Military Community, military installations, discussions, blogs, photos, videos - Military Times

Letters

Rules are rules

I cannot believe Air Force Times did a story about what airmen think are some of the stupidest rules in the Air Force, [“Air Force’s stupidest rules,” June 29].

I read the items you printed and felt sick to my stomach. What a bunch of babies: diamond earrings, why do we march, why do I have to tuck my PT shirt in, why can’t I have a beard.

What is the Air Force coming to? And why did a respectable publication field such nonsense?

After 20 years in the greatest Air Force in the world, it is sad to see that things have turned out the way they have.

Thank you for giving a bunch of babies a chance to make us all look like fools.

-- Master Sgt. John M. Tingle, Kunsan Air Base, South Korea

Don’t change ‘don’t ask’

It irritates me that people want to change the “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule. You have these simple rules — rules that I believe reflect some shred of a moral standard — and they want to complain about them and change them.

My opinion stands that gays and lesbians still shouldn’t be allowed in the military.

I have always been proud of the Air Force — and the entire military — for having that standard and standing behind it.

-- Senior Airman Michael Jones, Tacoma, Wash.

———

It’s interesting that you are printing so many letters supporting homosexuals in the military.

The policy we have now is a fair one. It seems like some people want to flaunt their homosexuality.

In my experience, I have not seen any interest in knowing the sexual preferences of fellow airmen. We have worked side by side and have made great accomplishments without such knowledge.

Recent Air Force Times articles have promoted motorcycle safety courses, weight loss programs and the benefits of exercise. Maybe there should be an article on how this lifestyle choice affects cultures.

Let’s work to build a stronger, healthier community that promotes strong physical, mental and spiritual individuals.

-- Chief Master Sgt. Jim Cox (ret.), Granger, Iowa

Air Force is not Army

I have to congratulate Robert F. Dorr about his piece in the June 29 edition of the Air Force Times [“Air Force is trying too hard to be Army”].

Since about 1992, the Air Force has been modeling itself after the Army. First the BDU, then tossing the Air Force Blues for the business suit, and now PT.

While serving at Al Udeid in 2003 I had a T-shirt made that said, “U.S. Army Air Corps 1903-1947” on top, and “2001-present” across the bottom.

Needless to say it only took one walk around base to be asked not to wear that again.

I see the new troops coming from basic, and their war stories from basic sound astonishingly like my friends’ from the Army.

Mr. Dorr’s comments were bigger picture than I see, but hit the same chord with me. My Air Force isn’t the Army. If they want it to be the Army Air Corps again, they need to come out and say it so I can get my retirement paperwork started.

-- Tech. Sgt. Justin P. Steiger, Misawa Air Base, Japan

F-22 is not a toy

While I sincerely thank Senior Airman Markeis McCray for his service to our country during this time of conflict, I have to disagree strongly with his assessment of the F-22 Raptor [“F-22: A waste of money,” June 29].

McCray apparently is operating on two false assumptions. First, he seems to conclude that because our current enemy does not possess an air force, that no enemy we will face in the future could have one either. Second, he seems to be saying fighter aircraft have outlived their usefulness because Top Gun-style dog-fighting is a thing of the past.

In reality, our current foe will most likely not be our last. Aggressive leaders in Asia could draw us into armed conflict with countries well equipped with the latest in Russian fighters. And while it may be hard to picture an aerial scrimmage between fighters of two opposing nations, it would be dereliction for our Air Force not to be prepared to dominate.

The F-22 is an interceptor much more likely to be used to interdict enemy bombers and warships before they get within striking range of U.S. forces and territory.

Whether the Raptor is the right fighter, at the right time, at the right price, or even scheduled to be purchased in the right quantity are all decisions above my paygrade.

But to categorize this lethal deterrent to enemy aggression as a “toy” is unfair.

-- Master Sgt. Jay Holman, Trenton, N.J.

Credit card hurts clubs

The thought that increased special benefits, such as discounted food, and tickets will bolster club membership and get folks to swallow the bitter pill of the credit card, no matter how low the limit or dues rate, shows that Air Force Services just doesn’t get it [“Join the club,” July 6].

Membership might increase slightly, but it would pale in comparison with dumping the credit card and issuing a mea culpa on that decision.

The credit card is not a convenient excuse for nonmembership, as the services officer in the article remarked. It is central to why club membership has been in a flat spin since the 1990s. It is the reason every squadron commander I have had since then has quit emphasizing membership. It is the reason I left the officers club more than 10 years ago and the reason I have never emphasized club membership to my subordinates.

The club system belongs to airmen, not Chase, Citi or whoever holds the current card contract.

If Air Force services’ desired effect in having the credit card is to reduce collections costs and administration, then so be it.

However, there are multiple means to this end and there is no underlying reason for the card’s continued existence.

Monthly allotments are easily established via myPay and it’s probably safe to say that every bank in the country allows for some form of automatic bill payment. All it takes is a little effort by Air Force Services to set up accounts for each base or a decision to go with a single master Air Force account.

The editorial had it right. The card has to go.

-- Lt. Col. Damon S. Feltman, Robins Air Force Base, Ga.