GKinnear

It's a done deal as far as DoD is concerned and in the hands of Congress. Good luck getting 218 goobers and 51 cats moving together in the right direction.

HELL YEAH, BROTHER!! Excuse the all CAPS...but I assume you're hard of hearing after being that close to nearly 36,000 lbs of awesomeness! When I was an EWO stud Lt at Randolph, I was lucky to be there when the 100th Century of Flight Tattoo was held. 2x jets set off all the car alarms in the parking lot...the BONE and the Phantom...and all my old-school G-model instructors were quick to point out the F-4 didn't need the afterburners to do it.

I'm not a financial expert...not that many of us are (paging @Finance_Guy)...but I've heard that the CBO uses fairly static analysis when scoring bills. So in this case, tax cuts are continued, but so are the spending levels...which leads to the that score. Just like the outyears in the FYDP, the numbers don't and likely won't reflect reality when it gets here. But it will be interesting to see if D's and R's are willing to actually cut discretionary, let alone entitlement spending. My guess is it'll always be the Party in the minority demanding cuts because they realize it'll never happen...and in four years magically the new minority party will wake up and realize they've always been fiscal hawks. Probably time to come up with a new club in on-line political arguments...

That's irrelevant to the fact that Hamas chose to attack civilians. Whether Israel provided support to Hamas or not, Hamas decided to act independently. It's not like Netanyahu had a secret plan to fund and allow Hamas to knowingly attack, rape, torture, kidnap, and kill Israeli citizens...which are both Jewing and Arabic. That's a 9/11-level "Bush knew / jet fuel can't melt steel" conspiracy.

...Which could have been avoided if Hamas hadn't decided to deliberately target civilians in Israel, and then hide behind their own civilian population. CIVCAS sucks, but if the Israelis wanted to kill Palestinan civilians, you'd think they'd be much better at it.

As a 2x time member of that club, it'll be interesting to watch and see what the study finds. But I won't be surprised if it ends up being a wash...too much politics in both directions.

I may disagree with the intensity of your statement, but not the overall point you're making. If the non-HAMAS Palestinians want to take a stand against that death-loving cult, then they need to do it...otherwise, they are unfortunately guilty by association.

I agree with almost everything stated here...the only thing is "Palestinians". If you said HAMAS instead, then yes absolutely, no white-space between our positions. But the non-HAMAS tolerant Palestinian civilians are an issue to figure out. I've seen some media reporting about some small-scale protests against HAMAS happening, but not enough yet. However, I'd like to give them the chance to throw off the shackles of HAMAS oppression and join the international community as Israeli citizens...who happens to grant full citizenship to "Palestinians" people who choose to live in peaceful coexistence under Israeli rule.

Violent agreement...I think it should be inside the borders of Israel. I just don't see the compelling need for US governmental involvement. Private US business concerns can invest if they want to, but I'm very hesitant on US government at any level.

Looks like a ceasefire deal was reached...we'll see how long it lasts looking through the X comments from both sides.

Thanks for the reply...some we can agree on, some I see the logic of your decision-making, but I disagree with the assumption it's based on. @TreeA10 and @Lord Ratner speak to the assumption part...HAMAS has had semi-independence for 20 years and never pursued a peaceful co-existence with Israel, and the world basically encouraged them not to. See multiple examples of the UN and AP journalists dual-hatted as HAMAS operatives. Also, HAMAS specifically targeted soft civilian targets. The killing would have been bad enough, but the torture, mutilation, kidnapping, and raping (regardless of age) puts it on another level. I pray for peace in the middle east, but it takes both sides to be honest participants, and HAMAS has never proven themselves to be anything other than what the world saw on Oct 7th. So your plan to get the Houthis to stop is dependent on Israel, which is dependent on HAMAS...like I said, makes sense from your POV, we just disagree about the nature of HAMAS. I celebrate your right to free speech under the 1st Amendment, but your AIPAC comment made me pause. Jews can be criticised, just as blacks, Chinese, Mexicans, Polish, etc, can; however, there are many anti-semetic conspiracy theories about global Jewish cabals running the world that seem to have echoes in your statement. I may have some bias since we've been on opposite ends of this conversation. To end on a positive note, I agree with you and @Day Man on the Gaza Riveria plan. US Government has no standing to get directly involved in post-war plans in any way, and I don't think there's a public outcry to justify a change.

Last year was PCS orders, this year its retirement orders...I don't think the government has had a normal budget cycle since the sequestration debacle in 2011/2012. Yet the shareholders (US voting citizens) keep endorsing the board with only minor changes...plus les choses changent, plus elles restent les mêmes Edit: Just saw on Reddit that training TDYs have also been hit...I'm so far removed from the line, I've got zero SA on it. Anyone else seeing that as well?

Instead of playing a game of one-upmanship, I went back and re-read all your posts to make sure I didn't misconstruct anything. Some points have merit...your original question was "what's different this time?" is valid for any operation, and in this one, to paraphrase other posts, it's difficult to bomb someone to the stone age when they're already there. However, let me ask what you would do if you were the ultimate decider, to stop the Houthis from sending TBMs & OWA drones into an ally's territory, and were attacking innocent ships of all nations traveling through the BAM? There are three basic options: do nothing, full-scale nuclear war, or something in between. An oppositional attitude can be useful in the planning process...too many yes-men and there's no critical thought developing the plan. You're obviously not a fan of the current COA, so what would you do differently? I'm truly interested.

And Biden spent $230M on his floating pier to Gaza that did jack and shit for the Israel - Hamas war...now you care about money spent? https://www.reuters.com/world/bidens-gaza-pier-injured-far-more-troops-than-previously-known-2025-05-07/ I also see the Houthi statement has been unconfirmed by anyone in the administration...maybe it's true, maybe not. If it true (big IF) then I'd argue the administration has chosen poorly and needs to restart the air campaign against the Houthis if they manage to land another missile in Israel. I also don't believe if they keep shooting at ships, of any nation, that the current POTUS will just sit by and allow it to happen. Again, fuck with us and we'll fuck you up. "Tail between our legs"...sounds like you don't have a super accurate read on the current situation...I stand by my previous posts.

Hope there's a few rungs left on the escalation ladder to nukes, but the Indians did us a solid by removing this shitbag from the earth. Abdul Rauf Azhar killed American reporter Daniel Pearl, and justice has finally been served...wish we had done it, but I'll take it.

Well, the coherent thought is "you fuck with us and we'll fuck you up". AQAP was actively planning, inspiring, and executing external operations against Americans...we left the Houthis alone because they weren't bothering us. In fact, Houthis and AQAP fighting each other, when it happened, was enjoyable to watch because that was less AQAP to worry about. Since the Houthis are now attacking an ally (granted, a non-treaty one, but stated as a policy position for every president since 1947), taking civilian commercial ships hostage, and threatening the economic status of the world (again...BAM is a critical chokepoint and economic security is a part of national security)...yeah, the Houthis made themselves a valid target for American street justice. In fact, you could argue they're a more valid target than Iraq in 1991 was...Houthis still aren't the recognized government in Yemen and they are a client state of Iran (state-sponsored terror and whatnot). Again...this isn't rocket surgery.

@Banzai please reconcile your difference of opinion with Trump's statement above and Biden blatantly stating he was going to ignore the SCOTUS ruling on student loan forgiveness. https://www.instagram.com/reel/C7kmMNttcQH/?hl=en If you're a man of principle and took a stand against one POTUS defying the Constitution and checks and balances, I'm sure you had posts on the other one as well...I must have missed them, though.

However, Biden's removal of the Houthis from the Foreign Terror Organization list meant previous authorizations against terror groups like AQ and ISIS couldn't be utilized...every strike was a "self defense" strike. Which honestly, was a weak legal argument to me (Kinesiology major from a small land grant college...so caveat emptor) since we could always just remove ourselves from the Houthi-controlled territory instead of striking them. The Houthis are a client of Iran, and the Biden admin was very soft on Iran, so anything more would run against his administration's intent. Biden didn't know or care to direct a deliberate campaign to neutralize a non-internationally recognized group from using weapons of war against the only democratically government in the Middle East, nor did he know or care enough to use appropriate force to remove the threat to US, Israeli, and others flagged vessels moving international shipment through one of the 7 global strategic chokepoints. And everything @Clark Griswold stated. So no....Biden did not bomb the Houthis in any meaningful way. The current Trump 2.0 admin is the only admin since forever to deliberately order military action against the Houthis specifically. This isn't rocket surgery...

Wrong: Obama took it to AQAP (which was in gang war with the Houthis) Wrong: Biden took steps to remove the Houthis from the target list (removed from the Terror list) Right: Saudis bombed the Houthis. Too bad we're not playing baseball, otherwise, your .333 batting average might be impressive.

Got it...my high-order opener may have been a bit much...it's just sleepy San Angelo rarely gets attention. I still think the "intel nerd furry" theory may end up being the right one, too.

Tracking the resemblance...just nothing popping up on the ol' googleizer as far as DEI or other toxic leadership controversies go. I've never been stationed there, just grew up there, and the old man hasn't sent me any local news reporting on it either...I'll wait and see if there's something over the next few days to bubbles up.

What the absolute fuck...why is San Angelo (Goodfellow AFB) the model for toxic Wing Commanders? Seems like a lot of Intel nerd trainees are mad they can't wear their furry suits like the Keesler kids do. It can't be the fire dawgs...they kind of behavior is handled internally for course correction. Granted, GAFB had a fairly well-known Sq/CC and DO toxic combo, but that was in the '08 (?) timeframe.

And now you've got Big Blue letting fighters and heavies record and post on social media their highway ops... The circle is now complete, and there's no such thing as "authorized" morale... Last comment...The Highway Men are highly recommended for drunk music listening when surfing BO.net...

Hey man...@Karl Hungus has a name...better put some R-E-S-P-E-C-T on it!

It's not Friday...but today is the day for the 80th Anniversary of the greatest picture ever taken...even if it's Marines