This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Tell me you didn't look at the 2021 organization chart of the wiki page you linked to without telling me you didn't look at the 2021 organization chart of the wiki page you linked to.
The Corps is composed multiple divisions, each at various installations. Each Division in turn has its own Brigades, including a Combat Aviation Brigade (CAB). You can recognize the helicopter units by the triangles shaped like |><| that represent the rotary blades.
Per the org chart, the division at Fort Bragg, NC, the same installation as the Corps HQ, is the 82nd Airborne Division. Underneath the 82nd Airborne Division is the 82nd Combat Aviation Brigade, with its 4 Aviation Battalions. Of those battalions, 2 are attack/recon (Apache gunships), 1 is Assault (Blackhawks), and 1 is General Support (Chinook).
You would be mistaken, and unfamiliar with the C-5 Galaxy.
A C-5 Galaxy strategic lift aircraft can carry up to six UH-60s.
A Blackhawk aviation battalion, in turn, is usually 30 or fewer blackhawks, or 5 or fewer strategic lift flights.
A C-5 galaxy can alternatively carry up to 2 CH-47s, such as this flight of 10k miles to Australia.
Only when it makes sense to, same with any other decision between shipping or airlift.
Countries send equipment by sea when cost matters more than speed, i.e. for a major deliberate deployment cycle for sustained operations. However, a global reaction force prioritizes speed over cost.
Since the point of a global reaction force is to be able to react, they tend to bring their own equipment they can be reasonably sure is reliably maintained, ready for use, and that their personnel are certified on, as opposed to assuming the crisis will occur in a region with extra equipment to fall in on.
More options
Context Copy link