Deep frustration in the USAF, is it the same across all services?

Amen, COL Charles Williams. There are DISTINCT differences between the career fields in the AF where the culture is "more green than blue" - SOF, security forces, etc. I think this is due to the fact that they implement more w/ the army than the rest of the fields, and have therefore adopted the best aspects of both cultures. This has created a very viable hybrid that one would hope the rest of the service would adopt.

I cant argue with the article at all. I have heard too many lectures by leadership about how my "warrior ethos" should be at the forefront and to remain fit to fight. With that being said, do not DARE fail a PT test because nobody should ever fail at anything they do! The one mistake AF is getting tiresome and I don't know if upper level leadership knows or even cares about it.

COL Charles Williams you are partially correct when you say the AF has a culture problem...it also has an identity problem.

Hooah MSgt (Join to see) and SSgt (Join to see). Just one guys perspective.

MSgt (Join to see), I like how the article also pointed out the double-standard of the "no-mistake" enlisted corps, but the "forgive & forget" officer corps.

MSgt (Join to see) I know what you mean about feeling out of place in PME type environments. Security forces is one of those AFSCs that's more green than blue. That being said, however, the extreme push on PT is very frustrating. I may not be the most fit person in my unit, but I know I can perform circles around my peers when it comes to job knowledge and job application. I've met people during my career who were in the gym for hours everyday, but I don't know if I could trust them for a second to know how to react in situations that go south. I've seen too many fantastic NCOs have to seperate, just because they weren't PT all-stars. The whole system just reeks of someone trying to get that star on their collar...

CSM (Join to see)

There's no way you can openly insult a branch, attempt to imply no offense whatsoever, when you said yourself you were knocking them, then lightly pull rank on me and remind me of tact. Let me ask you this, how would you have felt if someone was directly stating that your Army can't hack it, or that "for lack of better terms" they are the equivalent of toy soldiers? Thick skin or not, a proud person will get offended.

I in no way disrespected your rank and utilized as much tact as I received. I went straight to your opinion and made you see the unfruitfulness in the comparison. If you have a problem with my opinion, that's tough. It's my right to openly express myself and defend my branch and beliefs respectfully. This is how social sites operate. We speak freely on this social site about various issues in an informal fashion, somewhat free of those shackles. I know where the line ends regarding the upkeep of professionalism here and I haven't crossed it yet. How come you are entitled to disrespect a whole branch and I'm not entitled to respond to you defensively? Can a double standard be considered in this particular situation?

I do find it humorous that you feel that you have the privilege to make unprofessional commentary about other branches, then attempt to indirectly take jabs at my service with your "measly 28 years" comment, as if that should solidify or resolve things. I think you're trying to get me out of character...... Are you implying that because one service member has more years in the service, that makes him/her a better service member? Ultimately deeming him/her more knowledgable? The whole military can oppose to that. Again, someone come look at this. Seniority is as simplistic as it stands. A privileged position earned by reason of longer service or higher rank. In a lot of cases we have senior enlisted that just drag by and finish their time, disregarding customs and the sole reason they enlisted in the first place. I apologize for not being born in 1940. If so, I'd be able to IRONICALLY disregard tact and just spit out whatever I desire due to my highly impressive tenure, expecting no recoil at all.

If and so you feel that I'm personally attacking you, rest easy. My defenses are directed at unnecessary comments regarding our Armed Services. I'm beyond exasperated with all the branch-burning going on on this site. Anytime I see it, I'll charge right at it, no matter what rank. In most of my responses I'm even more sarcastic and, "for lack of better terms," a complete asshole to those whom merited it. This branch burning issue is a nuisance to me and one of my pet peeves, hence my argumentative stance. In my most honest opinion, I strongly felt that your initial comparison was insipid at the least.

I can admit that I somewhat went for the jugular and I will note that for future discussions while on Rallypoint. In the meantime, I will find a controversial issue on FB tonight and let loose there.

SrA (Join to see)
Thank you for proving my point.

CSM (Join to see)

I have no problem admitting my wrongs. Don't misconstrue my intent and think I'm submitting, I still dislike your commentary and arrogant stance.

I'm reasoning with the situation even after you attempted to undermine a branch, my intelligence and my service with your outstanding and stupendous 28 years of service. I can't say the same for you regarding reasoning. Not admitting a mistake is a bigger mistake, which often leaves one without much to say.

We're often looking at our shadow because we want to avoid the shame or embarrassment that comes along with admitting mistakes.

I would go one further than that, MSgt (Join to see). It seems that the enlisted corps is a "one mistake AF", but the officer corps get a little more leeway.