tac airlifter

Wow, you are what's wrong with the Air Force.

Is this one if those ethereal 'everyone supports someone' statements? Copy, we all support national objectives. But 'supporting force' implies the presence of a supported force; as we expand our geographic presence often we directly execute objectives with air power rather than using air power to support others executing objectives. It's kind of cool to see USAF aircraft influencing regions independent of other services.

I guess that depends on how you define support. If you think 99.9% of sorties are being flown in support of a dude physically located on the ground you are completely wrong. Most missions I fly aren't in support of ground forces anymore, and that's changed over the course of the past 10 years as we pull back from certain areas and attempt to influence others without introducing friendlies on the ground.

Along those lines, does top third or any of that other shit get looked at?

Good post Animal, maybe we can branch that into another thread because I'm equally tired of hearing about STS and bar songs.... Seriously, we have a dude claiming to be senior leadership talking to us & this is the topic we choose? I am personally convinced that killing is the only strategic solution against our current enemy. It sounds simplistic, but we've tried nuanced COIN operations to no avail. War is politics by other means, right? So we're using violence as required to achieve desired political outcomes. Our enemy is doing the same thing. Logically, we stop using violence when it's no longer the best tool to accomplish our desired outcome. However, our enemy doesn't share this logic. They would gouge my sons eyes out with a spoon if they could because they genuinely believe God wants them to. We can never compromise with them, we can never get along with them. Our only answer for this particular ideology is to destroy it. So yes, we need to convince our civilian leadership to loosen the ROE and let us kill more people. I understand the dangers of creating new enemies by killing old ones in the wrong time or place, but the only response to Zarqawi's horror houses in Iraq was death. By killing the few utterly resolved to our destruction, we not only mitigate that direct threat but indirectly we strengthen whatever moderate elements within our enemies camp who think they can achieve an acceptable outcome without terrorism. In this case more killing is the right answer. Nothing else we've tried against this enemy has shown results.

That's not just CVS bro. And shouldn't you change your location status now?

This is what we should be talking about. Leadership in AFSOC has spent years giving commanders calls about uniforms, sexual assault, professionalism, etc. Never once have I seen anyone over 0-5 ask about getting better at the mission. I've had a few talks here and there about specific problems, but fundamental fixes never came and as soon as we weren't fucking it up down range the attention left. Maybe you are a fantastic leader who facilitates tacticians tweaking the latest TTPs to outmaneuver and enable F3 of HVIs. Or maybe you're FOS; I'll likely never know. Regardless, I don't know any 0-6s who read AARs so your sentiment seems disingenuous. Which is a damn shame because our joint partners (who always seem to be the down range CDRs instead of AF) often ineffectively employ us and we could use some knowledgeable and credible advocates.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2434278/Kenya-mall-attack-torture-claims-emerge-soldiers-Eyes-gouged-bodies-hooks-fingers-removed.html We need to light these motherfuckers on fire.

Smells slightly worse than your average deployed spot, but not by much. If you have a few days off you can swim with whale sharks. Food is the best in the AORs I've been to.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10039672/UN-accuses-Syrian-rebels-of-chemical-weapons-use.html UN report is incomplete, but current assessment is AQ in Syria actively using chemical weapons.

Potentially valid; but that gambles on releasing that shit into the atmosphere. There are warheads designed for that mission, but the law of unintended consequences will likely reign supreme.

how about boards grouped by like AFSCs for 0-4 & 0-5? That way, at least the board would have a clue what the actual bullets and acronyms mean and a chance at discriminating intelligently without over reliance on stratification. Then HAF has neutered the DT and taken away the only carrot many senior rafters have. Is there a glass ceiling for non-selects now or do you foresee command positions populated by non residence guys/gals?

I'm totally confused by POTUSs speech today: basically "I have the authority to strike without congressional approval but I'm still going to seek congressional approval... But I might strike without it anyway."

Combat shamu?

Never heard that one before....

Good housing answer, thanks. The FY14 arrival was briefed yesterday by mid level HQ folks, guess its still undecided. We've heard rumors of a PCS freeze in 1 month if sequestration is still unresolved; can you speak to the validity of that rumor in reference to how it affects a new SQ standing up at CVS?

i have no idea if it will be configured differently, I just meant the transfer of ownership.

In other news; I heard the AFSOC MC12 will arrive at CVS FY14. Looks like more missions headed that way. Any ideas when the new base housing will be built?

Could you clarify this statement? Because it sounds like you're a UPT IP who thinks the bottom students "earned" a U28..... And if that's the case you have no idea what U28s do and you're an idiot who has hurt the war effort.

Yes, and "grievous morale issues" has always been a top concern among Air Force leadership.

You've got it all wrong bro. I'm busy. I come to BO to have interesting discussions with people whose opinions I value. You think its all anonymous internet posting, it isn't; these communities are small. I don't care what you fly or if you fly, but why waste my time talking with random people? You say it's all about the logical value of the points themselves; I recall being like that myself as a college student. But nowadays I'm uninterested in summoning the energy to debate unqualified opinions. Your tautological approach to debate tires me. Nsplayr was also pleonastic, but at least he is personally credible and is down range now doing great shit as we speak. Until I hear more about you, I'm uninterested in discussing the numerous flaws in your rationale.

Getting back to WTF territory we can all agree on........ Man fucks cow after claiming flirtatious enchantment, passes out during nuptials: https://metro.co.uk/2010/06/14/man-forced-to-marry-cow-faints-at-wedding-387781/ ETA: yes I know its a few years old.

You'd be wrong and the entirety of military history would be against you. Generals leading wars need not be current tactical experts, however, having that background is essential in knowing what can and cannot be done. Business comparisons sometimes work on a micro scale but always fall short on the macro. Besides that, you're entirely sidestepping the point: with current unofficial requirements for specific academic pedigrees we're rendering unqualified a large mass of people who have already proven themselves in combat, while simultaneously allowing only those with hardly any tactical experience through. There hasn't been a single successful military managed this way in all of history, and we seem to have stumbled into this practice rather than methodically reasoning our way here. Your whole discussion is tangential. If you want to be taken seriously, you need to offer something about your qualifications other than "it doesn't mater, I'm an officer."

Why do you think they were disrupting the flow of traffic? Seems to be an assumption on your part. You're also willful ignoring the role the police played in impeding the flow of traffic. Also 100% incorrect if you think the demonstrators were given ample time to go elsewhere; they specifically asked to relocate to a non-disruptive area and were told to go home. That's my issue here: they were basically told there was no option to protest. I don't even want to discus the whole idea of free people asking for a permit to exercise rights. This is one of those agree to disagree things since different folks view the same events but reach different conclusions. I posted this because for some of us, "SOP" behavior from police is a total WTF regardless of political affiliation.

Hard to say who is using them though. I know reports are Assad regime, but strong potential it's al Nusra front. Either way the civilians are suffering. Think this will lead to an escalation or fizzle out like the last time someone used chemical agents but source was indeterminable?