Vet 0369

I have seen exceptions. When I lived and worked in Wichita, KS, in the 1970s, a “first-timer” was running for Congress. He promised to send a synopsis of all major bills to his constituents each month to poll how they wanted him to vote on the Bill.  I took a chance and voted for him, even though his party wasn’t the one which I usually agreed. He followed through on his promise by sending the poll to ALL constitutes in his District. Until he was appointed Secretary of Agriculture by President Obama. Even though I didn’t necessarily agree with all his positions, I respected him.

I have seen exceptions. When I lived and worked in Wichita, KS, in the 1970s, a “first-timer” was running for Congress. He promised to send a synopsis of all major bills to his constituents each month to poll how they wanted him to vote on the Bill.  I took a chance and voted for him, even though his party wasn’t the one which I usually agreed. He followed through on his promise by sending the poll to ALL constitutes in his District. Until he was appointed Secretary of Agriculture by President Obama. Even though I didn’t necessarily agree with all his positions, I respected him.

I have to agree with Billdc 100%. For the most part, politians should set the limits, and then get the hell out of the way and let the military minds guide and control the battle. As I see it, most of the issues I saw during the Vietnam Conflict, a strictly political conflict, were caused by the politicians butting in and controlling the military. Before that, the most public incident was during the Korean Conflict and involved MacArthur publicly challenging Truman, and was removed from command because of it.
The Zalushny sounds almost identical to MacArthur in that he is publicly challenging his Commander in Chief. I expect it will have the same result if he doesn’t back off.

I have to agree with Billdc 100%. For the most part, politians should set the limits, and then get the hell out of the way and let the military minds guide and control the battle. As I see it, most of the issues I saw during the Vietnam Conflict, a strictly political conflict, were caused by the politicians butting in and controlling the military. Before that, the most public incident was during the Korean Conflict and involved MacArthur publicly challenging Truman, and was removed from command because of it.
The Zalushny sounds almost identical to MacArthur in that he is publicly challenging his Commander in Chief. I expect it will have the same result if he doesn’t back off.

I have to agree with Billdc 100%. For the most part, politians should set the limits, and then get the hell out of the way and let the military minds guide and control the battle. As I see it, most of the issues I saw during the Vietnam Conflict, a strictly political conflict, were caused by the politicians butting in and controlling the military. Before that, the most public incident was during the Korean Conflict and involved MacArthur publicly challenging Truman, and was removed from command because of it.
The Zalushny sounds almost identical to MacArthur in that he is publicly challenging his Commander in Chief. I expect it will have the same result if he doesn’t back off.

Not really sure what “early assault failures” you are referring to. The only amphibious assault “failure” that I remember reading about was the initial Japanese amphibious assault on Wake Island shortly after their attack on Pearl Harbor. The Japanese launched an amphibious assault that was defeated by the U.S. Marine Detachment, who not only defeated the only amphibious assault to fail (in the Pacific), but also sank a Japanese destroyer while they vwere doing it.
Yes, the Marine and Army amphibious assaults were very costly for the Marines and Soldiers who made them (especially during the Navy’s island hopping campaign), but NONE of them “failed!”

Not really sure what “early assault failures” you are referring to. The only amphibious assault “failure” that I remember reading about was the initial Japanese amphibious assault on Wake Island shortly after their attack on Pearl Harbor. The Japanese launched an amphibious assault that was defeated by the U.S. Marine Detachment, who not only defeated the only amphibious assault to fail (in the Pacific), but also sank a Japanese destroyer while they vwere doing it.
Yes, the Marine and Army amphibious assaults were very costly for the Marines and Soldiers who made them (especially during the Navy’s island hopping campaign), but NONE of them “failed!”

Not really sure what “early assault failures” you are referring to. The only amphibious assault “failure” that I remember reading about was the initial Japanese amphibious assault on Wake Island shortly after their attack on Pearl Harbor. The Japanese launched an amphibious assault that was defeated by the U.S. Marine Detachment, who not only defeated the only amphibious assault to fail (in the Pacific), but also sank a Japanese destroyer while they vwere doing it.
Yes, the Marine and Army amphibious assaults were very costly for the Marines and Soldiers who made them (especially during the Navy’s island hopping campaign), but NONE of them “failed!”

LOL, I love the sound of social discourse in the evening! It’s the sound of freedom (just like the sounds of a target range)! It’s amazing what an old grunt in his mid 70s can get started when he reminisces about training fifty years ago. If tactics haven’t changed in that interim, I’d be terrified for our service members!

There could be another reason. Sun Tsu in “the Art of War” suggests that one should leave the enemy a means of retreat if possible. A cornered enemy with no way to retreat will fight like, well cornered rats! If Ukraine drops the bridge, the Russians in Crimea will fight “like cornered rats,”as they have before. What do you think was the real reason that Eisenhower refused to allow Patton to close the Falaise Gap and prevent the Germans from retreating?

Believe it or not, this type of Soviet movement wasn’t unknown during WWII. If anyone here has ever played Avalon Hill’s “Squad Leader,” (the Great Grandfather of Combat Mission) sewer movement was a method of moving in Stalingrad missions, so it was most likely an actual thing!

Welll, unless they’ve also put in place a comprehensive method of eliminating said drones if they violate the “drone no fly zone,” it isn’t worth the paper it’s written on, because, criminals being criminals, couldn’t care less if it’s illegal! It only affects law abiding individuals.

Welll, unless they’ve also put in place a comprehensive method of eliminating said drones if they violate the “drone no fly zone,” it isn’t worth the paper it’s written on, because, criminals being criminals, couldn’t care less if it’s illegal! It only affects law abiding individuals.

What we call JP4 is pretty much the universal fuel for turbine engines. It’s basically kerosene, or what the British call Paraffin in. It is also used in most turbine powered vehicles such as tanks.

What we call JP4 is pretty much the universal fuel for turbine engines. It’s basically kerosene, or what the British call Paraffin in. It is also used in most turbine powered vehicles such as tanks.

Nah, just fly them down an intake and destroy the engines while they’re parked if they’re in the open. Shouldn’t be difficult, a running engine can suck a ground crew down an intake when it powers up to taxi, so a small drone shouldn’t have much trouble flying down an intake.

Excellent fire discipline at about1:40 through 1:50. I’m assuming the rifle has a burst or auto function, but he is snapping off single shots. Also, the automatic fire you can hear in the background is three to five round bursts. Good fire discipline saves A LOT of ammo!

Excellent fire discipline at about1:40 through 1:50. I’m assuming the rifle has a burst or auto function, but he is snapping off single shots. Also, the automatic fire you can hear in the background is three to five round bursts. Good fire discipline saves A LOT of ammo!

Yup, and potentially causes major oil spill of maybe say a couple million gallons of oil into the Indian Ocean or another near by sea!

This is pretty much correct, except that it’s a tad insulting to the “Grease Monkies,” and there is a more nuanced difference. I can’t speak to Army or AirForce manuals and maintene “levels,” but in Navy/Marine Corps Aviation, we had “Flightline,” Internediate,” and “Depot” level maintenance. The basic mechanical training for all levels was done in the same training school classes. When you finished your training, you were assigned to either a Squadron (Flightline), a Headquarters & Maintenance Facility (HAMS) Facility, or a Naval Air Rework Facility (NARF), you would receive some additional training for each, but you wouldn’t receive “a bigger hammer!” It all depended on the tooling available to you. In fact, the NARF  was considered to be equivalent to the original Factory that built the engine or the airframe. When I was writing procedures for the engines on the F/A- 18A/B, we wrote for Line, Intermediate, and Depot Manuals in the same office and frequently moved from one team to another depending on need. Our most driving factor was the Navy requirement that the procedures be written at a reading comprehensive level of 9th grade or lower (for folks not familiar with U.S. education, High School, our secondary school, started at 10th grade). That was in 1985 though and might be down to 6th grade by now. In fact, the Army at that time sent out Line Maintenance instructions for armor and helicopter turbine engines in comic book form.

This is pretty much correct, except that it’s a tad insulting to the “Grease Monkies,” and there is a more nuanced difference. I can’t speak to Army or AirForce manuals and maintene “levels,” but in Navy/Marine Corps Aviation, we had “Flightline,” Internediate,” and “Depot” level maintenance. The basic mechanical training for all levels was done in the same training school classes. When you finished your training, you were assigned to either a Squadron (Flightline), a Headquarters & Maintenance Facility (HAMS) Facility, or a Naval Air Rework Facility (NARF), you would receive some additional training for each, but you wouldn’t receive “a bigger hammer!” It all depended on the tooling available to you. In fact, the NARF  was considered to be equivalent to the original Factory that built the engine or the airframe. When I was writing procedures for the engines on the F/A- 18A/B, we wrote for Line, Intermediate, and Depot Manuals in the same office and frequently moved from one team to another depending on need. Our most driving factor was the Navy requirement that the procedures be written at a reading comprehensive level of 9th grade or lower (for folks not familiar with U.S. education, High School, our secondary school, started at 10th grade). That was in 1985 though and might be down to 6th grade by now. In fact, the Army at that time sent out Line Maintenance instructions for armor and helicopter turbine engines in comic book form.

This is pretty much correct, except that it’s a tad insulting to the “Grease Monkies,” and there is a more nuanced difference. I can’t speak to Army or AirForce manuals and maintene “levels,” but in Navy/Marine Corps Aviation, we had “Flightline,” Internediate,” and “Depot” level maintenance. The basic mechanical training for all levels was done in the same training school classes. When you finished your training, you were assigned to either a Squadron (Flightline), a Headquarters & Maintenance Facility (HAMS) Facility, or a Naval Air Rework Facility (NARF), you would receive some additional training for each, but you wouldn’t receive “a bigger hammer!” It all depended on the tooling available to you. In fact, the NARF  was considered to be equivalent to the original Factory that built the engine or the airframe. When I was writing procedures for the engines on the F/A- 18A/B, we wrote for Line, Intermediate, and Depot Manuals in the same office and frequently moved from one team to another depending on need. Our most driving factor was the Navy requirement that the procedures be written at a reading comprehensive level of 9th grade or lower (for folks not familiar with U.S. education, High School, our secondary school, started at 10th grade). That was in 1985 though and might be down to 6th grade by now. In fact, the Army at that time sent out Line Maintenance instructions for armor and helicopter turbine engines in comic book form.

Aw, come on, that’s nothing. The Russians were wiping out companies of Leopards and Bradly’s weeks before they arrived in Ukraine!

This is pretty much correct, except that it’s a tad insulting to the “Grease Monkies,” and there is a more nuanced difference. I can’t speak to Army or AirForce manuals and maintene “levels,” but in Navy/Marine Corps Aviation, we had “Flightline,” Internediate,” and “Depot” level maintenance. The basic mechanical training for all levels was done in the same training school classes. When you finished your training, you were assigned to either a Squadron (Flightline), a Headquarters & Maintenance Facility (HAMS) Facility, or a Naval Air Rework Facility (NARF), you would receive some additional training for each, but you wouldn’t receive “a bigger hammer!” It all depended on the tooling available to you. In fact, the NARF  was considered to be equivalent to the original Factory that built the engine or the airframe. When I was writing procedures for the engines on the F/A- 18A/B, we wrote for Line, Intermediate, and Depot Manuals in the same office and frequently moved from one team to another depending on need. Our most driving factor was the Navy requirement that the procedures be written at a reading comprehensive level of 9th grade or lower (for folks not familiar with U.S. education, High School, our secondary school, started at 10th grade). That was in 1985 though and might be down to 6th grade by now. In fact, the Army at that time sent out Line Maintenance instructions for armor and helicopter turbine engines in comic book form.

Well, to be fair, the U.S. did sign a treaty (George W. Bush) with Ukraine to protect them from foreign invasion after they destroyed their nukes after the dissolution of the USSR (or CCCP). Did the U.S. intervene with the Russian invasion of Crimea and other Ukrainian regions? NO! So, why would Ukraine or Ukrainians trust in anything the U.S. says, especially when the individual who made the decision on what to do, or more important, what NOT to do, was the Vice President of the U.S, and is now the President of the U.S. named Joe Biden!