Air Force maybe more F-15s

'I would just be happy to see it. My greatest fear over pursuing a pie in the sky aircraft such as the F-35 is that it reduces overall capability just due to reduced air frames. The single most important strategic factor right now for the US Military is having ENOUGH units to get and meet all its demands. If Lockheed Martin had keep their contractual promises and the F-35 was operational 5 years ago, we would not have this fear, but right now we do not have enough carrier air wings, not enough air frames for USAF training and AEFs, and any where near enough CAS aircraft.

For the past 35 years, the USA has keep and needed a minimum 3 squadrons of fast movers in the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asian region. Those have been Marine, USAF, and Navy aircraft, but they were and still are needed there. That is a significant number of air frames taking a lot of air hours and operational degradation.

For the last 14 years we have needed a minimum of 2 squadrons of fast movers in Afghanistan. And that necessity also does not seem to be diminishing. And that is also a significant number of air hours and operational wear and tear.

The USA has keep a minimum of 3 squadrons in Europe for NATO obligations throughout this entire time period as well. With a strategic resurgence on the part of Russia, that strategic minimum of squadrons should be raised.

The constant threat of North Korea ties down another two squadron minimum. And that is yet another strategic quagmire that is not going away in the foreseeable future.

A rising China forces two to three squadrons to be fully operational in Japan at all times. It forces squadrons to be operational from Guam to carriers, and an expansion potential into basing in the Philippines is yet another two squadrons forward deployed.

Then you have the minimum number needed to keep carrier wings operational and Marine expeditionary forces covered.

Then we get into training needs. At any time there are hundreds of daily training sorties within the 3 air equipped services, (including the Reserve and Guard components), of just fast movers, much less larger air frames.

Then there is the concept of air defense of the North American Command responsibility region which ties up yet another 4 squadrons at any one time.

This is the absolute bare bones, no fat, max lean strategic NEED of the USA from its military services. Those are combat air craft that need to be on the tarmac/deck or in the air ready to go at a moment's notice for strategic operation. That doesn't count air frames down for maintenance, back to depot for refurbishment or major repairs, or still in production testing stages.

And no amount of wand up the ass, pie in the fracking sky fairy fighter godmother, F-35 that MIGHT be here in 5 years is going to change that requirement. The USA needs real answers with solid time tables NOW. this very minute. We can not afford to drop below those minimums at any point, or deterrence and strategic obligations are a no starter. IF anything the USA should be looking to add 50% to our strategic air capability THEN worry about increase in technological capacity

It is about damn time. NASA does a superb job when it is keep to what it was assigned as a mission when created under Ike : education, space exploration, and technological development. Beyond that we should have moved to commercial space programs two decades ago. We should also keep our military space program strong but separate from any civil space program or commercial space program; and any potential adversary should be able to clearly be able to recognize which is which.

http://spacenews.com/spacex-gets-first-commercial-crew-order/

Ash vs Evil Dead.


I finally got a chance to catch the first two episodes of this new show being produced on Starz. I dreaded it at first, because I did not know what to expect. The original two Evil Dead movies were small low budget films, that are cult classics. I watched both of them while I was a teenager. The third Evil Dead film was a moderately big budget production, that while it did well still dealt a lot in camp for its laughs.

With Bruce Campbell reviving his role as Ash and directed by Sam Raimi, the show strives to capture much of the essence of the original trilogy. There was as 2013 remake of the original Evil Dead with the input of both Campbell and Raimi, but it does not quite capture the horror and comedy of the originals.

I had great hope for this new series and was not disappointed. The 'evil' and deadites live up to their nature and style of horror from the trilogy. For any fans of the Evil Dead franchise, this is a must see. 

Gun Culture and Caricatures of it.

I was asked a few weeks ago by a friend to help clarify in her mind aspects of the gun culture in the light of the Oregon school shooting in October. She mostly was requesting my thoughts on a number of key points instead of a detail essay upon the topic. So this article will be more a point by point ponderance, instead of a detailed conceptual essay.

First Point: Gun culture gets caricatured by both the left and the right.

    There is heavy distortions in both the red and blue sides of American culture on the place of firearms in American culture and civilization.

   The Blue side of America has an idealized almost Norman Rockwell type view of what American should and can be, except for those evil people on the right. With one of the biggest evils being those wicked guns that are the root to so much violence and crime. The Red side of America  builds onto themselves the myth  of noble defenders against tyranny. They draw from the tribulations and challenges of the old west and the frontier, plus the Founding Fathers' fight in the War of Independence. I think the mass media builds up both of these myths depending upon the bias of the journalist. Neither of these views are the complete reality, far from it. To truly walk through the ramifications of each sides views would take volumes of text, many of which has been written in current event books. Just recognizing that each side is just not seeing the picture the same way would be a start.

Second Point: Abuse of firearms

   There is a lot of abuse of firearms in our society, just as there is much if not more proper use of firearms for self defense. In the case of illegal carry, in my thoughts this really falls to two categories. You have the criminals who can not legally carry a firearm or would never bother to go through the trouble to legally carry. This is the real root of much of your gun violence. Yet when you are talking about such things you get very deeply into the issue of why those individuals are criminals in the first place. That is another topic worthy of vast volumes of text and consideration. The other category of those illegally carrying tend to be people who are very stubborn about their self defense rights and 2nd Amendment interpretations, and are willing to defy any law denying them the capacity to carry legally. My own thoughts about the later group is they are setting themselves up to become the first group. Unjust laws exist all the time, but we do have democratic processes and courts to try and rectify those laws. Just open defiance and civil disobedience are major steps to take, and anyone who does so put themselves in the court of public opinion and will pay a heavy price for it. I have always felt the better approach is to avoid places that restrict your rights, or find the best other alternative methods of exercising self defense rights with other weapons carry and training if possible.

There are some within the gun rights community who believe that the 'shall not be infringed' is the most important part of the 2nd Amendment and tend to ignore the well regulated part. (more on that in a bit). I have sympathy with them, because I think the Constitution is written fairly simply, but lawyers always complicate things. Open carry in some environments is something I do favor, especially when in the out doors or rural environments. Open carry is more convenient overall, and outdoors in the wild or rural environment people's concerns and social reactions are just far less important. I do not strongly favor open carry in urban and suburban environments because people react poorly in some cases. You have fools on the Blue side of the argument who try to see any weapon as an attempted attack, and then you have Red side proponents who claim to be activist, but are using the intimidation of an openly displayed firearm to be public nuisances. Far to many police would abuse the public nuisance charge to discourage firearms protesters, but there are many cases when just such activists deserve to be charged with a big handful of misdemeanors for being a royal pain. People defending them will stand up and scream Constitutional Right. Yes, well I have a Constitutional right of free assembly, but trying to hold a 1000 people protest in the middle of the highway is a public safety and public nuisance matter. I also have freedom of speech, but setting up a mega volume capable sound system in any down town area and blowing out every window in 8 city blocks is a problem.

There is also a real question of self defense versus defense of property that many communities and states have come to different answers upon. Far to many people in the country do not understand their local laws. You see news reports occasionally about some one killing another person because they set foot on their property, or some youth stole something and the person encounters said youth later.

The stand your ground laws and castle defense laws were passed across the country over the last twenty years to try and preserve people's rights of self defense. Stand your ground was to remove an expectation that you had to retreat. In many cases before such laws you were expected to flee first, and only if the assailant cornered you could you use violent force to defend yourself. This is tactically unsound and leaves people far more easily victimized. By removing any expectation that you have to flee for your life, it allows a person a better chance to withstand a direct threat. The Castle Defense laws were created with the same mindset. Far to many states expected people to flee their own homes before using self defense tactics. This was often unreasonable because home invasions happen fast and violently. By allowing a resident to immediately use violent means to defend themselves or loved ones within the context of a place they have a right to always feel safe, it assured more chances of preserving the lives of innocent citizens.

Many of these laws resulted because local prosecutors were rail roading innocent people right into felony sentences or plea bargains because all the interpretation of circumstances were up to the prosecutor. And it was very unrealistic for the victim to successfully defend himself in a court of law. This reflects far to much how the laws have become to complex and the justice system to convoluted for the average citizen to deal with on a daily basis. Far to much distortion of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment rights occur daily in this country because of this legal anarchy that is the American justice system. This also is a far deeper topic than I'm willing to handle in this post.

This only addresses half the points, but the rest shall have to wait till another day.  I am out of time to continue working on this matter.

  

Need to update

I have not updated this blog in awhile. For the most part I have shifted my attention to other social media outlets. But I'm coming back to the idea that I should keep difference outlets active on the web.

There are several activities and communities I am active in, like most things, all of these have activity and presences upon the Internet. When you start to mix your commitment and communications through out these activities, it dilutes your message and confuses people. Usually people who are interested in following your out put are drawn to one specific aspect, and prefer to follow that part of your web presence. By mixing up your messages, you mix to many things together.

It is comparable to how most of us move in many social circles, but we do not try to mix the people in those social circles. Most of the times this just ends up irritating people when we do try that.

Even though blogger is not near as popular as it use to be, I have established this web presence here for a number of years. So I will use it.

Those who are interested in my writings, both nonfiction and fiction can follow my efforts on www.earltower.com or the social media of @erltyriss on Twitter or Earl Tower on face book.

I think the use of my grayburst persona I will use more for my practical interest in photography, firearms, with some overlap of archery and fitness matters here.

For the most part I have stopped posting about politics, just because those who agree with you do not need any convincing, and those who disagree with you have no interest in hearing what you have to say. Far to much of America has become a matter of political tribes, with little willingness to listen to those in the middle or even recognize that the other side is even human. I fear for the future of our civilization if this continues, but I find little merit in posting about politics any longer on social media. It merely helps fuel a tempest in a teapot.