Pooter
-
Posts
704 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
37
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Pooter
-
-
5 hours ago, pbar said:
I didn't see anything like this with the African-Americans I flew with or served with. Heck, most of them did better than I did and went to USAFWS, SAAS, AWC, and made O-6... YMMV though.
I'd be interested to hear from anyone here who knows more about the situation with this guy. My initial read is that something is a little fishy here. How does a supposedly shit hot raptor pilot/Harvard grad land himself as a line IP at the Randolph IFF squadron doing some innovation ball wash for AETC..
Is it because the organization with POC as the secdef, csaf, and cmsaf is viciously racist? Or is it because he pissed the wrong person off or was a douche in his community and was put out to pasture like so many other iron majors before him?
Sorry dude, I know it hurts. But it's happened to white dudes too. In fact.. almost exclusively white dudes.
-
2
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, tac airlifter said:
Yes I am aware. Now that I’ve answered your question, kindly answer mine: Did I ask about training lines, or did I ask about combat lines?
recommend you read the original question from arg, which specifies combat lines, then read the reply, which indicates pregnant women can fly those aforementioned combat lines. Hence my inquiry.
Apologize for any ambiguity. No I don't think you're combat deployable once pregnant. But that still leaves most of the flying that happens in the Air Force as fair game.
I'm not sure why you're so intent on splitting hairs over this. Pilots should be flying as much as possible. 4-5 months out of the jet is a hell of a lot better than 9 months out of the jet. The Air Force has a policy that actually makes sense (for once) granting pregnant pilots some flexibility to continue to do their job. And now they've made a uniform so they can do that job comfortably. Both of those things are wins in my book.
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, lloyd christmas said:
That’s exactly the point. The Commander in Chief shouldn’t be commenting on this. Uniforms designed for a fraction of the total force shouldn’t rise to his level. I’d like to hear more about strategy, procurement, budgets, technology, manning, etc from the boss.
Agreed that there are bigger priorities, but when has a president not paraded around for getting some low hanging fruit? And it really didn't take up much of anyone's time until Tucker decided to go wildly high aspect about this issue.
1 hour ago, arg said:How far into a pregnancy can a woman fly a fighter on a combat, or training mission? Honest question, I tried to find the info. What kind of support mission would be okay into the second trimester? I would have a hard time being okay with my wife, or daughter, or granddaughter now(ha) doing six or seven sorties a day in a Herk supporting operations in wherever the AOR might be. But then again if the woman can handle it she can go to the back, have the baby, hand it to the loadmaster, then come back up front in time to complete the checklist and fly an overhead approach to an assault landing.
Current guidance says non-ejection seat aircraft and it can go at least part way into the second trimester. Those regs have existed for a while so this is really just a case of uniforms catching up with already existing policies.-
2
-
-
Having said that... I'll play devils advocate again here and say that making a pregnancy flight suit isn't a very heavy lift for an organization with more than half a million people.
Tucker is presenting a false choice here between accommodating people and lethality. An organization as large as ours can actually do both. Making a uniform to accommodate pregnant women does not come at the expense of lethality. There are those of us who go to work every day and train to China and Russia and Iran and Syria scenarios and that training keeps going no matter what new uniform is being developed. Obviously the job of the military is to kill people and break their shit. But the military is made up of individuals and individuals have needs.. other than simply being a badass tactician.
I'd even argue that accommodating people does make us more lethal because it improves quality of life allowing service members to actually focus on tactics instead of not having a uniform that will fit your body. This is the entire philosophy behind all of the MWR resources the government pours money into at every base.
I wonder how big of a conniption tucker would have if he found out that most bases have a golf course, bowling alley, auto hobby shop, arts and crafts shop, thrift store, etc...
I get that people like him and Shapiro want to fight back against the endless woke bullshit that's pushed on us every day. But he did it in a really really stupid way, and chose a bad example. I'm not surprised at the backlash at all and frankly he deserves it. If we can make a flight suit to accommodate women flying non ejection seat aircraft well into their second trimester to support the killing of our enemies, that is awesome.
-
1
-
2
-
-
@Lord Ratner
"trip over their equity erections to attack the conservatives tripping over their social-collapse erections"
probably the most accurate description of modern political discourse I've ever seen-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, bfargin said:
You seem to be dedicating a lot of time and energy for "not here to change everyone's minds"
Sorry I thought the intent of this forum was to be like the squadron bar.. you know the place where you bitch, moan, argue, and solve world problems. If it would bother you less, I could just agree with everyone. But that doesn't sound like any fun at all.
-
1
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:
We will never have zero risk. If we wanted zero risk we would never have an Air Force that puts America's best and brightest inside a piece of metal weighing hundreds of thousands of pounds, fills it with jet fuel, straps on explosives, lights it on fire and shoots it into the sky.
Agreed. And yet.. when there are easy things sitting right in front of our faces that can mitigate some of that risk, we generally do those things.
-
18 hours ago, Smokin said:
"Less than 1 in 100" includes less than 5 in 10000 and also includes zero. Zero is roughly the chance that I think I have of dying of COVID in the next decade. I will eventually get the vaccine for the same reason I get the flu vaccine, which I also think that I currently have a roughly zero percent chance of dying from. The flu and COVID both suck, but I'm way more likely to die from a car accident than either virus, so we need to reasonably evaluate the risks. For the military population, the chance of death from COVID is virtually zero, which makes me think that there is something more going on here. Speaking of which...
I cannot think of a public health issue in the history of the world that has been more politicized that this, which is why you see a substantial distrust in the system that developed it. Remember the VP debates when now VP Harris said 'if Donald Trump tells me I should get the vaccine, I won't get the vaccine" and now she is actively advocating that exact same vaccine simply because she is now in power? Zoom out just a little and I think you'll find reluctance to get an experimental vaccine that is being pushed by substantial political motivations for a virus is relatively non-threatening to the military population to be relatively reasonable. The vast majority of deaths have been >65 years old. If this is really not politically motivated, why was a healthy guy like me <40 years old offered the vaccine six weeks prior to my >65 year old parents? Politics in the military sucks worse than COVID; it is reasonable to push back against purely political decisions being forced on the military.
I'm glad you aren't in a panic about covid, but regardless of how you feel, your risk is not zero. Risk is never zero for pretty much anything and this is exactly why we compare probabilities. Then we use those probabilities to decide what to be most concerned about. I think statistics, history, and current experience all show your risk of actual observed effects from covid is much much higher than some hypothetical future side effects from a vaccine.
In reference to your political point: I've said from the start in this thread I don't think politics should factor into your decision. Neither should dumb Air Force policies. Of course kamala is going to shit on the vaccine when trump is in charge and then advocate for it when she's in power. Is that an indictment of the vaccine or of her as a two faced, manipulative, power hungry person? Trump would've done the exact same thing if the roles were reversed.
Political posturing and dumb regulations in response to this crisis were always going to happen and they have nothing to do with the actual scientists developing a vaccines.
-
1 minute ago, Tank said:
Is this a conservative vs. liberal argument or a vax vs. anti-vax argument?
I am a registered Republican but vote across party lines and only vote for who I think is the best candidate. I also could care less if you or anybody else believe in vaccines or are anti-vax.
I could give a rats ass about the FDA as an agency. My argument is that every vaccine and shot we take in the military has been clinically tested and FDA approved. Even still, people bitch about the anthrax and small pox shots and bitch about having to take them. So why now the big push for a vaccine that has not been approved by the FDA or hasn’t been clinically proven to the standards we’re used to?
Honestly, I don’t have to explain to you or anybody else for that matter why I am choosing not to take the COVID vaccine. Until it is required, we still have a choice. I’m only debating this for debate sake and unlike you, I am not trying to change anybody’s minds or persuade them to act like I do.
Keep preaching to the masses though and good luck with whatever you choose to do.
Obviously I'm not here to change everyone's minds either, and I doubt random internet commenters opting out of the vaccine will ever directly impact me. I just enjoy playing devils advocate especially when these threads get a little too echo-chamber-ey.
My main motivation is that I'm a very data driven person and all the data I see point to getting the vaccine. The data also points to lockdowns being stupid, lest to you think I'm some far left nut.
But to me the vaccine makes sense not only for your personal health but also to put an end to the national and military-wide covid rules stupidity. It's crazy to see people complain about covid restrictions and then turn down the vaccine.. the one thing that might actually make a difference and get these rules lifted.
-
45 minutes ago, Tank said:
Take a vaccine that is 95% effective for a virus that has a 99% survivability rate?
Take a chance on a vaccine with possible long-term implications on my already healthy body and lifestyle?
Take a chance on a vaccine that, if I had implications, could cause me to not be able to pass my annual flight physical or keep my FAA Class 1 medical?
Again, until it is FDA certified with more testing and there are more options for the vaccine, I’ll wait...
Sounds like a nasty hypothetical. Here's another one. You skip the vaccine, catch covid, and end up losing your class 1 due to actual observed long term side effects of covid that we already know about.
All you have to do to know this vaccine side effect argument is misguided is to look at the history of vaccines. Adverse side effects across a variety of vaccines are on the order of 1/10,000 to 1/100,000. Depending on your demographic covid has a 1/100 to 1/1000 chance of killing you. So basically you're choosing to risk a much more likely and much worse outcome now, to mitigate a much less likely and much less severe thing later. Am I missing something here?
Also I'm really curious how, in the minds of conservatives, the FDA went from giant bloated stupid bureaucracy to ultimate vaccine gatekeeper seemingly overnight.-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Guardian said:
Yeah “Standby” said it best. It is in fact your opinion and subjective experience. Then willingness to disregard people who think different from you.
Look how many millions of people have lost their jobs. And the coming hard ships from the inflation that is likely to happen. The unnecessary mass shut downs that have happened and continue to happen for a death rate less than 1%. And that death rate existed prior to the vaccine. What would happen if a mass pandemic with a death rate like those of the past would happen today?
You forgot a category. What about the group of people who don’t want to bail the military out of its own stupidity requiring only those who are taking a not required experimental drug to deploy or go TDY? I’ve heard of those types too. Why should the person sacrifice their own beliefs to not vaccinate on a not required vaccine just to help the military fill a deployment? I get it. We are all volunteers but the Air Force can force us to violate other beliefs.
Not saying I fall into any of these categories. But it seems you are awful critical of those choosing not to vaccinate. And I haven’t heard a good reason why.I don't have any beef with you that covid policy at both the national level and Air Force level has been botched to a preposterous degree. That is plainly evident from the devastating shutdowns in places like California.
But my entire argument is those things shouldn't factor into your personal vaccine decision. At the end of the day we have a dangerous virus and a vaccine to reduce your chances of getting it by 95%. All current medical evidence, the CDC, and the medical community of the entire world say the vaccines are safe. And by getting it you protect other people too as it has been proven to reduce transmission.
-
5 minutes ago, Guardian said:
95% protection against a virus that is more than 99% survivable. And likely even more survivable than the known number suggest because we aren’t likely to ever know how many people have had it. Or actually died from it.
None of those three motivations apply to the people who responded to you today. What do you think about that?Right. So since I'm sure you are aware how percentages work, that reduces your chance of death from less than 1 in 100 to less than 5 in 10000. Seems like a pretty good deal to me for a mild headache and a few days of arm soreness. But hey maybe 1/100 chance of death is good enough for you. Not the response I was expecting. I guess you got me.
So add a fourth one to the list, just sheer carelessness or apathy. Do you also not lock your doors at night, wear a seatbelt, or do other basic things to minimize low likelihood/high impact risk items in your life?
-
1
-
4
-
-
10 hours ago, Guardian said:
That’s a big assumption of peoples motivations. Big. Do you think there could be other reasons people have? Or are you 100% right?
Of course there are other reasons. Medical conditions precluding you from getting vaccinated are basically the only reasons that hold water in my opinion.
But based on this thread the only other motivations people have for rejecting it seem to be:
-spite
-generalized institutional mistrust
-F U don't tell me what to do
Here's my point. In my organization it was unbelievably easy to predict which people would refuse the vaccine. If it had been a Vegas bet I would have made a shitload of money. So why is that? Do I just have an amazing spidey sense of exactly where everyone stands on issues of personal health?
Or maybe is it because vaccine refusal is inextricably linked to a particular political ideology, and it's super easy to spot the far right political loud mouth complainers in the squadron..
-
1
-
4
-
-
9 hours ago, Tank said:
I’m not a political blowhard refusing it out of spite.
I just don’t want to put something in my body until it’s FDA approved and been clinically proven.
I have seen friends and family of mine who were perfectly healthy have side effects from the vaccine (one is a professional mountain biker and she has had equilibrium problems and “brain fog” since the injection over one month ago).
So why would I inject myself with something that could cause me problems?
Because not getting the vaccine could cause you much bigger problems... I'm sorry your friend got brain fog from the vaccine. That's a new one I haven't heard about. But I would urge you to weigh the risks of the two options:Option one: give yourself ~95% protection from the virus and risk hypothetical long term side effects and the occasional case of brain fog.
Option two: risk it with a virus that's killed half a million people in a year. Oh and we also don't know what covid's long term effects might be either.
And If we're doing brain fog anecdotes, I'll chime in with my anecdotal evidence too: every single person that I know who has gotten the vaccine felt slightly off for one day, had arm soreness for a few days, and then went about their life.-
3
-
4
-
-
I think we're conflating two things here. Whether or not you should get the vaccine, and the Air Force's dumpster fire policies relating to covid are two completely separate issues.
Anyone who has been in the Air Force for more than a day should have been able to predict that they'd enact idiotic policies, and commanders would revert to extreme risk aversion. But none of that should play into your decision of whether or not to get the vaccine. Getting the vaccine should be based on your personal health and that is it. Big Air Force nonsense shouldn't play into that decision and neither should politics.
But what I'm seeing in the 1/3rd of service members turning down the vaccine are a bunch of political blowhards refusing it out of spite. It's a selfish act of political defiance, a middle finger at big blue and the libtard lockdown people, with not a second thought given to their actual health.
And that is a problem.-
3
-
4
-
-
I'm going to direct my hate like I direct my JASSMs: with poor timing and in all directions.
-
3
-
2
-
-
Unpopular opinion incoming: I think wap is a pretty decent song. Certainly not a feminist anthem, but it has some clever lyrics and I think considering the number of male artists who spend every waking moment talking about their dicks, we can give the ladies this one. It's certainly more hilarious and fun than any of the other drivel on pop stations. Cardi b has other good songs too. "I like it" is an absolute banger of a remix. Shhhhh it's okay you can admit it.
-
1
-
-
46 minutes ago, HuggyU2 said:
Really? I had that conversation with my children. More than once too.
Same here. And my dad had that talk with me. People act like the police talk is only a thing for minorities, but the same shit applies to everyone. Your police interactions will go far more smoothly if you at a minimum: mind your p's and q's and don't try to fight them.
The number one way to reduce perceived police violence issues in this country is to teach people to not descend into hysterics the second you have to interact with a cop. And unfortunately exactly the opposite is being taught.
-
2
-
-
49 minutes ago, Majestik Møøse said:
I can’t keep up with forum drama, but I think he’s either a known troll or an actual idiot. His posts remind me of the Facebook comments that high school dropouts post.
I'm leaning toward actual idiot. It's pretty wild to see such a severe emotional reaction aimed at a car company and more specifically Tesla autopilot.. a feature you never even have to turn on if you don't want to. Is it perfect? Of course not. But we aren't measuring it against perfection. We're measuring it against the competence of the average driver, which is to say, complete trash.
-
3
-
-
13 hours ago, MyCS said:
First off, software is coded. People write the code for the software that makes it even more unreliable and subject to bugs. I don't have time for software bugs when I'm driving. If FSD was so great, why does the Tesla owner assume all the risk like a moron? What's the insurance rates on a Tesla again through a reputable company?
I don't care about the other drivers around me and what the hell they are doing. I'm a defensive driver. No software from Tesla is going to stop someone who sucks at driving from crashing into me. I've had to avoid 3-4 accidents in Texas alone because people are inattentive drivers and have the attentiveness of a baboon.
Last time I checked, sensors and cameras on cars fail. Especially when you are last in reliability like Tesla. I'm not willing to take that risk. How did it work out for the guy who burned to death in his Tesla by ramming into a highway barrier 🚧 because his car was on autopilot?
During the pandemic, the Tesla semi logged 0 miles. Diesel and gas trucks ran night and day to transport medical, food, and whatever else we needed. As gas cars sat in garages expending zero energy because people were teleworking. People with Tesla's had their cars plugged into the grid just eating up electricity as they teleworked. Brilliant idea.
There aren't enough facepalms in the world for this comment.
a. You proved my point exactly. You had to avoid 3-4 accidents? No shit dude.. people are terrible drivers. Why would you not want some well thought out automation to come along and help fix that problem. ABS, stability control, and traction control were all newfangled tech at one point and are now completely standard. Autopilot will be the same.
b. Yes software is coded... Not sure why you felt the need to tell us that. But also machine learning and software updates exist. So Tesla's autopilot gets better every day based on the millions of miles Teslas drive and through deliberate updates from the company. They'll fix 99.9% of the hypothetical bugs you're so worried about before you ever knew they existed. On this subject, I'd recommend sticking to your circle because the clunky verbiage you're using indicates to me you know precisely nothing about "coding" and "bugs."
c. Pretty creative pandemic-work-from-home edge case about electric cars sitting unused. Did you think that one up yourself? I guess that's the silver bullet argument. Really got nothing for you there. Bravo. "So this one time we had a pandemic and all these tech people worked from home I think and like probably all of them have Teslas just sitting in their garages which is super wasteful I'm pretty sure because of electricity and stuff. So probably electric cars shouldn't be a thing."
Is it bad that just from your ramblings on here I can say with 90% confidence you opted out of the vaccine have a punisher decal on your vehicle?
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, MyCS said:
Yeah, buy a Tesla if you want to drive the most unreliable car on the market. They are constantly ranked in the bottom for reliability.
Teslas are cool if you want your car to plow itself and your family into barriers, semi trucks, and first responder vehicles. Teslas love ramming into parked semi trucks and first responder vehicles. The concept is moronic at best. You're creating a class of people who already suck at driving and won't know when to takeover from the FSD system. They'll be to scared and hesitant, thereby slowing down reaction time.
Tesla isn't saving the planet. Mining nickel and cobalt for battery packs is harmful to the environment. Having to plug a car in every night just wastes electricity. If you aren't generating you're own power to fuel your Tesla, you're wasting electricity period. Renewables are a very small percentage of what provides us with electricity.
Autopilot in the jet kicks off sometimes too. Sometimes it's completely INOP **gasp** Should we scrap the entire concept because it isn't absolutely perfect? If I was trusting Tesla autopilot to transport my family, I'd do exactly what I do in the airplane. Monitor it. Trust but verify. Because I'm not an idiot.
As for other drivers on the road, I would trust Tesla autopilot software over their awareness and reaction time 100 times out of 100. Do you live in a strange alternate reality where people are really courteous, attentive, skilled drivers? If so I would very much like to visit.
-
2
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Lawman said:
Look around you when you drive literally anywhere in Suburbia, or look behind you if you’re like me and have a pair of car seats. That is not a comparable vehicle size to the big burly 3rd row might be an option SUVs that America has been in love with since the mid 90s.
That’s exactly what I’m talking about when I say I’m confused at exactly how Tesla is supposedly this revolutionary idea. It seems like they really want to just creat a buzz, and let a major manufacturer like GM or Ford do the heavy lifting of producing the mass of vehicles we actually buy, meanwhile Tesla will happily reap the benefits of being the go to source for infrastructure investment.I'm not sure where you're driving but all I see on the road these days are compact SUVs and crossovers. If you exclude pickups, the top 3 selling vehicles in America for 2020 were compact SUVs: the rav4, the crv, and the equinox.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/wheels/news/best-selling-cars-suvs-pickups-2020/%3Famp
You can't spec any of those three to be even remotely close to the level of luxury and tech a Tesla has. So the Tesla costs more. This is not difficult to understand. Tesla makes luxury electric cars with preposterous performance. So yes they're going to cost more and sell fewer total units than the companies making econo boxes.
I will admit they're not for everyone and the infrastructure isn't full up in some parts of the country. But it's pretty cool that the premier electric car company in the world is American.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, brabus said:
Also strip that dude of his call sign...everyone forever more refer to him as rank and last name, even when talking about him in a conversation. His call sign should cease to exist and never be spoken by another individual again. He doesn’t deserve it.
Agreed. The craziest part to me is that PC guidance from above isn't new and it certainly isn't a difficult thing to work around. You just have to think creatively, and be straightforward with your squadron. "I'll have your back if you have mine" kind of thing.
Hell, you can still have names that are acronyms for offensive things and then just create a PC cover story for them. This shouldn't be hard.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:
As most know it started years ago and is only going to getting worse...(see thread about USAFA safe spaces).
My old squadron had to remove a ton of heritage stuff going back to combat ops in Vietnam.
I remember my Wing/CC interview with Gen Rand...he was pulling his hair out after a naming ceremony at the IFF Sq at Randolph...I can only imagine how bad it is now.
That pisses me off more than anything because you know gen rand was around back in the heyday when you could get away with anything. But now that he's old and the one who has to provide top cover he's not into it anymore.
The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)
in Squadron Bar
Posted
😮This is my shocked face.
So now we know he's a shitty pilot and human being. Newsflash: the raptor demo pilot ONE DEMO TEAM AGO was a black guy.