Posted on 06/05/2008 10:38:22 AM PDT by PurpleMan
The military and civilian chiefs of the Air Force are resigning, U.S. officials said Thursday.
Defense officials who spoke on condition of anonymity said that Defense Secretary Robert Gates asked Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Moseley and Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne to step
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Missed it further down on the “Latest”
Apologies.
It’s probably more about the Air Force wanting to acquire the F22 in larger numbers...
It probably has more to do with the USAF not wanting to contribute anything near their fair share to the war effort.
I hope this isn’t related to the awarding of the new tanker contract to Northrup-Grumman/EADS and not to Boeing.
Looks like these two disagreed with the Iran bombing plans. Your outa here!
and the mistaken shipment of triggers to Taiwan.
Reminds me of the time a FSN got mixed up and resulted in shipping a CVN anchor to Ft Carson CO.
that is exactly why...and it is about damn time, too...we got troops on the ground 24/7, and this elitist pompous ass says having guys here in the u.s. controling drones in iraq is too stressful on his guys....what a blithering idiot..don’t let the door hit ya dude
Seems as though the Air Force has had its’ collective head handed to it. Gates isn’t one to be messed with, and when the AF guys didn’t change anything in its’ operations, Gates changed it for them. This could get interesting as time goes along. IMHO, this was way overdue.
There is a huge fight quietly underway about the future of manned tactical A/C.
One one side, you have the folks who say you can pull 20g, need no HVAC, SAR ,etc. with the man out.
As soon as you have an A/C pulling 20g vs. one with a pilot that can pull 9g max, it's all over for the guy in the manned A/C. In addition, the best performances of “piloting” the drones armed with Hellfire missiles have come. not from the classic pilots, but the B/Ns with a history of playing a lot of computer games!
On the other side, the old hands say there is nothing like a pilot in the cockpit to make decisions, evaluate, etc.
Doubtful. Sounds more like irreconcilable differences over larger policy/strategy issues.
If I had to guess, it's resistance to some sort of proposed change in mission capabilities and/or force structure.
One possibility: the USAF has been dragged over the coals for its poor performance in managing and fielding high-dollar space programs. Could be that Gates is looking at giving some of those programs away to some other organization....
Well this will have all the moonbats saying that it’s a divergence of views about bombing Iran — ooooooooohhhhhh — probably much more likely it’s conflict over what Gates said in April, demanding much more effort on UAVs and battlefield support in Iraq and Afghanistan, and AF brass did not like it.... probably built up over a long time and it’s come to a head in the past few months..... just my 2 cents worth of guesswork.
Countdown to the publication of the tell-all books...
(Probably not so much from the General as the Sec’y-AF)
Looks like these two disagreed with the Iran bombing plans. Your outa here!
Even during WWII, there were generals and admirals who were too afraid to fight. I recall a fascinating account in the weeks before the D-Day invasion of Europe, of a general who complained to Eisenhower that the plans would lead to catastrophe and unacceptable losses.
Mind you, this is after years of planning, with just weeks to go for the launch, and this guy speaks up. Well, Eishenhower did not blow him off. Instead, with the general’s concerns foremost in his mind, Eisenhower spent three whole days reviewing everything. This showed he was willing to listen and even take the critic’s point of view. After those three days, he wrote the general back saying that after he had completely reviewed the plans, and had to disagree with the good general. That is just incredible leadership as far as I’m concerned.
Hopefully, Gates learned from Eisenhower.
Doubtful. Probably this.
Air Force Wing In Nuclear Goof In Has Trouble
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/30/nuclear.mistake.inspection.ap/
I'm thinking these firings/resignations have more to do with what is talked about in this biased editorial from the "Army Times".
Well, OK .... and the reason why an M1-A1 Abrams is called a "tank" is because, back in WWI, they were shipped over to France in containers labeled "Water Tanks."
IMO, the neither the shipment of triggers, nor the subsequent reports of the incident, were accidental.
Exactly my take on it. Anyone who thinks the Air Force, of all services, would object to bombing somewhere—anywhere!—truly does not understand the mentalities involved here.
The UAV debate is a big deal. It’s been going on for a while now, and, speaking from my own experience as a ground pounder, the Air Force is smoking crack if they think UAV ISR assets will be better serving other ground pounders if the AF is controlling them, rather than a trained E7 in the BDE TOC.
I’m all for the next-gen fighters, etc, but the AF needs to wake up and smell the modular unit concepts.
IMHO: When you are entrusted with the safeguarding of a nuclear weapons stickpile and your command and control structure fails miserable at that, I doubt that that reason you are fired is because of something to do with the election.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.