Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rumsfeld Said to Pick Retired General to Head Army
AP News via New York Times ^ | June 10, 2003 | By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Posted on 06/10/2003 10:02:44 AM PDT by 68skylark

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In a highly unusual move, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has selected a retired four-star general to become the next Army chief of staff, senior defense officials said Tuesday.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the selectee is Peter J. Schoomaker, who retired from the Army after commanding the U.S. Special Operations Command from 1997-2000.

The choice, which has not been publicly announced and is subject to confirmation by the Senate, may raise some eyebrows inside the military because it is rare for a defense secretary to bypass senior active-duty generals in favor of a retired officer to be the Army's top general.

The current chief of staff, Gen. Eric Shinseki, is retiring Wednesday.

Because no successor will have been nominated and confirmed by then, the vice chief of staff, Gen. John Keane, will temporarily assume Shinseki's job when he departs, officials said.

Rumsfeld had tried to persuade Keane to take the top job but he declined for family reasons, officials said.

Schoomaker began his Army career in 1970 as an armor officer but switched to the secretive world of special operations in the late 1970s. He graduated from the University of Wyoming, where he was a star football player, and served with a variety of armor and cavalry units.

From 1975-76, he completed the Marine Corps amphibious warfare course and in February 1978 joined the Army's 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment, now known as the highly secretive Delta Force that specializes in counterterrorism missions.

He later was commander of the Army Special Operations Command and the Joint Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg, N.C.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: chiefofstaff; pentagon; peterschoomaker; turass; usarmy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-73 next last
I'm glad to hear they've found someone to fill this job -- if this report is true I hope he's the right man.

From the few facts given here he sounds like a good choice.

1 posted on 06/10/2003 10:02:45 AM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
what the media fails to recognize here is that this is obviously one of those honorable types who could no longer bare to serve under Sick Willy.
2 posted on 06/10/2003 10:04:40 AM PDT by Steven W.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
Special Ops is going to be on point for the War on Terror--good to have an Army CoS who understands the community. Too many tread-heads take the attitude of "if it ain't a big metal box on treads, it ain't soldiering." But he's also got a background in Armor--so it's not a foreign concept to him. And having attended Amphib Warfare School means that he speaks Marine Corps (and, bu extension, Navy), which is useful in today's "purple" environment.

Looks like Rummy may have found a really good candidate!

3 posted on 06/10/2003 10:07:04 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.
and the purge of the Clintonista generals continues....
4 posted on 06/10/2003 10:07:16 AM PDT by Nat Turner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
This could be very interesting to watch...
5 posted on 06/10/2003 10:07:49 AM PDT by hchutch ("If you donít win, you donít get to put your principles into practice." David Horowitz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.
What the media fails to recognize here is that this is obviously one of those honorable types who could no longer bare to serve under Sick Willy.

ALL promotions at the General Officer level require political approval.

The Clintonistas had 8 years to poison our military leadership. My personal military contacts tell me the damage was severe.

6 posted on 06/10/2003 10:21:03 AM PDT by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.
That's exactly what I thought.

And I hope the first thing he does is get rid of those black berets.
7 posted on 06/10/2003 10:22:46 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
Don't be too hasty to give this approval. Do a search using his name and "Waco" and you might not be too pleased with what you find.
8 posted on 06/10/2003 10:29:30 AM PDT by drjimmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalHope
The Clintonistas had 8 years to poison our military leadership. My personal military contacts tell me the damage was severe."

You don’t know the half of it. After Tailhook 91' the incoming Clinton administration used that scandal to destroy any officer who was not in favor of a politically correct military. We ended up with women in fighters who could barely fly (one ended up dead) and new problems with fraternization that we did not have to deal with before.

Anyone in leadership who did not agree with the direction the Clintons wanted to take the military was dismissed. We lost lots of very good men, including a man who was the current Blue Angels commander at the time of the fallout from Tailhook. His exemplary record was not enough to save him from the Liberals, and many other great pilots decided it was better to go fly a desk in the corporate world.

9 posted on 06/10/2003 10:48:59 AM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: drjimmy
I'm open to new information. If you have some facts, can you share them here so we all can see and comment?
10 posted on 06/10/2003 11:25:51 AM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Neets
bttt
11 posted on 06/10/2003 11:29:27 AM PDT by kayak (Do not bet against the success of freedom. - GWB 5/9/03)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
We ended up with women in fighters who could barely fly (one ended up dead)

WOW. All of one?! As opposed to the guys who regularly turn cartwheels across the flight deck or who go into vertical climbs to impress their parents on their way out of Millington?

12 posted on 06/10/2003 11:41:33 AM PDT by rabidralph (A seda-GIVE?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: rabidralph
What is your point? Bad pilots come in all shapes and sexes. The first women entering the fighter pipeline were rushed through with lower standards. I am not at all saying that women are not qualified to be in fighters. Don't try to suggest that I meant anything other than what I said.
13 posted on 06/10/2003 11:56:47 AM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
You just cited one dead woman pilot who was unqualified. What other female pilots are falling from the skies due to being unqualified and rushed through training? That's all.
14 posted on 06/10/2003 12:04:37 PM PDT by rabidralph (A seda-GIVE?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: rabidralph
If you knew how many women have been grounded or downed in the Navy over the past 3 years, you would not be asking me that. I dont need to mention names, because I dont intend to give my own away. However, rest assured that most bad pilots dont have to end up dead before washing out. Less than 2 percent of those entering NAVAIR male or female get into fighters. In the early 90's the Navy was under orders to get as many women into those cockpits as they could, and the Navy had to lower standards to do so. Some women made it, most did not. Many of those who did not wrote books, and one died. You can do your own research.
15 posted on 06/10/2003 12:09:43 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
Sorry for the drive-by posting. Here's some info I found. From a 1999 Dalla Morning News story:
One undated document stated an Army general with an extensive special-operations background had been given special permission to go to Waco despite questions about the military's authority to send him. U.S. military special-operations lawyers had previously ordered Special Forces soldiers not to go to Waco even to watch the botched Feb. 28, 1993, raid that began the standoff...Federal law prohibits any military involvement in domestic operations against U.S. citizens without authorization from the highest levels of government.

"No auth. for Gen. Shoomaker [sic] to go. Has been approved, but approved by SEC DEF," the note on stationery from an FBI commander in Waco. "SEC DEF" is an abbreviation for the secretary of defense, then Les Aspin.

The general, Peter J. Schoomaker, had once headed the Army's secret, anti-terrorist Delta Force unit and now is at U.S. Special Forces Command at Macdill Air Force Base in Florida. He was one of two senior military special operations officers who visited Waco during the standoff and then attended FBI briefings with the attorney general before she approved the final tear gas plan.

Another undated, handwritten note mentions that Delta Force commandos and intelligence experts should be "invited" to Waco, stating "Delta commo/intel guys - helpful in observation role."


And to show that it isn't just the liberal media dragging Schoomaker's name through the mud, this is from a portion of a WorldNetDaily story:
In the opinion of WorldNetDaily's military source it is telling that in the five years since the two officers in the memo met with Reno about Waco, they have, between them, collected six stars -- a nearly unprecedented rate of advancement. Boykin, then a colonel has gained three stars to become a lieutenant general in command of the U.S. Army Special Operations Command, and Schoomaker, then a brigadier general, quickly gained three stars to become commander in chief of the United States Special Operations Command, the ultimate leader of all Special Forces units, Ranger units, Air Force Special Operations wings and all Navy Seals, making him arguably one of the most powerful men in the military, after the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

It appears that Schoomaker declined to offer Reno advice on the Justice Department's proposed plan for attacking the Branch Davidian compound, saying it was not a military operation and he couldn't give an opinion. To me that is a plus for him. However, there are still some questions--raised primarily by conservative media outlets-- about exactly how involved Delta Force was in the operation. Does this stuff disqualify him from being Army Chief of Staff? Probably not, but it is food for thought.
16 posted on 06/10/2003 12:16:23 PM PDT by drjimmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
I'll take your word for it because I do not have an inside track into the washout ratios. I just think it's rotten to politicize one death as proof that they're all unqualified or if they're flying, it's because of lowered standards. Lt. Hultgren could have been part of the regular "quota" of Class A mishaps that occur each year in naval aviation--nothing more, nothing less.
17 posted on 06/10/2003 12:24:21 PM PDT by rabidralph (A seda-GIVE?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Valin; Matthew James
What I would give to be in on the confirmation hearings and see if any sneator has the guts to mention the word Waco. Any takers on that wager?
18 posted on 06/10/2003 12:28:38 PM PDT by SLB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: drjimmy
It sounds like he asked (or was ordered) to show up at Waco and have a look. To me, it doesn't sound like he broke the rules that forbid the Army from being "involved" with domestic law enforcement.

I can think of any number of reasons why a good spec ops Army leader would want to look at the Waco situation. I'd say he wasn't doing his job if he didn't try to learn as much as he could about real-world stand-off situations, in order to improve the way the Army handles the situations they have to deal with overseas.

What the FBI and ATF and the Reno Justice Department did at Waco was terrible, but from what I know at this point it doesn't seem fair for any of the stink to rest at the doorstep of the Army.

Unless I heard more information, I'd say this was a non-issue.
19 posted on 06/10/2003 12:29:45 PM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rabidralph
I never said that they were all unqualified. Can you read?

Lt. Hultgren was not qualified to wash a Tomcat, let alone fly one. That is a fact. She committed safety errors that would have gotten better men sent packing. She had multiple downs in the training command. Many NFO's refused to fly with her. Her death was tragic because she had no business in that airplane. The Tomcat is a difficult airplane under the best conditions. The Navy killed that girl, because they were under orders.
20 posted on 06/10/2003 12:33:38 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SLB
I wonder if someone will mention Al Gore?
21 posted on 06/10/2003 12:36:47 PM PDT by harpseal (Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: drjimmy
If he went to see what is going on that is possibly a good thing as well as possibly a bad thing.
22 posted on 06/10/2003 12:37:48 PM PDT by harpseal (Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Concur
23 posted on 06/10/2003 12:39:22 PM PDT by bert (Don't Panic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
Lt. Hultgren was not qualified to wash a Tomcat, let alone fly one. That is a fact. She committed safety errors that would have gotten better men sent packing. She had multiple downs in the training command. Many NFO's refused to fly with her. Her death was tragic because she had no business in that airplane. The Tomcat is a difficult airplane under the best conditions. The Navy killed that girl, because they were under orders.

What's interesting is that the Air Farce, for all its warts and flaws, handled bringing women onto combat aircrew duties much more professionally.

Remember Lieutenant Kelly Flynn? How many Navy Captains or flag officers would have sent her up for a court-martial like the Air Force did?

24 posted on 06/10/2003 12:41:24 PM PDT by Poohbah (I must be all here, because I'm not all there!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Poohbah, the truth is that the AF had more problems than we did. They were only better at PR, and keeping leaks under control. They had fewer women make it as a percentage through their pipeline even though they had easier aircraft and conditions to deal with.(not to mention long runways) AF standards were always lower than the Navy's because they place more emphasis on procedures and regimentation. In the Navy, flying (and CARQUALS in particular) comes first.
25 posted on 06/10/2003 12:49:31 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
Bump for University of Wyoming ROTC, the "Cowboy Battalion"!
26 posted on 06/10/2003 12:58:52 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
They had fewer women make it as a percentage through their pipeline

Yeah, because they actually enforced their standards.

27 posted on 06/10/2003 1:14:17 PM PDT by Poohbah (I must be all here, because I'm not all there!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
No they did not.

The AF was first to allow corrected vision in the front seat. This was done because they could not find enough good eyes among the females who could manage not to kill themselves. The Navy was forced to follow suit to not lose good candidates out of college.

The AF accepts 20/50 for pilots and 20/200 for WSOs correctible to 20/20. The Navy still requires 20/30 correctable for pilots and 20/40 for NFOs.
28 posted on 06/10/2003 2:32:22 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
But he's also got a background in Armor--so it's not a foreign concept to him.

Flag and General Officers usually have a pretty good grasp of how to use the resources (manpower) and assets (equipment) at their disposal. He will have at least a M.A./M.S., very likely a PH.D., and has probably both attended and taught at the War College.

Special Operators appreciate and depend on field support. While it's true that they go in deep in small teams, they aren't without support. A senior Spec. Ops guy, whether he's a Ranger, SEAL, Marine Recon, etc., will be well aware of the value of heavy armor versus LAV's, and Apache's versus A10's, A10's versus fast-movers, and NGFS versus artillery tubes versus F/A 18's. (Hint: Precision guided munitions put the Battleships out of business as NGFS platforms, not missles or the cost of operations.)

What I really like about Special Operators, at least the guys I've served with, is that they are very "close to the ground", both psychologically and in many cases, literally. They don't have time or luxury for B.S.. Stuff works or it doesn't. Tactics work or people die.

I'm a Navy guy, but I respect the other services roles and perogatives, and hope this works out.

FReegards, SFS.

29 posted on 06/10/2003 2:33:32 PM PDT by Steel and Fire and Stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rabidralph
WOW. All of one?! As opposed to the guys who regularly turn cartwheels across the flight deck or who go into vertical climbs to impress their parents on their way out of Millington?

from what I hear John McCain was a "limited talent" pilot, who wouldn't have seen pilots wings, let alone combat, except for his connections.

Female pilots may actually have some advantages over men in high G situations, physiologically, and it is yet to be proven, one way or the other, how they will do psychologically.

Now, I'm not particularly aware of any problems with vertical climb outs from Millington. Doesn't mean they don't happen, or didn't in the past. However, the most recent such incident I'm aware of that was in Tennessee, was, I think, an F-14 leaving Nashville, wasn't it? That one just augered in, what, about 2 years ago? He was doing a viking takeoff to impress the folks and lost an engine, or ingested a bird, or both.

30 posted on 06/10/2003 2:42:51 PM PDT by Phsstpok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok
Somewhere in Tennessee, yes. I thought it was Millington because of the base there. But he was showing off for the folks and had some sort of mechanical problem and died.
31 posted on 06/10/2003 2:58:07 PM PDT by rabidralph (A seda-GIVE?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah

No problems at first glance. Would've been cool if Beckwith had gotten the job....man that would've pissed off alot of the divas.

Go Rummy.
32 posted on 06/10/2003 3:08:12 PM PDT by VaBthang4 (Could someone show me one [1] Loserdopian elected to the federal government?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok
Female pilots may actually have some advantages over men in high G situations, physiologically, and it is yet to be proven, one way or the other, how they will do psychologically.

Cannot speak for the AF, but female aviators in the Navy have had a problem with aggresiveness. Too much thinking, defensive instead of offensive initiative. This goes for not only combat situations, but in staying ahead of the airplane. Women do much better in Hornets than they do in Tomcats because anticipation of what the airplane will do is not required, while the Tomcat can have a mind of it's own. Short, compact bodies do have a small G advantage.

33 posted on 06/10/2003 3:08:54 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok
In the case of the crash in Nashville, that was a guy named Stacy Bates, who was already under scrutiny, because he had already wrecked a Tomcat off of Hawaii. He was very good and aggresive in the air, but not safe. He stalled an engine coming over the top, and stayed in a dive trying to get a re-light. He stayed with the aircraft too long, knowing that if he wrecked a second Tomcat, he was done as a pilot.

He came from the Navy's worst squadron at that time, VF-213; the same squadron as Lt. Hultgren.

34 posted on 06/10/2003 3:22:23 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok
"Female pilots may actually have some advantages over men in high G situations, physiologically, and it is yet to be proven, one way or the other, how they will do psychologically."

Do they have advantages over Men in High S[tress] situations?

Just had to drop that one in there.

When I was younger I shot a drunk and armed intruder coming into my parents home. My Mom & Sister completely lost it!! I mean lost it...running through the house screaming and crying...LOL...I actually had to walk into the kitchen and phone 911 in order to get the ball rolling. Mind you, my Mother is married to a former Recon Marine and she herself is in charge of nationwide distribution for a Forbes 500 company. She's a pitbull. But when it got overwhelmingly salient...she went dramaqueen.

There isnt a test on the planet or any amount of statistical results that'll remove "my impression of women under stressful situations" from my head. They're just not wired for it, and no amount of slanted discussion or impure data is ever gonna change that.

35 posted on 06/10/2003 3:24:47 PM PDT by VaBthang4 (Could someone show me one [1] Loserdopian elected to the federal government?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: rabidralph
Somewhere in Tennessee, yes. I thought it was Millington because of the base there. But he was showing off for the folks and had some sort of mechanical problem and died.

sounds like the one I'm thinking of. I'm pretty sure it was an F14 and I know the incident I'm thinking of was Nashville. Being an F14 it would have had both a pilot and a RIO (radio / intercept officer, I think) and checking the web, it looks like they both died.

I did a Google search on "+f14 +nashville +crash" and came up with a couple of hits. One article confirmed that pilot error finding, though it doesn't metion the "showing off for the folks" that I remember from the time. The other just gives the basic info from the crash itself. That hit was at:

http://www.tomcattersassociation.org/F14/f14-news.htm

What stunned me was that I thought this was only a couple of years ago. This was January of 1996!!

Millington still has military planes fly in and out, but not near what they used to. The Naval air station has been closed (no longer training plane mechanics) and the majority of the base has been turned over to the city. There is still a military area, but its a clerical office. The airfield gets used for some military tasks (combat air patrol sometimes is based there during high alerts) but is supposed to be mostly civilian now. Just a couple of weeks ago, however, they had a big air show, including the Blue Angels. I didn't get to go, but friends who went said they had a larger presence of more different active military aircraft than they had seen in a long time.

36 posted on 06/10/2003 3:29:11 PM PDT by Phsstpok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok
The RIO was Graham Higgins, a young kid, who trusted Bates instead of departing the airplane. He was like 27-28, right out of the RAG.
37 posted on 06/10/2003 3:34:08 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
There isnt a test on the planet or any amount of statistical results that'll remove "my impression of women under stressful situations" from my head. They're just not wired for it, and no amount of slanted discussion or impure data is ever gonna change that.

I've found that both men and women can come apart at the seams under stressful circumstances. I've worked with women on ambulance runs where drugged out psycho's came at us with knives and the woman in question took the guy out. She handled it because it was her job. I know of an incident where the same woman fell apart and "freaked out" after a killing (by police) when she was off duty and it wasn't her problem. It can be a matter of circumstance. I never have a problem with a trauma case (don't get shook or emotionally stressed) when I'm in a position to help. I've got a job to do and don't have time. I'll get just as strung out and stressed as anyone, man or woman, if it's not my job to "go to work" because I don't have that reflex to fall back on.

People all react differently and the same people will react differently to different situations. I'm glad you were there to take care of your family. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to have had your mom take care of business in the same manner if you weren't there to shoulder the burden for her. Don't sell people short. You'd be surprised, both for the good and the bad, at what some people can do under the right set of circumstances.

38 posted on 06/10/2003 3:38:18 PM PDT by Phsstpok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
I gather you fly (flew?) the 14? I have always been in awe of what combat pilots can do with the machines they command. I remember I enjoyed a really dumb ass scifi time travel movie, The Final Countdown, simply because they used a real F14 squadron to do their flying. There was one amazing scene of an encounter between a pair of F14s and a pair of Zeros (don't ask). The work those pilots had to (apparently) go through to work against such incredibly slow aircraft was amazing.

Did you know the RIO in question? God rest both of them.

39 posted on 06/10/2003 3:44:56 PM PDT by Phsstpok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok
What stunned me was that I thought this was only a couple of years ago. This was January of 1996!!

Time flies, don't it. The initial news report said that his parents were at the airport/air field watching him take off. So he probably wanted to do something special for them and it went horribly wrong. A retroactive Hold muh beer! alert.

40 posted on 06/10/2003 3:45:43 PM PDT by rabidralph (A seda-GIVE?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok
I'm retired; soon to join Delta Airlines training program. I knew Bates. He was nuts. I flew for the Dogs, Sundowners and Agressors, and I was an instructor. (see profile) Final countdown was cool. VF-84 Jolly Rogers got that duty.

Actually, the Tomcat could fly slower than a Zero if need be. It has amazing AOA capability. Lots of lifting area. I did not know the RIO personally. With the newer Engines, both Bates and Hultgren woudl still be alive, but that is no excuse for poor airmanship.
41 posted on 06/10/2003 3:52:08 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
Especially since "Chargin' Charlie" Beckwith has been dead for years.
42 posted on 06/10/2003 3:55:45 PM PDT by RSM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok
~A smirk, an eyeroll and a giggle~

Brother let it go.

6000 years of Human history flies in the face of our most recent effeminate subterfuge.
They arent wired for it. You'll always have overlaps...nevertheless, those are overlapping examples....not general rules.
43 posted on 06/10/2003 3:57:20 PM PDT by VaBthang4 (Could someone show me one [1] Loserdopian elected to the federal government?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: RSM
LOL!!
Am I confusing my Special Forces soldiers?
Hahaha...yeah, that would've been some trick!

Let me go find out who I'm thinking of. The General that travelled to Riyahd in the first Gulf War in order to brief Schwarz on plans to insert Delta into Western Iraq.
44 posted on 06/10/2003 4:00:14 PM PDT by VaBthang4 (Could someone show me one [1] Loserdopian elected to the federal government?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
There are women who do just fine. You would not want to date them, though. The ones who do well do not consider themselves pioneers and shun the idea that they are anything special. The only serious problem with the women is fraternization. Happens every cruise to someone. You can't stop human nature.
45 posted on 06/10/2003 4:02:03 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
"There are women who do just fine. "

I've known a couple...one of'em was a looker. A WM who scored a 300 on her PFTs without fail. Nevertheless, Hotties like her are few and far between.

Anyone pretending that it is remotely possible to pool them all into the pilot community has an agenda.

46 posted on 06/10/2003 4:07:36 PM PDT by VaBthang4 (Could someone show me one [1] Loserdopian elected to the federal government?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
I'm glad to hear they've found someone to fill this job -- if this report is true I hope he's the right man.

He has the smarts and the background but has NEVER been under fire in 30 years in the service. Hope he has the backbone for the job.

47 posted on 06/10/2003 4:14:22 PM PDT by HoustonCurmudgeon (PEACE - Through Superior Firepower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
You are right about that agenda, but Rummy is weeding those people out, now that the Democrat congresspersons are not up the Navy's ass over the issue anymore. The way that the downsizing of squadrons is going on, you may not see any women in combat jets at all in 5-10 years. If it goes back to being completely competitive for slots, women wont get any.
48 posted on 06/10/2003 4:15:05 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
Final countdown was cool. VF-84 Jolly Rogers got that duty.

a story I read at the time was that the squadron involved was the first squadron certified to be able to shoot down a missle (not sure what kind) in flight.

With the newer Engines, both Bates and Hultgren woudl still be alive

At the time of the crash of the Thunderbirds squadron I read alot about how limited the planes they used were, how they were always pushing the edge of their envelope (I think they were T34s?). They then went to the F16. The big comment was that the engine had so much thrust that, if they got in trouble, they could simply red line it and they'd go ballistic in whatever direction they were pointed at the time. There's often no substitute for lots of pounds of thrust on demand.

I'm retired; soon to join Delta Airlines training program.

Do you know what you'll be flying? It'll be a bit different from what you've flown before. I knew the VP of American at the time they were consdering buying the L-1011. He was in charge of the buy. He had been a military pilot and was still certified, including his multi engine jet, so he took up the plane, along with the execs from Lockheed. According to his story, he asked if it could survive a roll. They assured him it could. So he rolled it. It survived. They lowered the price to what he was offering (which they hadn't been willing to do before). True story or not, you guys are all nuts.... in a good way (g).

49 posted on 06/10/2003 4:17:14 PM PDT by Phsstpok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
That sounds good to me.
50 posted on 06/10/2003 4:22:59 PM PDT by VaBthang4 (Could someone show me one [1] Loserdopian elected to the federal government?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-73 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson