AF Talking Points get defensive

[DaveGriffin]

Since they have been moved to the back of the bus in the recently released Army-Marine Corps counterinsurgency ops manual outlining The Petraeus Doctrine, it looks like the AF may be getting a bit defensive.

Here’s the latest PR spin memo (shortened) that has been distributed in an effort to keep Airmen on message when they explain why their primary role is now transport, recon and targeting intelligence.

The AF has never enjoyed being viewed as a support service.


Air Force Key Talking Points
March 2007 // Vol 2, Edition 3
A monthly publication to alert Airmen of key issues and talking points.
Further information available on the AF Portal – under Air Force banner, select “Strategic Communication.”

Heritage to Horizon – Commemorating 60 Years of Air & Space Power


Talking Points reflect top issues supporting AF priorities, initiatives and programs. Airmen at all levels should use these to accurately and consistently communicate AF priorities.

The Message: Convey the message that the Air Force is in the fight. This fight is not just the conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan – it’s the fight to save lives through our humanitarian relief operations, it’s the fight to dissuade and deter our adversaries, and it’s the fight to provide for the strategic defense of the country now and in the future.

AF Mission Areas ____________________________________________________________
· Global Vigilance, Global Reach, Global Power: America’s Air Force is global and expeditionary. The AF provides vigilance that is persistent and focused; reach that is reliable, rapid and agile; and power that is precise, stealthy and decisive.
· "Only one of our Armed Services can provide global surveillance, global command and control, and the requisite range, precision and payload to strike any target, anywhere, anytime, at the speed of sound or the speed of light.” CSAF, 18 Jan 07 testimony before HAC-D on Readiness

AF Priorities ____________
We are vigilant in the pursuit of the enemy to fight and win the Global War on Terror (GWOT)
Ø We are America’s edge and we’re in the fight. Our first priority is to continue our focus on winning the Global War on Terror, ensuring the safety and security of our nation and its citizens.
Ø Worldwide deployed as of 23 Feb 07: Total – 31,000 (Active – 25,000; Guard – 4,000; Reserve – 2,000)
Developing and Caring for Airmen and their families ensures readiness (Airmen)

Ø Airmen are warfighters. Our active duty, Guard, Reserve and civilian Airmen are our most valuable assets in fighting the GWOT and ensuring we are the world’s dominant air, space and cyberspace force.
Recapitalizing and Modernizing Air, Space, & Cyberspace Systems secures warfighting capability (Recap)

Ø We must ensure our warfighting future. The Air Force continues to become more capable, more efficient and more lethal. Modernization includes aggressive divestment of legacy platforms and significantly enhances what our Airmen bring to combat operations.

Key points:
Ø The AF has engaged in continuous combat operations for over 16 years and will remain in SW Asia long after ground forces depart.
Ø The United States depends on Air, Space and Cyberspace power to an extent unprecedented in history.
Ø The AF is dedicated to Joint interdependence.
Ø Fiscal constraints challenge our ability to ensure dominant air and space power for the 21st Century without increasing risk.
Ø Our adversaries worry about the USAF -- We can hold any target at risk anywhere in the world in anytime, anyplace.
Ø AF medical care: We closely follow casualties through their unit and through an assigned Family Liaison Officer to ensure we meet the needs of the individual and their family – “eyes on” and “hands on.”

What We’re Doing Today:
Ø We fly approximately 400 daily sorties for Enduring Freedom / Iraqi Freedom
o Global Vigilance
§ 16 ISR sorties in AOR; 11.5 UAV (Global Hawk & Predator) CAPs in CENTCOM AOR alone.
§ Track satellites from 55 countries – 560 satellites over-flights daily.
§ 100+ operational US satellites, 450+ satellite ops events.
§ 2 AWACS on alert for Homeland Defense.
o Global Reach
§ 1 AMC departure every 90 seconds…24/7/365.
§ 250 airlift sorties, 2500 PAX, 1000 s-tons, 58 offloads.
§ 30 tanker missions in AOR.
§ 13 Air Evac missions with 50 patients.
§ 8,000 people per month off the roads in Iraqi convoy duty because of intra-theater airlift.
§ 8 tankers on alert for Homeland Defense.
§ 49 consecutive successful national security space launches.
o Global Power
§ 80 strike / Electronic Warfare / Non-Traditional ISR sorties in AOR.
§ 7 Special Ops / Search and Rescue sorties in AOR.
§ 40 fighters on alert for Homeland Defense.
§ 480 ICBMs on alert for the nation every day.

Top 5 procurement priorities:
1. KC-X: “The tanker is our number one procurement priority. In this global Air Force business, the single point failure of an air bridge, the single point failure for global ISR, or the single point failure for global strike is the tanker.” –CSAF

2. CSAR-X: The Air Force has selected the Boeing CH/MH-47as our newest Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) aircraft. (The GAO has recently released its report and the AF is currently studying it to determine next steps.)
3. Space Systems
Ø Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS): SBIRS will deliver a new generation of space-based satellites providing missile warning, missile defense, technical intelligence and battlespace awareness to combatant commanders.
Ø Transformational Satellite Communications System (TSAT): TSAT will provide unprecedented connectivity extending the Global Information Grid to space allowing protected worldwide internet access and an order-of-magnitude increase in capacity and capabilities.
Ø Space Radar: SR will provide persistent, day/night, worldwide, all-weather intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities for military, intelligence and civil applications.
Ø Space Situational Awareness: SSA is more than cataloging what’s in space. It is understanding what’s up there, when a satellite maneuvers, when something is deployed off a satellite or bus, and determining the capabilities of the satellite and intent of the operator.
4. F-35 Lightning II: 5th Generation, multi-role, stealth, precision strike fighter meets operational needs of AF, Navy, USMC and Allies.
5. Next Generation Long Range Strike – a new bomber by 2018: A new long-range strike platform is the critical piece to upgrading our portfolios to ensure range and payload – the soul of our AF – and persistent access in enemy environments for the future.

 

[pkober]

I'm surprised that they don't mention anything about being sensitive and diverse. The AF has gotten so PC it's sickening. I recently saw a "newsletter" in our HQ from the "Office of Cultural Transformation". I don't want mine or any one else's culture transformed. How about the "Office of kicking our enemies a$$e$ and worrying about some ones' hurt feelings later".

Just an idea.

 

[Deuce130]

I'm surprised that they don't mention anything about being sensitive and diverse. The AF has gotten so PC it's sickening. I recently saw a "newsletter" in our HQ from the "Office of Cultural Transformation". I don't want mine or any one else's culture transformed. How about the "Office of kicking our enemies a$$e$ and worrying about some ones' hurt feelings later".

Just an idea.

Can't comment much on the talking points - not sure who the AF is talking to or who we're supposed to talk to about all these points. As far as PC, just swing by any social actions office (or whatever it's called now) and the literature, bulletin boards, memos, and articles you'll see there will make you hurl.

 

[Gummo]

Personally, I like the acquisition priorities. Number 1 is a tanker and number 2 is a helo. Pretty soon there will be human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together...mass hysteria!

 

[bssthound]

Lemme do my best to steer this just a bit off topic:

Several years ago we had some sort of "sensitivity" briefing, I forget what it was called, where a social actions type came in and tried to talk about that sort of nonsense. She honestly said, and I am not making this up, that one of their goals was to have the base population reflect the local area's ethnic makeup. One of our more outspoken guys asked what exactly this had to do with putting bombs on a target. He stated that the Air Force's mission is to put bombs on target and asked how exactly this grand vision would make the USAF more effective at that mission. To the AF's credit that was the last time that presentation was given, at least at our unit.

Any bets on when the bomber they want by 2018 will actually be operational?

 

[pkober]

That was EO (Equal Opportunity 2000) 2000. Last time we have serious hardcore sensitivity training was under Clinton. It's still there, just not as overt.

When I got in the AF in 1994 the motto was changed from something like "Air power through flexibility" to "Air power through diversity".

 

[CFI2766]

This Dave guy; he simply doesn't like the Air Force, does he?

Did he wash out of UPT or something?

 

[bssthound]

Last time we have serious hardcore sensitivity training was under Clinton. It's still there, just not as overt.

Kinda like a cigarette here, a cigarette there, and before you know it you're smoking two packs a day.

When I got in the AF in 1994 the motto was changed from something like "Air power through flexibility" to "Air power through diversity".

When I got in the Air Force in 1986 it was "Fly, Fight, and Win." Now I s'pose it's "don't upset (fill in name/organization here) " One of you quick-witted young bucks/does can improve on that, I'm sure!!

It's he11 gettin' old Where's the smiley for just needin' a nap?

 

[DaveGriffin]

This Dave guy; he simply doesn't like the Air Force, does he?

Did he wash out of UPT or something?

Half right. While many of the individuals in the AF are outstanding, as an organization they are a poor team player with a superiority complex and little regard for the Army and Marines on the ground who do the heavy lifting.

This opinion was formed through the experience of working with them.

 

[Deuce130]

Half right. While many of the individuals in the AF are outstanding, as an organization they are a poor team player with a superiority complex and little regard for the Army and Marines on the ground who do the heavy lifting.

This opinion was formed through the experience of working with them.

No such thing as "them." You obviously worked with INDIVIDUALS, not the shadowy, nefarious "organization" you call the AF. If you didn't like them, fine. I'm sure they didn't like you either. I've worked with many SOF forces, most of them are good dudes. Some of them have serious attitude - as in "I'm a super soldier and you're here for me so you better shut up and color" type attitude. Which one are you? Maybe YOU were the cause of your bad experiences, not the aircrew you worked with. Self-reflection is a powerful tool, maybe it can help you out. And maybe answer the question of why a SEAL is constantly berating people on an aviation message board. Isn't there some other website you can patrol?

 

[pkober]

Half right. While many of the individuals in the AF are outstanding, as an organization they are a poor team player with a superiority complex and little regard for the Army and Marines on the ground who do the heavy lifting.

This opinion was formed through the experience of working with them.

OK, stop the whining. Now get back to shining my boots while I go to the country club and eat caviar.:laugh:

Don't lump all of us into one group. We in the ANG/AFRC Herc community bend over backwards to help our Army and Marines on the ground. We do every thing we can to get the drops off or get them in and out of where they need to be. Plus, allot of USAF guys, along with many good Marines and soldiers, have done the heavy lifting with there lives over the past wars

 

[dtfl]

Lemme do my best to steer this just a bit off topic:

Several years ago we had some sort of "sensitivity" briefing, I forget what it was called, where a social actions type came in and tried to talk about that sort of nonsense. She honestly said, and I am not making this up, that one of their goals was to have the base population reflect the local area's ethnic makeup. One of our more outspoken guys asked what exactly this had to do with putting bombs on a target. He stated that the Air Force's mission is to put bombs on target and asked how exactly this grand vision would make the USAF more effective at that mission. To the AF's credit that was the last time that presentation was given, at least at our unit.

Any bets on when the bomber they want by 2018 will actually be operational?

An AC I flew with in gunpigs critiqued the hell out of TQM - said it was worthless (it had some decent points...but the course was not tailored to the mil) and he got called into the WG/CV office and chewed out. For a critique..of a 1-time training requirement...WTF???????? Someone stuck a gun up the CVs &ss and told him TQM was the fad of the week?!?!?

Whats the quote by the old general or flyer? I'll mess it up but - "In my day we drank whiskey and screwed women..now they drink diet coke and screw each other"

Yup. Hey - go by the Hurlburt Class 6 and pick up some beer..ooo better wait. NO alcohol sales from 2300-0800. It's evil. There is no way on EARTH the airmen would drive out the gate to the Circle K 1/4 outside the gate for beer. How DARE they.

There was an article on Tue or Wed early bird about problems with troops drinking in Iraq...where it's "already illegal" yet they do it..and then RAPE and PILLAGE and COMMIT CRIMES...oh the humanity.."

I predict, RIGHT NOW, some General has mentioned GO #1 to be imposed on ALL troops. The WG CC at HRT (old one) asked if he could. He ended up imposing it on ANY TDY. ANY..SOS? Dry. WIC? dry. Red Flag? Dry.

4 years and counting..........

whew..that felt good.

I should move to Khazakstan. I hear they have the most superior potassium.

 

[bssthound]

dtfl opines:

I should move to Khazakstan. I hear they have the most superior potassium.

All other countries have inferior potassium.

 

[Pistlpetet]

No such thing as "them." You obviously worked with INDIVIDUALS, not the shadowy, nefarious "organization" you call the AF. If you didn't like them, fine. I'm sure they didn't like you either. I've worked with many SOF forces, most of them are good dudes. Some of them have serious attitude - as in "I'm a super soldier and you're here for me so you better shut up and color" type attitude. Which one are you? Maybe YOU were the cause of your bad experiences, not the aircrew you worked with. Self-reflection is a powerful tool, maybe it can help you out. And maybe answer the question of why a SEAL is constantly berating people on an aviation message board. Isn't there some other website you can patrol?

That is because this guy Dave Griffin has been exposed as a fake/imposter SEAL, and he does not have the moral fortitude to admit it. Dishonoring the many who have actually earned the Trident.

I have his PM's that tell me he is an over 50 ex-SEAL, yet I also have some of his posts that say he went to the Naval Academy in the early 90's.

I would give his opinion on ANYTHING as being totally worthless. He continues to stir the pot, and definately has an AF axe to grind. I would guess you are right about him being a UPT or BUD/S washout. In the end he is just an internet troll with a keyboard.

 

[SoundBarViolatr]

Half right. While many of the individuals in the AF are outstanding, as an organization they are a poor team player with a superiority complex and little regard for the Army and Marines on the ground who do the heavy lifting.

This opinion was formed through the experience of working with them.

LOSER.

 

[Occam's Razor]

Back on topic:

What exactly is wrong with having "talking points"? Am I missing something? If a commander (includes civilian authority over commanders) wants the team on-message, why is a bad thing to provide a reference for the message?

Where's the fire?

The priorities make sense to me.

 

[DaveGriffin]

Back on topic:

What exactly is wrong with having "talking points"? Am I missing something? If a commander (includes civilian authority over commanders) wants the team on-message, why is a bad thing to provide a reference for the message?

Where's the fire?

The priorities make sense to me.

The real question to ask is: Why does the AF thinks it needs to provide Talking Points to keep its team on message that the AF is doing its part?

With the release of the latest COIN Ops manual, the AF has found its role diminished to second tier status. They are also very concerned about losing budget.

The Fighter Jock Zoomie culture that has been running the AF for the past 30 years doesn’t want to lose strategic status or budget to the Army and Marines, the guys doing most of the work. Though they want to remain at the tip of the spear, it looks like a PR campaign, represented by the Taking Points, is the only way they can figure to counter their loss of status.

If they had built more C-17s and funded development of a real replacement for the A-10, maybe the Army and Marines would view the AF as a more valuable player to keep on first string offense.

 

[Mud Eagle]

If they had built more C-17s and funded development of a real replacement for the A-10, maybe the Army and Marines would view the AF as a more valuable player to keep on first string offense.

Man, I don't understand why the AF spends so much time and effort to send their officers to schools to learn about aerospace power. What a waste --

You've obviously got it all figured out when so many others who have spent their entire careers studying airpower have got it so wrong.

You're a serious airpower strategist. Respect!

 

[XShipRider]

My brother served 20 years in the Air Force so I refuse to jump on the put-down bandwagon. He garnered a Purple Heart by being blown up in the Khobar Towers bombing. It only took two surgeries to get his shoulders back to pseudo-normal but he still does not have full range of motion.

That said, I question why they're restructuring the workforce to accommodate the F-22. Who will maintain these birds? Contractors? Or is this a ploy to get what they want now then ask for a personnel increase down the road?

Mud Eagle, in reference to your post above: I freely admit I too am no air power strategist. I'm not denigrating the AF by asking my force level question. I simply don't understand the logic of their proposed personnel cuts.

Yeah, I know.. I'm a bit off topic.

 

[Mud Eagle]

I don't claim to completely understand the ins and outs of the CSAF's decisionmaking process, but I do get his rationale behind cutting manpower to modernize the fleet. It's not about the F-22...it's about the replacement tanker, a replacement CSAR helo, and several other aircraft, too. The overall age of the USAF fleet is unprecedented, and SOMETHING had to be done to throw a stake in the ground toward fixing the problem.

The AF mortgaged modernization of the fleet in the early 90s by counting on a "peace dividend" that would eventually open the flood gates to new money and new airframes. Well...that money never showed up, and here we are 15 years later with nothing significant to show for it.

So, I don't claim to know HOW the shrinking manpower of the force is going to be used as taskings continue to grow, but I do understand the dollars-and-cents rationale for needing to modernize the aircraft fleet across the board.