I see no A-10 assignments in his bio. Doesn't appear to be mean spirited or bitter. Nice toothy, eye catching promotion file photo. Nothing about home of records, wives or kids however. Bio Link
#3
Hey General - grunts have 2 words for you: FUCK YOU.
His record starts with F4, goes to F16, and thats it. 1983-2008 all fighter and fighter wing assignments, all pretty much air defense stuff. Seems to have gotten his higher commands after a 25 year career - they started in the Obama years
Another USAF Fighter Mafia a-hole with a stick up his butt.
#4
And given he prefaced his statement with a denial that he would ever admit to saying it, and basically suborning fellow officers to lie (via omission) to Congress... I'd say he should get his retirement papers in order if Congress is paying attention.
#6
Side note: Given the repeated cheating and other scandals at the USAF academy, the mess with complete disobedience by USAF officers with the whole ULA mess, the Nuclear Strategic Forces fiasco a few years ago, the mess with the F35, and far too few of the F22, refusing to let Enlisted/Warrants to fly drones, and now this jackass...
#8
The 'fail' began in 1947. The U.S. Army is now only a couple of meters behind, and closing fast. They'll likely cross the fail line.... grinning and winking, hand-in-hand.
#10
A-10 has no future. Widespread manpads will kill it, unless USAF fails and the medium altitude is even dangerous. But then A-10 is the least of the problems.
British Tornados with 12 Brimstones and drones make the work from medium altitude with much more safety.
#11
The discussion has devolved Lionel. The article and rant is more about a perfidious, self-serving general than the merits of an airframe. The good or bad of a particular piece of kit should be argued without reference to treason.
#12
newc says It is not high cost, it is political.
Of course it's not high cost! If anything it's LOW cost.
There's no room for major graft and pocketfilling if you've got a successful platform with a proven record.
And while I don't blame him for this because it's been going on for a long time, it fits perfectly into Obola's MO. Success is irrelevant, the only thing that counts is power and graft....it's the Chicago way.
#13
Relatively to its number of aircraft WWII's USAAF had a far lesser imact on the front than the Luftwaffe or the Red Air Force. That is because ven in those times were the USAAF was for formally subordinated to the Army it dereamed of winning the war all by itself through strategic bombing and shunned close support to the ground forces. It was not only due to aleger share of planes being B-17s and B-24s ill suited for the role of assault planes but because of a lack of interest in developping doctrine and trainingg for it.
Things have not changed at all.
PS: How do yo tell stalinian purge in US Air Forcesque?
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
01/20/2015 9:15 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Fine, retire them. Get them out of the Air Farce inventory. The Army will be happy to pick them up and provide their own close air support.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
01/20/2015 13:41 Comments ||
Top||
#17
49 Pan, the Marines could probably use a few too.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
01/20/2015 13:54 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Remember it's not just a A-10 vs F-35 issue. It's also an issue of the next generation attack helo vs an A-10. Both air based platform. Look at both in mission profile, susceptibility to counter measures, and cost. At a certain trade off level (there is no perfect), better to simply move the A-10 to the Army as a alternative to that next generation attack helo. (insert attack helo special interest howl here - of course they'll never be held accountable for the cost overruns let alone budget killing decision in the future either).
#20
The issue here isnt the A-10. Its the officer calling a legally required honest answer to Congressional inquiry "treason". Thats quite simply wrong - and may in fact be criminal under the UCMJ.
This general should NEVER have gotten his star with that sort of attitude - he's using it for a corner office at Lockheed apparently.
#5
Trying to rationalize away the fact of his being raided Islamic and Val Jar being Persian. It's pretty simple, no long winded rationalization needed. He just cant bring himself to publicly admit the religion he was raised under was a false one.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
01/20/2015 13:38 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Here's my take from the article.
First the kind of war described is the antithesis of any conflict the 'Jacksonian tradition' in US politics will support. If Jacksonian support is indeed a necessary (not sufficient) condition for any US war/conflict effort then this enterprise was already doomed in 2001.
Second, here's the key part on the nature of the WoT:
'...it has always been a war against networks of radical Islamists. But in order to wage that war, the U.S. has had to ally with Muslim countries and people, many of whom believe the state should punish apostates, adulterers and blasphemers.'
'large pluralities of Muslims in countries allied with the U.S. in the war on terror disavow the tactics of terrorism but endorse the aims of radical Islam. For example, 74 percent of Muslims in Egypt feel that sharia should be the "country's official legal code," and an equal majority say it should apply to non-Muslims as well as Muslims'
This looks like a deal was made whether implicitly or explicitly and secretly.
The West makes concessions to the mainstream Arab-Islamic world. Among these concessions is the at least de facto imposition of some key elements of Sharia on non-Muslims in the West.
Mainstream forces in the arab-islamic world in turn will cease any support for terror attacks on the West.
This does seem mad but it would be an explanation for the very strange attitudes of the Western political class since 9/11/2001.
#7
Elmerert Hupens2660, I read that differently. The way I read the text you quoted it means Egyptians may not like terrorism but they think Sharia is dandy and should apply to Egypt and eventually the world. I don't read any deal in there.
The problem is we played the weak horse in order to get our allies to like us. Act weak and people assume you are weak. Eventually you become weak.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
