are."
Lol, you've taken your analogy way beyond relevantly to this conversation. I'm def not an MC130 guy, commanders work for commanders, and evaluators will do what their boss says or lose the Q code 🤷♂️
-
2 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:
Do you argue with an evaluator who's giving you a check ride on how you don't agree with their interpretation of an area of checkride criteria? Who's charged with the final interpretation of said check ride criteria, you or the evaluator?
Not a perfect comparison but I’ll play: No I do not to your first question; the second one has more than two options and it’s where your analogy falters. Stan/eval is a commanders program, and I fired an EP (once) for not evaluating in accordance to my directives. The gentlemen fired was safety focused to a fault, and I wanted to accept more risk for gains in combat. He wouldn’t change his outlook to account for the aggressive culture I was hired to facilitate, so I overrode his judgement, reclaimed the authority, and hired new EPs who got with the program.
14 minutes ago, Motofalcon said:Yes, and both.
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.”If you don’t like it, then get the law changed
Good reply! I’ll start by saying I wholeheartedly agree with your last statement quoted. My understanding of POTUS perspective is a challenge on what constitutes “due process” as he’s searching for a streamlined system fit for circumstances. Getting 20 million people in front of a judge surpasses existing resources, and it was illegal for the previous administration to let them in.
If the legal answer is impossible, what’s the real world solution? The people elected an executive who said “I’m deporting them” because they were tired of Laken Riley’s being murdered by illegal criminals. Democrat lawyers say “not so fast, rule of law!” (Ironic since they ignored rule of law to get the nation into this situation) and have frozen our executives ability to do what the people want. You’re right the best answer is congress to legislate, but absent that are we forced to accept millions of Venezuelan gangsters soaking up social resources and killing citizens?
This issue was ignored for years when numbers were small & the people were mainly coming in to work. Under Biden some countries dumped their prison population on us, the amount of young Chinese men who entered is worrying from a national security POV. So thank you again for the thoughtful reply. What do you think POTUS should do since the courts cannot process the volume of people we’re dealing with?
-
1
-
-
41 minutes ago, Banzai said:
Please reconcile the discrepancy between you claiming to support the Constitution while cheering for an administration who openly questions whether they need to follow it. Does the Constitution actually say the president gets to ignore Supreme Court rulings as you seem to believe? Or has 'it been decided' over 200+ years of American jurisprudence that Supreme Court interpretations of the Constitution are binding law? Basic civics - when the Supreme Court rules on constitutional matters, that ruling IS what the Constitution means - that's literally their entire purpose in our system of government.
You sort of addressed the question in your last sentence which was the nuance I sought to explore (SC rulings can be reversed or clarified when new situations arise, therefore an opinion on constitutional matters is in a different category than the document itself). But why are you putting words in my mouth & asserting what I believe? I’ll pass on engaging in discussion with you, needlessly combative.
-
4 hours ago, Motofalcon said:
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
Please reconcile for me the discrepancy between your statements here. Does the constitution actually say illegal criminal invaders require due process prior to deportation as you claim? Or has “it been decided” meaning a court issued an opinion on something not explicitly covered by the constitution?
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, 17D_guy said:
Like you'd address it in a realistic way if he did.
I replied to him with a specific opinion on a specific subject one page back & got no response, so your accusation is invalidated. Instead he (or she!) is creating composite narratives with which to argue; a bad faith tactic and one for which there is no need since real people with opinions are right here.
This is a fun page with lots of cool folks holding diverse perspectives yet shared experiences. It's priceless really. However trolls are sand in the gears and must be purged. Not saying this dude is one (you certainly aren't) but I am saying this conversational practice is a red flag, hence my sharper than normal rebuke.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:
Combining the arguments of 30 different people, and then layering on conservative news media as though that somehow represents the views of anyone here, then combining all of that into one hyper-conservative Boogeyman, and naming it "you guys."
Well said.
Banzai your post is boring and your thoughts shallow. Is there a specific thing you want to talk about or is this general purpose amalgam condemnation?
-
2 hours ago, M2 said:
Excellent.
“It’s a foregone conclusion that at a minimum, this guy is going to be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. The only question is how many more years there will be in addition to that there will be, and our office’s goal is to get every single of of them,” 23rd Judicial District Attorney George Brauchler said.
From a philosophical standpoint I don't understand life in prison with hundreds of extra years versus the death penalty. Seems cruel to the offender and unsatisfying for victims. Just kill them. What am I missing about the utility of this punishment?
22 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:Second offense, permanent loss of license.
You get to be dumb once. After that it's intentional.
I'd vote for that. With extra penalties if you hurt someone.
-
Fuck the SEALs. Plenty of good ones but an above average amount of shitbags for a Tiered organization. I worked at the Beach; they have a massive ego issue within the command. How anyone could see this account and not be excited to celebrate Chapman is beyond me but they’ve drawn it out for years. Disgusting.
-
1
-
3
-
-
Repeat drunk driver hammered off his ass middle of the day and driving to get more booze, that's who killed one of the finest warriors and family men produced by the USA. He won't last.
Matt made so many people better during his too short time here, we'd all be lucky to have the same said for us. Life is precious, enjoy every minute with your loved ones.
-
3
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Banzai said:
It’s not about supporting or not supporting MS-13 gang members - you guys are presenting an entirely false dilemma. It’s about supporting the constitutional right to due process.
GMAFB, you are presenting the false dilemma: treat an unprecedented mass of illegal murderous gang members with the same deliberate protections of law provided citizens or we cannot maintain the constitution. I reject your premise.
Is there any doubt how our founding fathers would've handled this situation? They were actively driving out the natives & preventing additional British colonists from staying; it was obvious to those who wrote the constitution how/when "due process" applies and who is eligible. Yet now we're arguing to obey the constitution we have to do the opposite of what the authors intended?
2 hours ago, Banzai said:Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
Go with your opinion on the mandatory Covid vaccine, forced closure of churches & arrests of people engaging in the free exercise of religion during that time, assault weapons bans, sham trials for J6, FISA court abuses....
-
1
-
7
-
-
19 hours ago, brickhistory said:
I ask this seriously, no snark or point scoring intended: were you aware, and if so, were you cool with Obama ordering the Hellfiring of an American citizen and his 16 year old son, even though the guy was a terrorist? He had no due process other than a Situation Room briefing that said, "he's a bad guy."
I'm not sorry the guy's dead, but I said then, and do now, that it was wrong.
As to your "equal branch" point, I almost agree. Supreme Court = POTUS = full Congress vote.
I don't agree that a district court should be able to impose a nationwide anything regardless of what political party occupies the other branches. So I hope the Supreme Court finally ends that practice once and for all. Will be better for all.
As to a mass invasion and due process, that's a thing. I don't have a complete answer. But if Biden can arbitrarily let them in, why can't Trump boot them out? Biden granted "paroles" and "temporary refugee" status to hundreds of thousands of Haitians, et al. Why can't Trump remove that grant?
Point of order: the 16-year-old son was not specifically targeted but was armed & at dinner with multiple named objectives. Also, he was killed by GBU54 is not a hellfire. Also, whoever found/fixed then lazed those bombs did not know the 16-year-old son was there, but had they known they would have killed him anyway 🇺🇸⚔️
-
2
-
Commanders are dropping like flies this year
in General Discussion
Posted
Ok, enough internet for me today 🤮