LaxPower Back-Up Stick

a fan wrote: ↑Wed Jun 26, 2019 4:20 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:20 am The MOH process involves a long and complex chain of command jump thru hoops sort of deal. Here in Upstate NY Staff Sgt Bellavia's heroism has been known for many years. The last step in the process is approval by the POTUS. This time around it was Trumps turn for the photo op. I am certain that if it had been HRC awarding him the medal there would be many people on the other side with the same sentiments. IMO whomever the POTUS is awarding the medal it should not take away from the bravery of this soldier.

I despise Trump. But if he awarded me a medal, the I'd be honored to let him hand it to me/pin it on me/whatever. I'd be blown away by the honor.

Respect the office, not the man. This goes for visits to the White House, too. I'd accept an invitation without hesitation, and be proud to shake Trump's hand.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:20 am If you have not read the citation of why the Staff Sgt was awarded the medal it is worth reading. It does not glamorize war. It tells the story of uncommon valor and a soldiers love for his men.

Read the story, and watched the ceremony. Amazing. Can't imagine being in that situation, let alone having to react to it.

Saving you from yourself, I will say you are fortunate never to have been made such an award. You'll thank me some day.

USS Boxer should be in the Arabian Sea by now. Slide show of recent ops :
https://www.nationalreview.com/photos/u ... p/#slide-1

Cradle. Obama having faith had nothing to do with whether tie Senate would pass anything. Mitch day on anything that would reflect well on Obama from the minute he was sworn in

OCanada wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 7:03 am Cradle. Obama having faith had nothing to do with whether tie Senate would pass anything. Mitch day on anything that would reflect well on Obama from the minute he was sworn in

I understand your point. Neither side wants to give the other the opportunity to accomplish something that they can get political points for. The problem is that Obama didn't try to convince the Senate that this deal was good for both sides. Not that the blockheads would have listened to him, but he should have at least tried. This leads us to the next problem with what is becoming the new normal. If you can't get the Senate to go along with you... then you circumvent them by other methods that are half ass at best. Good intentions are a poor excuse for not doing things the right way.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 9:35 am

OCanada wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 7:03 am Cradle. Obama having faith had nothing to do with whether tie Senate would pass anything. Mitch day on anything that would reflect well on Obama from the minute he was sworn in

I understand your point. Neither side wants to give the other the opportunity to accomplish something that they can get political points for. The problem is that Obama didn't try to convince the Senate that this deal was good for both sides. Not that the blockheads would have listened to him, but he should have at least tried. This leads us to the next problem with what is becoming the new normal. If you can't get the Senate to go along with you... then you circumvent them by other methods that are half ass at best. Good intentions are a poor excuse for not doing things the right way.

BOOM! And that is no way to run a country!! Too bad Mitch doesn't give a flying fig about what's best for the country...

foreverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 9:47 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 9:35 am

OCanada wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 7:03 am Cradle. Obama having faith had nothing to do with whether tie Senate would pass anything. Mitch day on anything that would reflect well on Obama from the minute he was sworn in

I understand your point. Neither side wants to give the other the opportunity to accomplish something that they can get political points for. The problem is that Obama didn't try to convince the Senate that this deal was good for both sides. Not that the blockheads would have listened to him, but he should have at least tried. This leads us to the next problem with what is becoming the new normal. If you can't get the Senate to go along with you... then you circumvent them by other methods that are half ass at best. Good intentions are a poor excuse for not doing things the right way.

BOOM! And that is no way to run a country!! Too bad Mitch doesn't give a flying fig about what's best for the country...

It's what is best for the party. The country can go take a flying leap.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:47 am

foreverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 9:47 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 9:35 am

OCanada wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 7:03 am Cradle. Obama having faith had nothing to do with whether tie Senate would pass anything. Mitch day on anything that would reflect well on Obama from the minute he was sworn in

I understand your point. Neither side wants to give the other the opportunity to accomplish something that they can get political points for. The problem is that Obama didn't try to convince the Senate that this deal was good for both sides. Not that the blockheads would have listened to him, but he should have at least tried. This leads us to the next problem with what is becoming the new normal. If you can't get the Senate to go along with you... then you circumvent them by other methods that are half ass at best. Good intentions are a poor excuse for not doing things the right way.

BOOM! And that is no way to run a country!! Too bad Mitch doesn't give a flying fig about what's best for the country...

It's what is best for the party. The country can go take a flying leap.

Is about the party? Or is it really about the money, power and influence gained by helping out those with the most money, power and influence?

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 26, 2019 5:20 pm


Saving you from yourself, I will say you are fortunate never to have been made such an award. You'll thank me some day.

Hahahaha! Bravo!!

Trump regime is overly eager to start another war:

F-22's arrive in Qatar :
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... n-tensions
their absence was part of the reason I did not expect us to strike in response to the drone shoot down.
Ivan noticed their arrival:
https://sputniknews.com/military/201906 ... interests/

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 6:08 pm VDH counsels patience re. Iran.

Notice he's playing the EXACT same dangerous game that you, Trump, FoxNation, and many posters are playing.

Did you pick up on, oh, just a small detail that Hanson left out in his piece?

Get back to me when you get it.

I am glad the US can be patient. You think someone should tell Iran so they can be patient too?

I had a really interesting and humorous talk with a high school friend of one of my sons. Now early thirties oil trader. We talked about Iran possibly shutting down the straits. How easy it is, how many possibilities they have. They can easily do it without violating any law or doing anything that could really be classified as an act of war. If a war starts it will more than likely be blamed on us, by the world.

The lets start a war for lunch bunch, the I'd rather be a hammer than a nail guys are messing with the wrong folks. The juice isn't worth the squeeze.

In case it was missed here attacks on SA we have been sourcing to Iran are coming from Iraq per news reports

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 4:24 pm

ABV 8.3% wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:45 pm The bridge over Cos Cob harbor was designed to NOT fail too. Made my summer visiting the old girlfriend such a problem just starting taking the train from Jersey.

Thank you, but none of what you replied helped much with the question. No evasive tactics at 60K feet? All those eyes, expensive eyes at that, in the Straitz of Hormez, and not one of those eyes can detect an Iranian missile attack? What a joke our "defense" system is if this is the case. I could buy $5 million, per drone, but not 20 to 30 times that much.

The RQ-4 is the size of a 737, is not maneuverable enough to evade a SAM & not responsive enough for such evasive maneuvers, nor are it's operators trained for such maneuvers.

Obviously, whoever commanded that mission did not expect the Iranians to take the shot.
Based on the article I linked, apparently we've been operating the RQ-4 there for a long time without incident.
Which troubles me with the decision to launch it, given the recent shots they took at the smaller MQ-9s.

If we start convoys, we should bring the old R/MQ-1 Predators out of mothballs for over watch of the convoys from approaching IRGC speed boats.
They're excess & cheap enough to be expendable.

war college......no longer studies contingency plans, scenarios....all possibilities? Seems like the commandor has a bright future on the Joint Chiefs

jhu72 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:39 am I had a really interesting and humorous talk with a high school friend of one of my sons. Now early thirties oil trader. We talked about Iran possibly shutting down the straits. How easy it is, how many possibilities they have. They can easily do it without violating any law or doing anything that could really be classified as an act of war.

Tell us how they could do it without violating international law. Specifics please.
Did your friend consider blowing holes in 6 tankers a violation of law ? How 'bout shooting down an aircraft in intl airspace ?

First where is your irrefutable proof?

Gotta love how the resistance fools want to give the benefit of the doubt to the fascist mullahs rather than our admin

I take you picked up on what Hanson intentionally "forgot" when discussing what Trump should do, old salt?

Hanson's yet another casualty of the Seminar, flunked out for intentionally leaving out Iran's nuclear program in discussing what Obama and Trump should be doing about Iran.

Oh, I'm certain it was rhetorically innocent, and Hanson was just off his game.

OCanada wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:01 pm First where is your irrefutable proof?

Civil air traffic control (ATC) radar tapes, from the ATC facilities which control intl air traffic in the region, which would show the flight path of the RQ-4 & P-8. There's a lot of civil air traffic under ATC radar coverage in that area. ATC radar tapes are preserved for investigating accidents or airspace violations.

Photos & video of the IRGC boat crew alongside one crippled tanker removing an unexploded limpet mine.
The base of the unexploded mine remained attached to the tanker.
Forensics from the damaged tankers (once they're in dry dock).
Analysis of where the ships were prior to the damage & how/where/who could have affixed the mines.

Iran's actions were disruptive to intl air navigation as well as maritime commerce.
https://www.justsecurity.org/64725/the- ... of-hormuz/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... n-us-drone

https://www.icao.int/NACC/Documents/Mee ... SARP06.pdf

...the pilot of a UAV operated outside a militarily hostile environment must maintain A/G communication with the relevant ATC units and obtain appropriate clearances to operate