|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:Ok, so I went to high school near White Sands Missile range, and there were some big lasers out there. We got to visit HELSTF and their MIRACL laser around 1993 or so. In front of the building, they had a cubic meter of concrete that they boiled to a depth of about 2" or so with a few pulses. Boiled. Concrete. At 20 miles, so they said. They showed us the tracker, sitting in a 5" mount. They said they were only a couple years away from fitting the whole laser system in the 5" mount, held up only by exhaust venting required because the laser burns some nasty stuff, and emits hydrofluoric acid and heavy water in its exhaust stream. Really interesting stuff, thanks! I still suspect the F-35 laser is vaporware.
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 13:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 18:25 |
|
|
Pity it isn't a gas laser, I like puns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 13:19
|
|
|
NightGyr posted:We're building a plane we don't know how to fly or arm. drat this rushed production thing is messed up. As much as I like to poo poo on this program, this aspect is perfectly normal and how every fighter since WWII has been developed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:HAHAHAHA oh god everyone needs to watch this. It's loving hilarious, especially in the last half. Haha...I posted it earlier in the thread, it's a great loving video. The clip of the B-47 performing a LABS maneuver around the 37:40 mark is  as hell.Here's another one I posted earlier, it's literally the polar opposite of POWER OF DECISION: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlPEBROvR9w Oh CPD/Plan B, you were (and are, in the case of CPD) such scamps.  : SURPRISE ATTACK MOTHERFUCKERS***34 minutes later***  : Well I guess the massive multi-billion dollar early warning system we established on both coasts has failed us miserably, who knew it could be beaten by SLBMs on a depressed trajectory launch, man it sure would've been nice if we'd spent a shitload more money on MX and an insane rail basing scheme because that would've somehow been more survivable than missiles cocked in silos. And it sure would've been nice if we'd spent more money training our SAC crews because apparently our 15 minute MITO launch scheme just wasn't enough to get the fleet airborne. Should've paid the money and accepted the risk to keep Chrome Dome going. Also I don't know how it happened but the Soviets took every single boomer out, must've harnessed the power of Yuri.***9 minutes later*** Nothing left to do but surrender I suppose...if only we had listened to Team B.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 16:38
|
|
Sir, for the last 36 hours all nuclear detonations have been inside the Soviet Union. Of 100 airfields 96 are destroyed and 4 are heavily damaged. We have lost only 6 aircraft, and we believe those to be operational, not combat losses. We have received a dozen independent requests for cease fire. Supreme Headquarters Europe reports soviet troops in disarray and retreating.
They have no choice. We have the Air. We have the Power. And they KNOW IT.
|
Team B was a bunch of jingoistic psychos, so no wonder.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 16:50
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:HAHAHAHA oh god everyone needs to watch this. It's loving hilarious, especially in the last half. I'm digging the 1950s style presentation. "Oh, let me take a quick call while on camera..." fake e: We MUST have more force than the communists, even though in the event of a nuclear war we will both be destroyed (?) Nebakenezzer fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Jun 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 19:54
|
|
|
These might not be very useful moves, but they're pretty damned cool. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3h2PIo0tt0
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 01:03
|
|
|
Vindolanda posted:I've heard from our Army Air Corps that dealing with the Americans isn't so much insanity-building as it is slightly worrying, because people seem so much more driven to rise in command level, rather than to become proficient at whatever it is they do. Bear in mind, however, that anyone is going to say they their branch of service in their military is better than that of another country. This is absolutely true, unfortunately. The system is specifically designed to do this in a number of career fields, and the bleeding of talented personnel makes it even worse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 14:18
|
|
|
Godholio posted:This is absolutely true, unfortunately. The system is specifically designed to do this in a number of career fields, and the bleeding of talented personnel makes it even worse. It sounds like it takes the peter principle, and throws it into a pressure cooker. "Good at your job? Well gently caress you, where's your goddamn ambition?!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 14:49
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:It sounds like it takes the peter principle, and throws it into a pressure cooker. "Good at your job? Well gently caress you, where's your goddamn ambition?!" The military is the exact opposite of the Peter Principle. It is essentially impossible to move people laterally out of whatever environment or community they're stagnated in and similarly impossible to bring in fresh blood at anything above entry level. The only way to get rid of incompetents, particularly in the upper enlisted ranks, is to promote them. Note that by far the dominating archetype isn't the skilled specialist without ambition, it's the often actively dangerous egotist nincompoop who must be made someone else's problem. People with the ability to become readily proficient at what they do run from the organization screaming.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 15:02
|
|
|
On that subject, I've been flipping through the GiP story threads for a while, and the one thing that constantly amazes me is how dumb and goddamn crazy some people are. Not like  "This loving guy" but "Holy poo poo, how have you not killed anyone yet and why are you still here?" This is probably my favorite story from the 'Lets Talk About Idiots' thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
Truthfully the idea of the US being able to win a nuclear conflict with the Soviets wasn't really (and keep in mind I'm not saying it would be a good idea) an unlikely proposition based on Soviet launcher and warhead numbers until the mid to late 1960s. Hell just looking at platforms the US had far more bombers and subs than the Soviets. Really until 1962-1965 (with ICBMS coming online) the scenario depicted in Power of Decision isn't really that counterfactual. Nebakenezzer posted:I'm digging the 1950s style presentation. "Oh, let me take a quick call while on camera..." Yeah, Power of Decision was actually really nicely made and apparently they used actors (industrial short actors) and as Snowdens pointed out a few days ago, it's not exactly a rosey picture for Post War American Life. Snowdens Secret posted:It does state 60 million American dead/wounded and very little of the bomber force survives. Always surreal to see B-52s as the primary weapon system surrounded by liquid-fuel ICBMs, Snarks, slide rules and the new-hotness B-58. Marshal Prolapse fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Jun 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 16:07
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:The military is the exact opposite of the Peter Principle. It is essentially impossible to move people laterally out of whatever environment or community they're stagnated in and similarly impossible to bring in fresh blood at anything above entry level. The only way to get rid of incompetents, particularly in the upper enlisted ranks, is to promote them. Note that by far the dominating archetype isn't the skilled specialist without ambition, it's the often actively dangerous egotist nincompoop who must be made someone else's problem. Paraphrasing Field Marshal Moltke, there are four kinds of officers: smart and lazy, smart and energetic, dumb and lazy, and dumb and energetic. Smart and lazy officers should be made generals, as their combination of intelligence and natural laziness allows them to discover the easiest and simplest solution to a problem. Smart and energetic officers should be made staff officers for the smart and lazy generals, as they have the drive and intelligence to put together all the products that the smart and lazy generals need to devise the easiest solution to a problem. Dumb and lazy officers are harmless, they are idiots but they don't do anything so they can be ignored. Dumb and energetic officers are a cancer on an organization and must be eliminated at all costs because they do nothing but create irrelevant work for everyone. Unfortunately the U.S. military has stood Moltke's maxim on its head: our leadership consists of the dumb and energetic people, who do nothing but make hundreds of stupid decisions every day and create extra work for everyone else. They are assisted by the dumb and lazy, because the smart and lazy ones got the gently caress out and the smart and energetic ones are rapidly following behind them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Paraphrasing Field Marshal Moltke, there are four kinds of officers: A professor/mentor of mine has a very similar way of breaking down students. Knowing him it's entirely likely that he stole it from Moltke and has been waiting for one of us to call him on it. I'm mangling the poo poo out of it (it was a lot funnier when he said it) but as best I recall it went "Cyrano, you will find that there are three types of students in your classes: Those who are smart and industrious, those who are either smart OR industrious, and those who are neither. The the smart and industrious ones will earn A's from you. The smart OR industrious manage to get B's. The ones who are neither . . . ehhhhhhh. . . . . . *grimaces and shrugs with his palms up in front of him in a "what the hell can you do" motion*" On topic: I've heard a lot about this flight of intelligent officer material from military and ex-military people I know, many of them mid-tier officers (O3 - O5) who either bailed at that point or were in the process of plotting their exit trajectory. I'm curious to hear what you think the reason for this is? Frustration with the institutional retardation and hardships (deployments etc) of military life? Better paying positions in the civilian sector?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 17:05
|
|
|
Frustration with the institutional retardation -- 40% hardships (deployments etc) of military life? -- 45% Better paying positions in the civilian sector? -- 15% (not counting the folks whose plan from the beginning is to get trained/experienced in a viable MOS and get out after a tour or two)
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 17:21
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:The military is the exact opposite of the Peter Principle. It is essentially impossible to move people laterally out of whatever environment or community they're stagnated in and similarly impossible to bring in fresh blood at anything above entry level. The only way to get rid of incompetents, particularly in the upper enlisted ranks, is to promote them. Note that by far the dominating archetype isn't the skilled specialist without ambition, it's the often actively dangerous egotist nincompoop who must be made someone else's problem. Ah, I get it. It's not competant people promoted to the level of incompotance, it's "the more actively stupid and dangerous you are, the better material you are for promotion." Hooooollllyyy poo poo. Does the Canadian Forces roll like this? NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:Not like  There's not a psyduck in the world large enough for this
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:
This question is based on only my (non-extensive beyond some basic training) knowledge of industrial lockout/signout procedures, not anything military, but why was the detonator left at the other end of the system, and not with the crew that was setting up the charges? I'm sure there's some military reason, but it seems like the "some rear end in a top hat could kill us all with this" part should be held by the guy who's generally the last man out of the danger area.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:
Yeah, that thread is usually a source of humor (vs say the o_0 thread), but that one is just well super pysduck. I'm still surprised no one beat the poo poo out of the guy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
BAE Systems have dug out a few ideas from the 60's http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2013/06/totally-psycho-1960s-military-prototypes-that-should-never-have-left-the-drawing-board/
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
Has there been an actual honest to god peer-reviewed study that examines the structural flaws in the US military? My gut says no.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 20:01
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Has there been an actual honest to god peer-reviewed study that examines the structural flaws in the US military? My gut says no. Well, "structural flaws in the US military" is a huge loving subject. I mean, that could encompass everything from the cultural/institutional issues driving promising young officers out of the service to procurement inefficiencies to under/non-reporting of sexual assault. Any organization that big that has even the slightest whiff of competence (and, yes, the US Military is competent at least at that minimal level) is going to be self-conscious enough to be conducting internal audits and evaluations all the time. Chances are they're even going to be hiring outside consultants to look over whatever specific aspects they're concerned about in order to get a perspective that isn't mired in their particular world-view. The real question is whether anyone with real decision making power is paying attention to these suggestions and acting on them in a real way? The other issue is that you bring up the peer-review process. Peer-review probably wouldn't be possible for this kind of study simply because it would need to be internal (or at least destined for internal consumption) by its very nature. Chances are that the evidence being examined would be classified at various levels and the contents of the report itself would almost certainly be classified as well. That alone would prevent the publication necessary for peer review. Note that peer-review isn't really necessary for a study to make a good assessment of something and make good recommendations based on that assessment. Internal studies and assessments are done all the time by all kinds of corporations and government bodies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Ah, I get it. It's not competant people promoted to the level of incompotance, it's "the more actively stupid and dangerous you are, the better material you are for promotion." Absolutely yes. I worked for a military contractor in the late 90s (Computing Devices Canada, now owned by General Dynamics) and most of the technicians there were ex-military or reserves who said they had to get the gently caress out of there ASAP. Perhaps it is better now but it sounded like it was a terrible place for skilled electronics technicians who had half a brain. I forget the specifics of stories now but it was a big poo poo sandwich of people failing upwards and whoever was the best asskisser being the top dog etc. priznat fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Jun 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 20:46
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Has there been an actual honest to god peer-reviewed study that examines the structural flaws in the US military? My gut says no. With just as little thought as went into this statement: "Reflective belts are to be worn at all times (problem solved)!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:17
|
|
|
Speaking of military incompetence, the best is when higher HQ wants to pull someone from a unit, so the subordinate unit sends their worst officer up there that they don't mind giving up. Then that crummy officer is put in charge of writing the orders the subordinate unit is supposed to execute. Frustration ensues.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 22:49
|
|
|
RAND corporation does studies on the military I think? The problems with the military seem to be endemic to the government in general, based on my experience at the Fed. In my department most of the work wound up getting done by contractors since at least half of my coworkers didn't know how to do poo poo even if they could be bothered. Just cruisin' to retirement. The main difference being there wasn't much in the way of excruciatingly awful stuff that makes people just want to leave any way they can, just the enticement of higher salaries (but lower benefits) in the private sector for the competent folks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
And then the contractor goes and hires the cheapest most worthless people they can get away with while still meeting the minimum requirements of the contract, and the product is resultingly lovely because of it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2013 00:03
|
|
|
grover posted:And then the contractor goes and hires the cheapest most worthless people they can get away with while still meeting the minimum requirements of the contract, and the product is resultingly lovely because of it. Contractors are so hit and miss. Sometimes they are brilliant guys who used to serve or with serious degrees in applicable areas. Other times it's that officer or NCO you hated in the service who has retired and immediately snagged a job through a friend.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2013 00:13
|
|
|
It's turning into a GiP conversation but yes, by all appearances the inverse Peter Principle and other endemic problems are common to the entire Federal government. On the one hand you do have -some- more ability for lateral in / out movement, but far less motivation; the military generates "If we don't go around this guy to fix this we're likely to end up all dead" situations that can cut through the fog of incompetence in ways the civilian bureaucracy never does. On the other hand any potential adversary's military command structure is going to be far, far worse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
grover posted:And then the contractor goes and hires the cheapest most worthless people they can get away with while still meeting the minimum requirements of the contract, and the product is resultingly lovely because of it. You're right. What also gets left out of the conversation are working capital funded government civilians. Also contractors just that do less work and have more distaste for anyone actually doing anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Ah, I get it. It's not competant people promoted to the level of incompotance, it's "the more actively stupid and dangerous you are, the better material you are for promotion." It's not even that the system is abused...it's that it's straight-up designed this way. On an officer's annual performance report (OPR), there's only one small section that even deals with the performance of your primary duty and it's a pass/fail thing. Let's use the example of a guy I worked with (well, he worked for me despite being 2 years senior, which tells you how competent he was!). His duty was Air Surveillance Officer (the guy that runs the radar on AWACS). He lost his aircrew qualification twice in a year...once by commander direction after he displayed gross negligence and a complete lack of aircrew discipline, then he failed his annual checkride. But because he completed his remedial training before his OPR was due, there was NO MENTION of any of this...technically, as of the day his OPR was due, he "met standards." Because he was really good about sliding by, he was promoted to major on his first try (this was while he worked for me, and I was furious). quote:Does the Canadian Forces roll like this? I worked with Canadians on a daily basis, but only saw one incompetent one. After he flunked out of upgrade training they shipped him somewhere else to be worthless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2013 02:15
|
|
|
Military organizations being hosed up is SNAFU and universal. My dad left as major, became surgeon instead. Not going to leave details. They are secret for a reason  E: Btw, my own expericence with that organization tells me they gently caress even harder(softer?) now. A lot of the details have changed, and somehow they managed to get all of them wrong. It's astonishing if nothing else. No more. ThisIsJohnWayne fucked around with this message at 19:22 on Jun 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:I've heard a lot about this flight of intelligent officer material from military and ex-military people I know, many of them mid-tier officers (O3 - O5) who either bailed at that point or were in the process of plotting their exit trajectory. I'm curious to hear what you think the reason for this is? Frustration with the institutional retardation and hardships (deployments etc) of military life? Better paying positions in the civilian sector? This has been at the forefront of my loving mind lately, and I could probably write a book about it at this point, much less an effortpost. This just one man's perspective, but here goes: I think disillusionment is a huge part of it. Starting during the post-9/11 patriotic fervor until poo poo got really bad in Iraq around '05-'06 and it became increasingly clear both wars were not going to have good outcomes, the military was able to recruit a lot more motivated and talented people into the officer corps than usual. There's always been a stream of somewhat talented types who didn't see their future at Harvard or Berkeley (or just couldn't afford it) but there was definitely a greater sense of purpose and desire to serve during that period. The lack of a draft means that this generation of officers has been carrying the load of (at least) two wars entirely on their shoulders and frankly they've been pretty lovely wars. If you're rolling through Belgium trying to open the road to Berlin, seeing the tears in the locals' eyes as you liberate their villages, you have a pretty clear goal (beat Germany) and it's easy to justify time away from your family and friends. If nothing else, there is an end you can look forward to. On the other hand, the situation in Afghanistan has been static for as long as I've been in, and no one can really articulate a desired end state other than "Democracy and chicken in every pot." Even operational objectives tend to be vague poo poo like "provide security" and "disrupt insurgent networks" that don't ever really have tangible outcomes. We've taken to measuring our successes in "metrics." "I built munitions for 214 rotary wing sorties." "I set up VoSIP and secure internet service for 352 users in 13 FOBs" "I offloaded 655,000 lbs of fuel." "I managed a fleet of 129 vehicles." Maybe if you're out on the pointy end, you can say, "I killed six insurgents," but where is that really getting us? We've been slapping ourselves on the back for "disrupting networks" and killing/capturing "high value targets" for years, but if any of those guys had really been that important to the insurgency, I don't think we'd be negotiating for a dignified withdrawal in Qatar right now. These wars have been loving grinding at the pointy end, too. There's no fighter planes to shoot down, mountains to plant flags on, barely even a coherent enemy to force surrender from. Every day, the Army and Marines go out on patrol, and maybe they get blown up by another IED or shot by snipers. At night, their bases take indirect. Not earth-shattering WWI barrages, just a constant drip of rockets and mortars, letting them know the enemy is still there. Or maybe some ANA guy who's supposedly on the same team walks into their tent and machine-guns them while they sleep. They rarely get to engage the enemy, because most insurgents that are willing to get into a pitched firefight with Americans are dead already. After they make it to the end of their tour, they hand off their AOR to another unit and go home to regenerate for the next cycle. There is no catharsis of victory or defeat or even conclusion. Our 24/7 access to news media means that it's easy to contrast this with ongoing sectarian violence or an upsurge in Green on Blue attacks or the craven greed and incompetence of the governments we're fighting to support. It's not like the wars are going swimmingly on a macro level either. You can read Rajiv Chandrasekaran's Imperial Life in the Emerald City and Little America if you want a blow by blow of how we shot ourselves in the foot in Iraq and Afghanistan through basically incompetence and not caring. Even for POGs, the ops tempo can be loving brutal. The combatant commanders always want more bodies, more materiel, and you don't get ahead in the military by saying "no." I know one guy who was asked to reschedule his wedding, which had been on the books for a year, because if his unit let him go they wouldn't have anyone to cover the new deployment tasking that came down, and the shortfall would have to be explained to higher headquarters. Their "compromise" was to give him a week for the wedding before they deployed him, because gently caress your honeymoon. Most Captains have already been deployed multiple times, and after the first very few are eager to go back unless they need the money or they're going through a rough patch with the missus or whatever. Then there's the sick culture of the military itself you have to deal with even when you're stateside. There's a reason Catch-22 is a perennial favorite in GiP. My personal belief is that MBAs ruined the military. A little after the Reagan years, it became popular to "try to make the government run like a business" despite the fact that government and business have basically nothing in common. High ranking officers started hiring consultants, attending seminars and redesigning our uniforms to look like business suits. We adopted Total Quality Management (called it Quality Air Force) and Lean Six Sigma (Air Force Smart Operations for the 21st Century) even after the private sector realized they were snake oil, because if everyone knows your product doesn't work you can still sell it to the government. I have had to hear a lot about Lean Processes, but not once could any of the "Black Belts" explain why delivering munitions on targets was in any way like building loving Toyotas. Didn't matter, though: they were still getting stellar performance report bullets out of it. The system has come to value process almost exclusively over results, and any attempt to analyze what actually works devolves into tribal infighting and turf wars. On your performance reports, it's all about showing you were doing something without any regard to if you were doing it well or it was making things better or worse. Simply doing your job and ensuring continuity is not enough. This encourages constant churn, where even if something is working perfectly well, it's in your interest to reorganize or create a new way of doing things or add a new level of complexity or making everyone use this mandatory tracker and fill out that questionnaire, because now you can say you were doing something. This is why it is incredibly important that you get a Masters Degree as soon as possible, but it doesn't matter what it's in or whether you got it from Harvard or University of Phoenix. Gotta check that box, son. This is why we have the continual, festering growth of mandatory annual computer based training. You didn't waste everyone's time with a loving useless active shooter CBT, oh no no no: you spearheaded a $500,000 multimedia training program with Air Force-wide impact, informing over 330,000 airmen about an emerging threat. Firewall five, motherfucker. The need for leadership to always be doing something is why we're often treated like children. A common refrain is, "one person poo poo his pants, and now we all have to wear diapers." You may have led men in combat or piloted a multi-million dollar warplane half way around the world, but you need to attend a mandatory safety briefing before leaving for a three day weekend because last year Private Shitknuckles decided to drive for 24 hours straight and wrapped his new Camaro around a tree. You are expected to be aggressive, independent, able to plan, think for yourself and possess excellent judgement, but will be punished for demonstrating any of these qualities in your personal life. Want to ride a motorcycle or take up skydiving? Follow these exact steps and submit a written safety plan to your supervisor. You are expected to be loyal to your friends and trust them with your life, but also prepared to turn them in without hesitation if they break the rules. Of course, the Air Force isn't going to talk to you when you're down or watch your kids while you're away, since it's pretty clear from day one that the service expects love and devotion from you even though it doesn't give a poo poo about you as a person. Here's a little story I think sums this up nicely. Overseas, we had, until recently, General Order 1 B, which forbade among other things: liquor, porn, adopting local animals, and men & women sharing the same room with the door closed. Well, we had two married officers who were deployed with us over their anniversary, and they asked if they could go off base for dinner and get a hotel together downtown. Keep in mind, this is the Persian Gulf, not Helmand loving Province. Now, in any sane world, the answer would have been "sure, have fun." The Air Force, on the other hand, made them request a written waiver to GO1B. They literally made a man ask permission to sleep with his wife on their anniversary. It's the most humiliating thing I've seen done to a marriage since Braveheart. Gosh, I wonder why retention is so bad. Our reliance on contractors lets us see exactly how much we're getting screwed. We work shoulder to shoulder with people doing the same job as us, often people who recently retired from the same unit and came back to work as civilians. Contractors make more money, can't be compelled to attend mandatory fun, do less bullshit, and are nearly impossible to fire. If they do go overseas or work overtime, they get paid ridiculous amounts of money, because the government can't get away with giving them a bit of ribbon and calling it square. Perhaps most compellingly, their boss does not care if they spent their weekend drinking whiskey and marathoning Game of Thrones instead of volunteering at the animal shelter as long as they show up to work on Monday. When you look at it that way, there really aren't a lot of reasons to stay in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
This is loving beautiful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
Furlough everyone, fire the pentagon into the sun and action off everything outside the boomers and warheads. Hand all duties over to PMCs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:This has been at the forefront of my loving mind lately, and I could probably write a book about it at this point, much less an effortpost. This just one man's perspective, but here goes: I hope this makes it over to GiP
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
No bullshit, this is among the most interesting things I've read in TFR in years. Seriously, if you could expand each of those paragraphs out into a longer 3-5 page discussion of each issue you have the structure of a loving amazing article. If you could actually squeeze each one out to a 30-40 page chapter you have the basic outline of a hell of a book there. Not bullshitting, this is something you should do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2013 16:33
|
|
|
This is very interesting, thanks for the words. ninja edit - I'd read a much longer form as well 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
I'd read it. It was interesting and I'd enjoy more of the same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
You could call it "Style over Substance".
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2013 17:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 18:25 |
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:You could call it "Style over Substance". I think that title was taken for the F-35 program.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2013 17:40
|
|
