General Patton on Lieutenant Kerry

In message , Stephen Harding
writes
Paul J. Adam wrote:
Sorry, but Hackworth is more interested in pandering to prejudice than
rational analysis. (For instance, his cheerful bluster about the
"useless" 9mm pistol and the "ineffective" M16 family... tell you what,
he can stand in front of me and I'll put a few rounds from either into
him; then he can tell me how "ineffective" they are)

Although I've come around to your sort of opinion towards
Hackworth, the "effectiveness" argument is sort of bogus
isn't it?

The argument is that these weapons are apparently so lacking in
lethality that enemy soldiers laugh off multiple hits, crying out "stop
that, it tickles" - on the rare occasions when these weapons apparently
fire at all, they apparently being so unreliably that it's a miracle any
US soldiers ever get a round off in combat before their weapons
permanently jam.

Hackworth's vilifying the M-16 family in a way that makes the L85 look
like a paragon of reliability (oddly enough, the L85 _did_ perform very
well during TELIC)

A muzzle loading, black powder Kentucky Rifle would be
"effective" under such a test, no?

Most definitely - the complaints are reliability and lethality, and a
well-handled muzzle loader should do well on both scores provided the
weather's not too damp Rapidity of fire, combat load, functionality
in rain, et cetera are not measures of effectiveness Hackworth mentions
so I'm leaving them out too.

His rules, not mine.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

In message , Kevin Brooks
writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
"British timidity"? Just how many reservists was the US mobilising for a
ground offensive into Kosovo? I seem to recall the option being
categorically ruled out in the US... but we were getting ready to sign
Queen's Orders.

Personally, I could care less what Hackworth has to say about anything--IMO
he is a bit like James Dunnigan and Tom Clancy, in that he apparently
enamored with the sound of his own voice and impresses himself if nobody
else. But Paul, you do need to go back and check your facts--while Clinton &
Company had indeed ruled out the ground option early on (rating as one of
his administration's bigger military mistakes--it was stupid to give
Milosevich the additional breathing room it afforded him), they did
subsequently revisit the issue,

Sure, and never claimed otherwise. But the US _did_ rule it out (and
then change its mind), while here in the UK many of us were getting
ready for mobilisation despite a few years away from the colours. The US
was able to reverse course without having to call up reserves: not an
option for others, particularly when the US was still mumbling "no
ground troops under any circumstances".

The US made a mistake and successfully reversed it, and I'm not
attacking that: just the unspecified claims of "British timidity".
Refusal to obey really stupid orders, perhaps, but not timidity.

Sorry, but Hackworth is more interested in pandering to prejudice than
rational analysis. (For instance, his cheerful bluster about the
"useless" 9mm pistol and the "ineffective" M16 family... tell you what,
he can stand in front of me and I'll put a few rounds from either into
him; then he can tell me how "ineffective" they are)

He has also spent his ire at other US targets--he was especially deriscive
of the National Guard (though he has apparently piped down on that one over
the last year or two).

A quick poke around SFTT suggests not, at the moment: he's making the
British argument of STABs versus ARABs look like a friendly debate at
the moment. It seems the US National Guard units are untrained,
unskilled, and laden with huge numbers of unfit freeloaders who never
report and can't deploy but can justify claims for pay'n'rations... with
only heroic interventions by Regular troops saving them from certain
disaster.

One wonders how such bumbling amateurs managed to survive in a warzone,
let alone make any sort of useful contribution: yet rather more than a
few have apparently deployed and served, and I don't hear tales of
"Weeping National Guard wimps slaughtered as Regular heroes hold firm
and fight to last round".

Oh, well... where reality conflicts with a lucrative column, presumably
reality simply hasn't been properly informed and will eventually fall
into line.


Just make sure you don't shoot him where he wore that
unauthorized ranger tab he was bragging about...

Having been trained by a few Paras and a bootneck or two, and working
with both now, I imagine this is similar to wearing a red or green beret
without having passed P Company or the Commando Course. (Neither are
recommended strategies, if you couldn't guess).

And I recall that Chief of Naval Operations Jim Boorda committed suicide
over being accused of falsely wearing decorations he hadn't earned...
perhaps an extreme reaction, but interesting to compare.



--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

On 03 Feb 2004 15:19:24 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Ed Rasimus wrote:

I think the parsing is coming from your side. And, piloting military
aircraft isn't an "entitlement." It's an earned privilege.


Yeah but once you earn that privilege you are damn well going to fly whether
you like it or not. (grin)

Arthur Kramer

Well, I earned the privilege, but haven't flown as pilot in command in
many years. I never had the urge to go to work for the airlines and
there's nothing (short of maybe "warbird" ops) that would equate with
flying tactical jets.

People often ask, why I didn't go with the airlines and my answer is
always the same, "would you ask Mario Andretti why he didn't start
driving for Greyhound when he retired from racing?"



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Well, I earned the privilege, but haven't flown as pilot in command in
many years. I never had the urge to go to work for the airlines and
there's nothing (short of maybe "warbird" ops) that would equate with
flying tactical jets.

People often ask, why I didn't go with the airlines and my answer is
always the same, "would you ask Mario Andretti why he didn't start
driving for Greyhound when he retired from racing?"



Ed Rasimus

Same with me. Never could get offered a pilot slot, bad timing, and the
thought of airline flying just does not do it for me.

Looks like I might just end up flying a DC-4 on fires this summer...




Ron
Pilot/Wildland Firefighter

Ed Rasimus wrote:

Well, I earned the privilege, but haven't flown as pilot in command in
many years. I never had the urge to go to work for the airlines and
there's nothing (short of maybe "warbird" ops) that would equate with
flying tactical jets.

I dunno Ed, I know a few guys who flew fighters and this is what one
of them (a former A-7, F-106 and F-16 jock) had to say:

Q: So Jim how does flying a trike compare to flying a fighter on
the fun scale?

A: Equal, but different. Way different. I like all types of flying,
but they are all fun in different ways. Flying trikes is probably the
most natural sensation of flying like a bird, like you dream about,
of any form of powered flight I've ever experienced. Flying
fighters is like flying a Formula I race car with wings, except even
more physically punishing. There's nothing like being at 100' and
seeing the electrical line poles go by at 600 kts +, and there's
nothing like cruising along at 50 mph waving at people and
smelling the new cut hay and feeling like a puppy with your head
out of the car window. I'm happy to have had the opportunity to
experience both. I'd rate them both as 10's, but different forms
of fun. If I had to pick one to experience in life and couldn't do
the other, I'd pick fighters. Fortunately, I didn't have to pick just
one.

People often ask, why I didn't go with the airlines and my answer is
always the same, "would you ask Mario Andretti why he didn't start
driving for Greyhound when he retired from racing?"

I can understand that but I think there may be something else going
on there. In other words, maybe guys like you whom have pushed the
envelope so many times in combat sense deep down that it's simply
time to quit?

(Ron) wrote:
Ed Rasimus wrote:

Well, I earned the privilege, but haven't flown as pilot in command in
many years. I never had the urge to go to work for the airlines and
there's nothing (short of maybe "warbird" ops) that would equate with
flying tactical jets.

People often ask, why I didn't go with the airlines and my answer is
always the same, "would you ask Mario Andretti why he didn't start
driving for Greyhound when he retired from racing?"

Same with me. Never could get offered a pilot slot, bad timing, and the
thought of airline flying just does not do it for me.

Looks like I might just end up flying a DC-4 on fires this summer...

Haven't flown fighters like Ed but I have flown single pilot IFR
under Part 135 like you and no offense, but that DC-4 position
sounds like just another uneviable, low-pay, low-prestige yet
high-risk flying job. No thanks.

"Mike Marron" wrote

Haven't flown fighters like Ed but I have flown single pilot IFR
under Part 135 like you and no offense, but that DC-4 position
sounds like just another uneviable, low-pay, low-prestige yet
high-risk flying job. No thanks.

On top of that, very little is done to tame the fires. In most cases
the fires just keep burning until the weather changes. Water and
Retardant bombers are like ****ing on a house fire.

Haven't flown fighters like Ed but I have flown single pilot IFR
under Part 135 like you and no offense, but that DC-4 position
sounds like just another uneviable, low-pay, low-prestige yet
high-risk flying job. No thanks.

On top of that, very little is done to tame the fires. In most cases
the fires just keep burning until the weather changes. Water and
Retardant bombers are like ****ing on a house fire.

Well it depends on the situation. Retardant is rarely dropped on a fire
anyways. Its main use to to help get a fire under control so the people on the
ground can get a handle on it. On smaller fires, it definitely makes a big
different, but on larger firestorms like what was in San Diego last year and
Yellowstone in 88, they do not always have a big impact.




Ron
Pilot/Wildland Firefighter

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
In message , Kevin Brooks

snip


He has also spent his ire at other US targets--he was especially
deriscive
of the National Guard (though he has apparently piped down on that one
over
the last year or two).

A quick poke around SFTT suggests not, at the moment: he's making the
British argument of STABs versus ARABs look like a friendly debate at
the moment. It seems the US National Guard units are untrained,
unskilled, and laden with huge numbers of unfit freeloaders who never
report and can't deploy but can justify claims for pay'n'rations... with
only heroic interventions by Regular troops saving them from certain
disaster.

One wonders how such bumbling amateurs managed to survive in a warzone,
let alone make any sort of useful contribution: yet rather more than a
few have apparently deployed and served, and I don't hear tales of
"Weeping National Guard wimps slaughtered as Regular heroes hold firm
and fight to last round".

He must have missed the close combat operations conducted by the light
infantry battalion out of the FLARNG in Iraq, the various SF operations
conducted by 19th and 20th SFG (both ARNG assets) troops in Afghanistan (and
other places), the ARNG combat engineers, truck drivers, etc., who have
suffered their fair share of casualties in Iraq, etc. Like I said before,
the guy apparently just brays to hear the discordant sound of his own voice.


Oh, well... where reality conflicts with a lucrative column, presumably
reality simply hasn't been properly informed and will eventually fall
into line.


Just make sure you don't shoot him where he wore that
unauthorized ranger tab he was bragging about...

Having been trained by a few Paras and a bootneck or two, and working
with both now, I imagine this is similar to wearing a red or green beret
without having passed P Company or the Commando Course. (Neither are
recommended strategies, if you couldn't guess).

And I recall that Chief of Naval Operations Jim Boorda committed suicide
over being accused of falsely wearing decorations he hadn't earned...
perhaps an extreme reaction, but interesting to compare.

You were aware that he was intimately involved in that affair? He was the
goober who "tipped off" Newsweek magazine about Boorda's decorations, and a
week after the suicide he was all over the media bellyaching about the
sanctity of decorations...then he got sort of quiet about that after his
unauthorized Ranger tab was mentioned. He used to portray himself as
"America's most decorated soldier"...and then the Department of the Army
stated that there was no such a beast (and one wonders what the surviving
MoH winners thought of his claim). The guy is scum, plain and simple. He was
danged lucky to have been able to retire--there was serious consideration
given to courts martialing him after he went to the media with his "get out
of Vietnam" crap while he was still a serving officer.

Brooks

Paul J. Adam

From: Ed Rasimus


On 03 Feb 2004 15:19:24 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Ed Rasimus wrote:

I think the parsing is coming from your side. And, piloting military
aircraft isn't an "entitlement." It's an earned privilege.


Yeah but once you earn that privilege you are damn well going to fly whether
you like it or not. (grin)

Arthur Kramer

Well, I earned the privilege, but haven't flown as pilot in command in
many years. I never had the urge to go to work for the airlines and
there's nothing (short of maybe "warbird" ops) that would equate with
flying tactical jets.

People often ask, why I didn't go with the airlines and my answer is
always the same, "would you ask Mario Andretti why he didn't start
driving for Greyhound when he retired from racing?"



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8



But Ed, just think of the fun you could occassionally have had flying a
tactical profile with a fully loaded 747 as a way of brightening the day. Just
think of the screaming passengers as the noisemaker on your old 105.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired