Quoted:

  So basically you a virgin running a whore house.

Johns come in, they want kinky sex thing X, you have a pretty good idea of what X is because you have heard other folks talk about it, but can you ever really know about X until you try it?

Sylvan wants something totally filthy, and you don't know enough to dispatch the right lady to satisfy his lusty desires.


 

Quoted:

damn........

Cease fire, target destroyed.

That was co-authored with a fine naval officer, btw.

Quoted:


See I've gone around this with you as a casual advocate of airpower and it really does come through that you are remarkably well informed, which makes your posts very interesting.

Unfortunately for as much as you have read about Air Power, and as much as you can articulate the finer points you've never been able to grasp the "Ultima Ratio Potentiam Caeli".

You grasp it in the deterrence set, and you can figure how this plays into a policy end in broad strokes against peers. However you've never put 2 and 2 together to understand how this fundamentally invalidates earlier warfighting doctrines, land warfare, and infantry in nearly total.

All power is moral in nature, military efforts ultimately rely on the willingness to implement them. We are losing these wars because we are incapable of using nuclear weapons to commit genocide against people who are perfectly willing to commit genocide with IED's, and box cutters. We will continue to lose until we recognize that half measures will not suffice, and the application of ground forces is fundamentally a moral "half-measure". The misguided belief that if we send out some of our precious youth, armed with discriminating weapons, they will be able to use their judgment to kill some and leave others and our delicate sensibilities will be sated.

Unfortunately this moral doctrine has no relation to the conduct of an actual goddamn war, something our enemies understand and we do not.

I'll believe you "Understand Air Power" when you finally realize that it can be an active instrument. Not only the threat of a swatting a Peer in retaliation, but the active capability and willingness to exercise the same of swatting backwaters primitives in a fashion which they have absolutely no ability to counter.

Quoted:


See I've gone around this with you as a casual advocate of airpower and it really does come through that you are remarkably well informed, which makes your posts very interesting.

Unfortunately for as much as you have read about Air Power, and as much as you can articulate the finer points you've never been able to grasp the "Ultima Ratio Potentiam Caeli".

You grasp it in the deterrence set, and you can figure how this plays into a policy end in broad strokes against peers. However you've never put 2 and 2 together to understand how this fundamentally invalidates earlier warfighting doctrines, land warfare, and infantry in nearly total.

All power is moral in nature, military efforts ultimately rely on the willingness to implement them. We are losing these wars because we are incapable of using nuclear weapons to commit genocide against people who are perfectly willing to commit genocide with IED's, and box cutters. We will continue to lose until we recognize that half measures will not suffice, and the application of ground forces is fundamentally a moral "half-measure". The misguided belief that if we send out some of our precious youth, armed with discriminating weapons, they will be able to use their judgment to kill some and leave others and our delicate sensibilities will be sated.

Unfortunately this moral doctrine has no relation to the conduct of an actual goddamn war, something our enemies understand and we do not.

I'll believe you "Understand Air Power" when you finally realize that it can be an active instrument. Not only the threat of a swatting a Peer in retaliation, but the active capability and willingness to exercise the same of swatting backwaters primitives in a fashion which they have absolutely no ability to counter.

Quoted:


Eh.  Experience (BTDT points) in a particular field matters.  It isn't the only thing that matters though - at least IMO.  

I just really enjoy irony

Quoted:


I think you're a postmodern strategist word generator. That rant makes nearly zero sense.

Quoted:
Not even I am crazy enough to think that.
 

Quoted:


True, but he's OUR asshole.

And we like his style.

TRG

Quoted:





 

Quoted:


See I've gone around this with you as a casual advocate of airpower and it really does come through that you are remarkably well informed, which makes your posts very interesting.

Unfortunately for as much as you have read about Air Power, and as much as you can articulate the finer points you've never been able to grasp the "Ultima Ratio Potentiam Caeli".

You grasp it in the deterrence set, and you can figure how this plays into a policy end in broad strokes against peers. However you've never put 2 and 2 together to understand how this fundamentally invalidates earlier warfighting doctrines, land warfare, and infantry in nearly total.

All power is moral in nature, military efforts ultimately rely on the willingness to implement them. We are losing these wars because we are incapable of using nuclear weapons to commit genocide against people who are perfectly willing to commit genocide with IED's, and box cutters. We will continue to lose until we recognize that half measures will not suffice, and the application of ground forces is fundamentally a moral "half-measure". The misguided belief that if we send out some of our precious youth, armed with discriminating weapons, they will be able to use their judgment to kill some and leave others and our delicate sensibilities will be sated.

Unfortunately this moral doctrine has no relation to the conduct of an actual goddamn war, something our enemies understand and we do not.

I'll believe you "Understand Air Power" when you finally realize that it can be an active instrument. Not only the threat of a swatting a Peer in retaliation, but the active capability and willingness to exercise the same of swatting backwater primitives in a fashion which they have absolutely no ability to counter. The goal is not to scare them into compliance, or to maintain a delicate lose-lose scenario that deters rational actors. The Goal is to kill our enemies and fall back on the other benefits passively until we can kill our enemies.

The deterrence set, and MAD are just extensions of the fundamental offensive paradigm. When your not on offense, you need to constantly improve your position until you can resume offensive operations. This applies with Nuclear weapons just as much as with armored columns.

Quoted:

http://youtu.be/PSofqNSuVy8

Quoted:


To be fair, politicians make choices based on the options that are presented to them by their military advisers.

When president Derpy McLimpdick asks for options and the Air force tells them "We can kill every living thing", and the Army tells them "We can kill only the ones that don't like us, and leave all the poor innocent children alive and prosperous and everything will be unicorns and rainbows forever". Which option is more appealing when they are presented as falsely equivalent?

The war is wrong, because the Army keeps selling the political leadership of this country on fighting the wrong war.

TL:DR Airpower is awesome and we should try it some time.

Quoted:


How much sea time do you have?

Quoted:




http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/lemay.jpg

Quoted:




http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/lemay.jpg

If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting.

Quoted:

Quoted:


The fact that anyone is still alive in Afghanistan invalidates your premise.

Again, your focus is on the second order benefits (deterrence) but not the first order benefits (Killing enemies wholesale).

But I digress, I've said my piece and I don't want to make the thread jump the tracks. I got work to do so I'll bow out of this one. I'll leave you to arguing about things that are largely irrelevant (CAS).

I will say though, that its a damn shame you won't consider green-to-blue, the Air force needs hard-headed sons-of bitches like you in the missile branch.

Quoted:


I threw up once on Ferry in Alaska.

Does that count?

Quoted:

damn........

Cease fire, target destroyed.

That was co-authored with a fine naval officer, btw.

Quoted:


This tells me all I need to know.

You want to have another Amway sales presentation where no dissention is allowed.

I've got over 24 hours of USAF airpower instruction. During every block, every instructor save one gave the same appeal to authority.

Quoted:


Isnt that an oxymoron?

Quoted:


The fact that anyone is still alive in Afghanistan invalidates your premise.

Again, your focus is on the second order benefits (deterrence) but not the first order benefits (Killing enemies wholesale).

But I digress, I've said my piece and I don't want to make the thread jump the tracks. I got work to do so I'll bow out of this one. I'll leave you to arguing about things that are largely irrelevant (CAS).

I will say though, that its a damn shame you won't consider green-to-blue, the Air force needs hard-headed sons-of bitches like you in the missile branch.

Quoted:


The fact that anyone is still alive in Afghanistan invalidates your premise.

Again, your focus is on the second order benefits (deterrence) but not the first order benefits (Killing enemies wholesale).

But I digress, I've said my piece and I don't want to make the thread jump the tracks. I got work to do so I'll bow out of this one. I'll leave you to arguing about things that are largely irrelevant (CAS).
I will say though, that its a damn shame you won't consider green-to-blue, the Air force needs hard-headed sons-of bitches like you in the missile branch.

Quoted:


Boils my blood really.  Tell the customer they don't know what they are talking about, don't know what they need, don't know how things are run by upper management of an abortion organization with no loyalty to sister services, then cite some freaking desk jockey USAF officer as a reliable source of info on the customer.

S13gmund:  Your inability to correctly use the English language isn't inspiring any confidence in the customer.  It could easily be interpreted that if someone in such an important position can't spell, maybe they shouldn't be managing the Air Support Operations Center for an entire AOR.  Am I correct to conclude that you are an officer?  The next chain of logical thought is, "If these guys can't screen, hire, train, and retain officers that know 4th grade English (their vs. there), what are the JTACs doing punching in grids?"

Reminds me of the days when I had to threaten officers with calling the waste, fraud, and abuse hotline when then were filling waste baskets with aborted attempts at printing a legible document for soldier awards or other admin paperwork.  They were never trusted with anything close to the entire Air Operations Center of a campaign though.

I had friends on ODA-574, so this isn't a theoretical fun argument for me.  Some of our Nation's greatest men were lost that day, especially JD.

http://hansdevreij.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/oda-574-and-hamid-karzai-november-20011.jpg

Quoted:
Isnt that an oxymoron?

Quoted:

It was damn near a call-out from the get go.

Quoted:

Your ad hominem attacks and snarky remarks aren't going to get you the response you wanted.  Considering that this post has been made entirely from an iPhone while sitting in a car dealership waiting room I'd say it's a literary masterpiece.

To the argument about virgins or hotdog vendors, how about saying to a surgeon, who has performed thousands of surgeries and hundreds of appendectomies: "oh, you've never had an appendectomy befor? But you've performed hundreds of them successfully? You have no business performing appendectomies!"

See? I can do analogies too.  But more on that later.  I'm in the parking lot at work and need to go in.  I'll return to this thread later.

Quoted:


I hear you.  If I could wave a magic want and have unlimited aircraft, pilots, gas, maintainers, and time- I'd give every Joe his own personal A-10 squadron.  But if my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle... it's just not the way things are.

Air Power is exceedingly scare.  Tankers are exceedingly scares.  Maintainers are scarce.  Parts are scare.  Flight hours are limited.  For that reason, employment of air power absolutely must be exercised sparingly, in accordance with CFC's intent, in an attempt to get the most benefit for the very limited resource.

What I find curious is that the Air Force seems to get blame for the Army not getting the air support they want.  This is an issue to take up with Army Fires in nearly all cases except TICs, as it is ARMY FIRES who assigns priorities to ASRs.

Quoted:


popcorn.gif

Quoted:


So you see yourself as a surgeon? I might normally forgive the butchering of English if you're driving a handheld device and you were a half-witted civilian with lower than GED education.  Good thing JTACs don't use them.  As an officer working in a career management field where plain text transmissions can mean life and death, I strongly urge you to start practicing higher standards of commo procedures so these habits cross-pollinate to your professional behavior.  Then expect it from your peers, subordinates, and superiors.

It isn't ad hominem if it's relevant.  Ad hominem is designed to distract from the discussion by personally attacking a participant on irrelevant points in order to dissuade them from making their argument, like you did by citing some unnamed USAF CC telling you to ignore Sylvan because he's too opinionated.  I'm saying that competence is critical to the whole nature of CAS, because it is, despite USAF doctrine and practice to ignore the customer.

Don't engage me on the nature of logical fallacies. I promise you will lose that debate.  And for the record, I take the time to make sure my handheld device messages are correctly spelled...bad habits from being trained to send specific and correct burst transmission before text messaging was available to the public.

http://www.themilsimperspective.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Eco-51st-Inf-LRRP-1986-89-YouTube31.png

Maybe it's time to revisit data transmission device procedures, wouldn't you say?  The USAF has very high standards for recruitment of not only officers, but enlisted...or at least it used to.  We never liked the fact that calling in CAS was so protected by USAF, and even when an 18E was sent to the USAF JTAC school for 8 weeks, we still had to have USAF JTAC support for CAS.

This insane inter-services rivalry is costing good men their lives.

Quoted:


As a Group FIre Support Officer, I had over 40 13 and 18-series JTACs in the Group.  Air Force JTACs were attached to teams that either had a split team mission or did not have a JTAC assigned to their ODA.

Our 18-series JTACs controlled a lot of air...and did it well.

Quoted:

It's irrelevant because the difference between Sylvan's wishlist for fire support and what was actually delivered isn't sufficient to accomplish whatever muddled strategic goals the US government thinks it has.  Inadequacies in CAS notwithstanding, US ground forces already have no problem winning firefights.  Having Zeus's lightning bolts on call by every squad leader would save some ground-pounder's lives.  It wouldn't 'win' Afghanistan or Iraq.