Why was the USAF.....................

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
I've copied two paragraphs from Joe Baugher's website and these only
apply
to the B-52H.

Hmm, according to my books on the BUFF, the 20mm cannon was a "stock item"
on
the H model.


BUFDRVR


You want to reread that first paragraph which reads "The defensive tail
armament was changed. The quartet of 0.50-inch machine
guns carried by earlier versions was replaced by a single General Electric
M61 20-mm six-barreled rotary cannon. "

It says the .50s were used on EARLIER versions. My experience was with Ds
and Gs. The 20mm was only on the H which is what my message said.

Tex Houston

From: Mike Marron

(B2431) wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

Coming from someone whose stupidly wasted more bandwidth than
all of us combined swapping drivel with Tarver over such inane
things as "pitot tubes" and such, THAT was a truly mind boggling
retort! And as far as your buddy Beaman is concerned, well, he's a
self-admitted Tarver apologist. Pot Kettle Black.

Marion, please pay attention. Yes I did argue ad nauseum with tarver but I
never stooped to his level of name calling,personal attacks and vulgarity.
You have.

As if. As if being a santimonious hypocrite somehow lets you off the
hook. And I s'pose politely using a clinical term for "cajones" is a
"crime" or a "sin" in your book as well?

That is the tactic of one who is either losing an argument or has no
argument to begin with.

I stand by everything I wrote, Big Dan. And you do know the difference
between having an argument and expressing an opinion, correct?

I sure do and name calling and insults ahve no place in a debate.

First, who said anything about having a "debate?" Second, there
ya' go again with the sanctimonious, holier-than-thou crap.
Now, let's quickly review some of YOUR namecalling and insults
in this thread alone:

1) Misspelling my last name while keeping yours a secret.

It was a typo which I have since corrected and I apologize for.

2) Accusing my Father and his friends of being criminals.

I said they committed criminal acts which is a fact. You misread what I said.
It is against regs to take unauthorized people on launch trucks, to the
flightline etc. That makes it a criminal act.

3) Calling my Father and his friends fools.

I said entrusting their life support equipment to an unqualified person is a
foolish act. I stand by that. One foolish act does not make a person a fool.
Again you misread what I said. Once I got issued anything on which my life
depended I would not let any unauthorized person, especially a child, touch it.

4) Calling fighter pilots the second biggest BS artists in the world.

I said they are the second greatest BS artists when swapping stories. Again,
you got it wrong. Watch a group of fighter pilots trying to out lie each other
over beer and you will see what I meant. In any event if they ever told you
anything about the Air Force mission it is very obvious you have forgotten it.

5) Accusing me of having no idea what the USAF's job is.

I stand by that. It is an opinion and was given as such.

I'll say it slow, one more time, so even YOU can understand, Mr. Dan
B2431....

POT.



KETTLE.




BLACK.


(In other words, glass houses, stones, that kind of thing.)


Comprende?

None of what I said was a personal insult or attack against you. I am sorry you
don't see the difference. Please note you just called me a "santimonious
hypocrite." Please note I have never attacked you presonally or called you
names.

I have, however, said you seem to have no comprehension what the Air Force
mission is, how it conducts the mission and suggested you go review such. I
have also said your 20 years as a dependent (base brat) does not compare with
those of us who have actually served. I have also said you have made an
accusation that the USAF was responsible for 9/11 and you have yet to produce a
theory to explain why you said that. I have also said that your assertion that
the USAF was responsible for 9/11 was offensive to those who have served. None
of this was a personal insult or attack.

It appears to me you have no way to back up your accusations and you seem to
think calling me names and accusing me of things I haven't done is an
appropriate way for adults to debate.

Once again I say either give us a realistic theory as to why you accuse the
USAF of being responsible for 9/11 or apologize to all you have offended and
retract it.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

From: (JSH5176)
Date: 1/8/2004 7:14 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

It Was Asked,,,
Just curious, if fighter pilots are the second biggest BS
artists in the world, whose the first biggest?

THAT is simple,, The SP's take that honor hands down, not even the Marines
can
come close to a bunch of AF cops!!

Jim
SAC COP
78-88


Close g

If marron had remained civil and had asked that I would have answered "everyone
else." g

There I wuz, me and Ike, that's General Eisenhower to you,............

Just substitute the name for the war you choose to BS about. It is generally
assumed anything following "there I was" or "this is the honest to God's truth"
is pure BS.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

"Mike Marron" wrote

Comprende?

20+ posts in this thread, and still no information as to why you think the
USAF 'dropped the ball on 9/11 BIG TIME!"

Pete

Tex Houston wrote:

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...


I've copied two paragraphs from Joe Baugher's website and these only


apply


to the B-52H.


Hmm, according to my books on the BUFF, the 20mm cannon was a "stock item"


on


the H model.


BUFDRVR




You want to reread that first paragraph which reads "The defensive tail
armament was changed. The quartet of 0.50-inch machine
guns carried by earlier versions was replaced by a single General Electric
M61 20-mm six-barreled rotary cannon. "

It says the .50s were used on EARLIER versions. My experience was with Ds
and Gs. The 20mm was only on the H which is what my message said.

Tex Houston




Is a tail gun necessary on a B52? Has one ever been used as a defensive
measure in recent times?

Also, refresh my memory, it was a B52 that Slim Pickens was dropped from
in the movie ( as per BUFDRVR's signature )?? It's been a long time
since I saw the flick. And as more of a side note, was BUFDRVR's H
model built before or after the movie came out?

(B2431) wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

Coming from someone whose stupidly wasted more bandwidth than
all of us combined swapping drivel with Tarver over such inane
things as "pitot tubes" and such, THAT was a truly mind boggling
retort! And as far as your buddy Beaman is concerned, well, he's a
self-admitted Tarver apologist. Pot Kettle Black.

Marion, please pay attention. Yes I did argue ad nauseum with tarver but I
never stooped to his level of name calling,personal attacks and vulgarity.
You have.

As if. As if being a santimonious hypocrite somehow lets you off the
hook. And I s'pose politely using a clinical term for "cajones" is a
"crime" or a "sin" in your book as well?

That is the tactic of one who is either losing an argument or has no
argument to begin with.

I stand by everything I wrote, Big Dan. And you do know the difference
between having an argument and expressing an opinion, correct?

I sure do and name calling and insults ahve no place in a debate.

First, who said anything about having a "debate?" Second, there
ya' go again with the sanctimonious, holier-than-thou crap.
Now, let's quickly review some of YOUR namecalling and insults
in this thread alone:

1) Misspelling my last name while keeping yours a secret.

It was a typo which I have since corrected and I apologize for.

Gee Dan, I thought you "dismissed" me? Guess not, huh? In any
event, apologies accepted but I'm still wondering why you're so
secretive when it comes to revealing your FULL name? Whattsup
with THAT?? Afterall, you're retired and all so who cares?

2) Accusing my Father and his friends of being criminals.

I said they committed criminal acts which is a fact. You misread what I said.
It is against regs to take unauthorized people on launch trucks, to the
flightline etc. That makes it a criminal act.

Whatever. ISTR you accusing another poster of "confessing to a felony"
and now here you are accusing my father and his friends of comitting
"criminal acts." Now, I don't know what you job in the military was
specifically, but you're deluding yourself if you think that you've
impressed anyone here with your superficial knowledge of the law.

3) Calling my Father and his friends fools.

I said entrusting their life support equipment to an unqualified person is a
foolish act. I stand by that. One foolish act does not make a person a fool.
Again you misread what I said. Once I got issued anything on which my life
depended I would not let any unauthorized person, especially a child, touch it.

He did not entrust me or any other unqualified person to his life
support equipment. Thems YOUR words, not mine. There's a
HUGE difference between allowing your 9 or 10 year old son to simply
ride along in the launch truck along with all your equipment as
opposed to "entrusting your life support equipment to an unqualified
person." Now, I realize you're retired and all, but you really do need
to get a life. I mean GET A LIFE!!

4) Calling fighter pilots the second biggest BS artists in the world.

I said they are the second greatest BS artists when swapping stories. Again,
you got it wrong. Watch a group of fighter pilots trying to out lie each other
over beer and you will see what I meant. In any event if they ever told you
anything about the Air Force mission it is very obvious you have forgotten it.

See above. You just love to argue for the sake of arguing, huh?

5) Accusing me of having no idea what the USAF's job is.

I stand by that. It is an opinion and was given as such.

Exactly. Just like it is my opinion that the USAF is partly to blame
for not preventing the WTC/Pentagon terrorist attacks. I'm not the
only person who shares that opinion in this country, BTW.

I'll say it slow, one more time, so even YOU can understand, Mr. Dan
B2431....

POT.



KETTLE.




BLACK.


(In other words, glass houses, stones, that kind of thing.)


Comprende?

None of what I said was a personal insult or attack against you.

Riiiiight.

I am sorry you don't see the difference.

Riiiiiiiiight.

Please note you just called me a "santimonious hypocrite." Please note
I have never attacked you presonally or called you names.

You can attempt to spin it anyway you wish, but accusing my Dad of
"committing criminal and/or foolish acts" and me of "having no idea
what the USAF's job is" constitutes personal attacks in my book.

I have, however, said you seem to have no comprehension what the Air Force
mission is, how it conducts the mission and suggested you go review such. I
have also said your 20 years as a dependent (base brat) does not compare with
those of us who have actually served. I have also said you have made an
accusation that the USAF was responsible for 9/11 and you have yet to produce a
theory to explain why you said that. I have also said that your assertion that
the USAF was responsible for 9/11 was offensive to those who have served. None
of this was a personal insult or attack.

And you seem to have no comprehension what it's like to stand on
the firing line for more than 12, long, agonizing months just waiting
and wondering if your Dad has been shot down or killed in some
steaming ******** SEA jungle....or taken prisoner....or WTF??!!

It appears to me you have no way to back up your accusations and you seem to
think calling me names and accusing me of things I haven't done is an
appropriate way for adults to debate.

First, I'm not obligated to defend my opinions to YOU. Second, if you
haven't noticed, I'm not interesting in having any "debate" with YOU.
Anyone like YOU whose willing to sit and argue with someone like
TARVER (of all people!) on the internet month after month after month
is obviously someone who simply loves to argue for the sake of
arguing. Ya' just can't win with guys like YOU, so thanks but no
thanks! Feel free to go back to swapping drivel over "pitot tubes"
and such with good ol' Tarv.

Once again I say either give us a realistic theory as to why you accuse the
USAF of being responsible for 9/11 or apologize to all you have offended and
retract it.

Again, thanks but no thanks. (Please see my response to Dweezil
below...)

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Retired and perhaps a bit too much free time on your hands?

***

After spending the first 20 years of my life on ADC bases I grew
accustomed to the sound of afterburners blasting off all day
and night and the even louder concussions of sonic booms.
As a young kid, I rode in those dark blue Air Force panel trucks on
the flightline with Dad and his RO's carrying their chutes, kneeboards
and helmet bags. I sat in the tower and listened to his radio
conversations and watched until my neck was sore as my ol' man
roared down the runway at Kingsley Field and pulled straight
up 'till he was clean out of sight. Hell, I've even drank beer with
him and his pilot buds and a few of the wise old maintenance types
whom he fondly referred to as "Zebras." In other words, I have a
pretty damn good idea of what the USAF's job is and to imply
otherwise is offensive not only to me, but also the USAF. The purpose
of this NG is to discuss all-things-military aviation, and that is all
I am attempting to do. Anyone who knows me, or either of my two
older brothers (not to mention my younger sister and my
Mother, of course!) knows just how much we honor and respect
the military and especially the USAF. If my remarks concerning
9/11 happen to offend you, I sincerely apologize. However, I remain
convinced that the USAF was at least partly to blame for 9/11. Not
unlike pre-Dec 7, 1941, the pre-Sept. 11, 2001 USAF (USAAF in
'41) had become complacent and both the Japs AND those Islamic
****s ($1 to Juvat) simply caught us all napping on the job, so
to speak. Like it or not, the horrific results of both surprise
attacks at Pearl Harbor and NYC/Washington DC speak for
themselves. But that's just my opinion, you're entitled to yours, of
course. Nice day!

***

"Mark and Kim Smith" wrote in message
...
Is a tail gun necessary on a B52? Has one ever been used as a defensive
measure in recent times?

Also, refresh my memory, it was a B52 that Slim Pickens was dropped from
in the movie ( as per BUFDRVR's signature )?? It's been a long time
since I saw the flick. And as more of a side note, was BUFDRVR's H
model built before or after the movie came out?

The guns were used in North Vietnam 1972. After gunners were removed from
crew (1991) the guns were gradually removed but only the guns. Remainder of
firecontrol system retained. See my earlier messages, same subject line.

Read the book never saw the movie. Do not know when it came out. As I
remember the book, not a bit of it was like real life as I encounterd in the
SAC Alert Force where I spent years and years.

Tex

"Gene Storey" wrote in message
news:vhlLb.9549$6l1.6504@okepread03...

Because the guys on the ground don't have the same kinetic energy to kill
and bring down centers of commerce.


?

"Mike Marron" wrote in message
...
"mg" wrote:

To blame the Air Force is like blaming the fire department for not
stopping
an arsonist.

Poor analogy. The Air Force is not entirely to blame for what happened
to 9/11, but it's not absolutely blameless either.

Actually the fire department likely has a bigger role in stopping arsonist
that the Air Force in investigating potential terrorist threats. In many
areas the fire department is responsible for criminal investigation of
arson and if it is a repeat offender they should have caught him last time.

It was there to put the fire out (endless CAP mission ever since),
but it could not have prevented it.

Given better intelligence, the USAF could have easily prevented it.

Yes, but the Air Force is not tasked with intelligence analyst of
that nature. Rarely they'll be tasked with some of the gathering that
requires their technical assets but in those cases they are more
likely than not to have no idea why they are acquiring it.

Or why not blame the Army for not having a AAA battery stationed in NY or
DC.
Or why not blame the Navy for not having a ship on the Potomac or in NY
harbor that could have prevented it.

Actually, you're absolutely right. Why not blame the Army or Navy?

Because they too, are not very involved in that area.
Well, actually, army & navy special forces might be involved if
requested by civilian agencies.

In what far fetched way could the USAF have prevented 9/11?

A preemptive strike, perhaps? Recall the Israeli attack on the Osiraq
nuclear powerplant near Baghdad back in 1981.

Yes, with better intelligence the USAF could have preemptively targeted
Ossama. But the Air Force would not have gathered the intelligence,
the Air Force would not have analyzed the intelligence and the Air
Force wouldn't have decided it sufficient to act upon.

You are aware that the Army, Navy and Air Force are not allowed
to launch preemptive strikes on their own?

From: Mike Marron


(B2431) wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

Coming from someone whose stupidly wasted more bandwidth than
all of us combined swapping drivel with Tarver over such inane
things as "pitot tubes" and such, THAT was a truly mind boggling
retort! And as far as your buddy Beaman is concerned, well, he's a
self-admitted Tarver apologist. Pot Kettle Black.

Marion, please pay attention. Yes I did argue ad nauseum with tarver but I
never stooped to his level of name calling,personal attacks and vulgarity.
You have.

As if. As if being a santimonious hypocrite somehow lets you off the
hook. And I s'pose politely using a clinical term for "cajones" is a
"crime" or a "sin" in your book as well?

That is the tactic of one who is either losing an argument or has no
argument to begin with.

I stand by everything I wrote, Big Dan. And you do know the difference
between having an argument and expressing an opinion, correct?

I sure do and name calling and insults ahve no place in a debate.

First, who said anything about having a "debate?" Second, there
ya' go again with the sanctimonious, holier-than-thou crap.
Now, let's quickly review some of YOUR namecalling and insults
in this thread alone:

1) Misspelling my last name while keeping yours a secret.

It was a typo which I have since corrected and I apologize for.

Gee Dan, I thought you "dismissed" me? Guess not, huh? In any
event, apologies accepted but I'm still wondering why you're so
secretive when it comes to revealing your FULL name? Whattsup
with THAT?? Afterall, you're retired and all so who cares?

I like my privacy and that of my family.

2) Accusing my Father and his friends of being criminals.

I said they committed criminal acts which is a fact. You misread what I
said.
It is against regs to take unauthorized people on launch trucks, to the
flightline etc. That makes it a criminal act.

Whatever. ISTR you accusing another poster of "confessing to a felony"
and now here you are accusing my father and his friends of comitting
"criminal acts." Now, I don't know what you job in the military was
specifically, but you're deluding yourself if you think that you've
impressed anyone here with your superficial knowledge of the law.

As I said before and you don't quote here you were talking about your father
taking you out in a launch truck and I said that violated regs, the same regs
that applied to me, and was therefore a criminal act. If your father came
aboard any truck I was driving on the flightline and brought you along I would
drive the both of you off the line to the nearest cop shack no matter what rank
your father was. If in fact you were in the "tower" of any airbase and NOT
accompanied by your father, assuming he had written authorrization to be there
or was himself escorted, someone was committing a crime. Ref AFR 207-1

3) Calling my Father and his friends fools.

I said entrusting their life support equipment to an unqualified person is a
foolish act. I stand by that. One foolish act does not make a person a fool.
Again you misread what I said. Once I got issued anything on which my life
depended I would not let any unauthorized person, especially a child, touch
it.

He did not entrust me or any other unqualified person to his life
support equipment. Thems YOUR words, not mine. There's a
HUGE difference between allowing your 9 or 10 year old son to simply
ride along in the launch truck along with all your equipment as
opposed to "entrusting your life support equipment to an unqualified
person." Now, I realize you're retired and all, but you really do need
to get a life. I mean GET A LIFE!!

You said you handled their parachutes and helmet bags. That's life support
equipment.


4) Calling fighter pilots the second biggest BS artists in the world.

I said they are the second greatest BS artists when swapping stories. Again,
you got it wrong. Watch a group of fighter pilots trying to out lie each
other
over beer and you will see what I meant. In any event if they ever told you
anything about the Air Force mission it is very obvious you have forgotten
it.

See above. You just love to argue for the sake of arguing, huh?

Looking in a mirror?


5) Accusing me of having no idea what the USAF's job is.

I stand by that. It is an opinion and was given as such.

Exactly. Just like it is my opinion that the USAF is partly to blame
for not preventing the WTC/Pentagon terrorist attacks. I'm not the
only person who shares that opinion in this country, BTW.

But ALL the other people have come up with theories and/or supposed evidence to
support their claims. You refuse to do anything beyond accuse an entire branch
of dereliction of duty.

I'll say it slow, one more time, so even YOU can understand, Mr. Dan
B2431....

POT.



KETTLE.




BLACK.


(In other words, glass houses, stones, that kind of thing.)


Comprende?

None of what I said was a personal insult or attack against you.

Riiiiight.

I am sorry you don't see the difference.

Riiiiiiiiight.

Please note you just called me a "santimonious hypocrite." Please note
I have never attacked you presonally or called you names.

You can attempt to spin it anyway you wish, but accusing my Dad of
"committing criminal and/or foolish acts" and me of "having no idea
what the USAF's job is" constitutes personal attacks in my book.

But they are true. If they aren't sue me for libel and let the courts decide.

I have, however, said you seem to have no comprehension what the Air Force
mission is, how it conducts the mission and suggested you go review such. I
have also said your 20 years as a dependent (base brat) does not compare
with
those of us who have actually served. I have also said you have made an
accusation that the USAF was responsible for 9/11 and you have yet to
produce a
theory to explain why you said that. I have also said that your assertion
that
the USAF was responsible for 9/11 was offensive to those who have served.
None
of this was a personal insult or attack.

And you seem to have no comprehension what it's like to stand on
the firing line for more than 12, long, agonizing months just waiting
and wondering if your Dad has been shot down or killed in some
steaming ******** SEA jungle....or taken prisoner....or WTF??!!

What firing line? And what has that to do with this discussion? You are right,
I never had to wait for a relative in combat. I WAS the relative in combat.

It appears to me you have no way to back up your accusations and you seem to
think calling me names and accusing me of things I haven't done is an
appropriate way for adults to debate.

First, I'm not obligated to defend my opinions to YOU.

Actually you ARE obligated to defend your vile accusation or retract it.

Second, if you
haven't noticed, I'm not interesting in having any "debate" with YOU.
Anyone like YOU whose willing to sit and argue with someone like
TARVER (of all people!) on the internet month after month after month

And you are behaving exactly like tarver by making an accusation like you did
when you blamed the USAF for 9/11 and making no attempt to back that up despite
several people besides me asking.
is obviously someone who simply loves to argue for the sake of
arguing. Ya' just can't win with guys like YOU, so thanks but no
thanks! Feel free to go back to swapping drivel over "pitot tubes"
and such with good ol' Tarv.

Once again I say either give us a realistic theory as to why you accuse the
USAF of being responsible for 9/11 or apologize to all you have offended and
retract it.

Again, thanks but no thanks. (Please see my response to Dweezil
below...)

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Retired and perhaps a bit too much free time on your hands?

***

After spending the first 20 years of my life on ADC bases I grew
accustomed to the sound of afterburners blasting off all day
and night and the even louder concussions of sonic booms.
As a young kid, I rode in those dark blue Air Force panel trucks on
the flightline with Dad and his RO's carrying their chutes, kneeboards
and helmet bags. I sat in the tower and listened to his radio
conversations and watched until my neck was sore as my ol' man
roared down the runway at Kingsley Field and pulled straight
up 'till he was clean out of sight. Hell, I've even drank beer with
him and his pilot buds and a few of the wise old maintenance types
whom he fondly referred to as "Zebras." In other words, I have a
pretty damn good idea of what the USAF's job is and to imply
otherwise is offensive not only to me, but also the USAF. The purpose
of this NG is to discuss all-things-military aviation, and that is all
I am attempting to do. Anyone who knows me, or either of my two
older brothers (not to mention my younger sister and my
Mother, of course!) knows just how much we honor and respect
the military and especially the USAF. If my remarks concerning
9/11 happen to offend you, I sincerely apologize. However, I remain
convinced that the USAF was at least partly to blame for 9/11. Not
unlike pre-Dec 7, 1941, the pre-Sept. 11, 2001 USAF (USAAF in
'41) had become complacent and both the Japs AND those Islamic
****s ($1 to Juvat) simply caught us all napping on the job, so
to speak. Like it or not, the horrific results of both surprise
attacks at Pearl Harbor and NYC/Washington DC speak for
themselves. But that's just my opinion, you're entitled to yours, of
course. Nice day!

***

If you won't explain to me, and based on your vast knowledge of the Air Force
mission, tell the rest of this NG how the USAF caused 9/11.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired