Avatar feed
Responses: 4
PFC Jonathan Albano
2
2
0
Wonder what idiot made that decision. A moving target is harder to hit than a stationary one. Good way to get a top official or two killed in a wartime scenario.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen
2
2
0
Dumber than dirt comes to mind. Know this administration thinks costs for new AF1 are exhorbinate but cutting in-flight refueling capability just shows how out of touch with reality they are.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
TSgt Hh 60 G Maintainer
2
2
0
This is a bad idea. Landing to refuel makes the president and the aircrew a vulnerable target. The aerial refueling system is probably well worth the added cost.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close