Air Force Times letters - Army Community - Army Discussions - Army Times

Air Force Times letters

Air Force Times’ editorial “Trust but verify” [Dec. 18] is sloppy journalism. Although the newspaper broke the story about then-Brig. Gen. Richard S. Hassan’s misconduct and subsequent removal from his position as director of the Air Force Senior Leadership Management office, less than a year later it misidentified him as a judge advocate by assigning his misconduct to the Air Force Judge Advocate General Corps. Hassan was never a JAG.

In addition to getting basic facts wrong, Air Force Times unjustly condemned the JAG Corps and its 4,500 honorable, hardworking airmen as “awash in scandal” as a result of individual behavior.

The entire journalism profession cannot be condemned because a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter makes up stories. Likewise, the entire profession of arms can’t be condemned because of the misdeeds of a few. Any population will include a few bad actors.

The real measure of an organization is what it does when misconduct is discovered. The JAG Corps did not cover up the matter or protect Col. Michael D. Murphy, who was relieved of command at the Air Force Legal Operations Agency after it was learned he practiced law without a license for more than 20 years. JAGs discovered Col. Murphy’s bar credentials issues. In less than 24 hours, he was relieved of command, and the matter was passed to the inspector general for formal investigation. Within days, the JAG Corps established a sweeping requirement that its 2,500 lawyers prove their bar status.

Air Force Times’ attack on JAG Corps’ integrity is misguided hyperbole. Integrity is the Air Force’s first core value for a reason. Airmen must rely on each other, even with our lives.

In addition to the just reliance on the integrity of its members, as earned and demonstrated over the past 60 years by thousands of JAG Corps lawyers, the JAG Corps has and continues to expand upon various profes-sional responsibility oversight measures.

As far back as I can attest to, lawyers have been required to submit written proof that they are law school graduates and members in good standing in the highest court of a state or in a federal bar prior to being designated as a JAG.

Longstanding regulations require JAGs to remain in good standing with a state or federal bar and to notify the JAG Corps immediately when their bar status changes. Every year, JAGs must review rules of professional conduct. And recent events led the JAG Corps to take yet another step by requiring JAGs to verify bar status through independent evidence.

With a track record like that, you can be assured the Air Force JAG Corps will carefully examine its qualification and verification processes to allow commanders and airmen to continue to trust their lawyers.

You’ve got to be kidding me. The medical community has an elaborate system to verify and certify its qualifications every year, yet, of all professions, we trust lawyers based on their say-so [“Senior JAG fired,” Dec. 18]?

Who’s driving this bus? What about the other professions (such as chaplains) that require special certification? How many others are out there hiding behind their uniform or rank?

It is really sad that the Veterans Affairs Department can’t quickly adjust to allow veterans in categories 4 to 8 to fill their VA prescriptions at Wal-Mart or Target for $4 each instead of the $8 now being charged by the VA for the same 30-day supply [“VA allows shift to discount chains for $4 prescriptions,” Dec. 11]. This issue should be expedited.

Wal-Mart has prepared a list of the 314 generic drugs that it offers for $4 each and can be obtained online or by a visit to a Wal-Mart pharmacy in most states.

Regarding the treatment of Staff Sgt. Jason Adkins [“Vaccine ruined his health, career, former airman says,” Dec. 18]: I flew with Jason in the early 1990s. He was a young airman at the time. Hard working and dedicated, he was a poster child for the Air Force and the perfect model of a loadmaster.

The Air Force did nothing wrong when it ordered him to get his anthrax shots. Officials’ actions after he experienced an adverse reaction were nothing less than deplorable. Every vaccine has resulted in someone suffering an adverse reaction. Some people even die from vaccinations. The reason we still get vaccines is because the number of people who suffer side effects is small and the benefits the vaccines provide are huge.

Staff Sgt. Jason Adkins is one of the unfortunate few who suffered an adverse reaction to the anthrax vaccine. He should have been helped, not punished. If he could not continue his distinguished career due to health problems, he should have received a medical discharge for his years of loyal service. I am ashamed of the Air Force for its treatment of such an outstanding career noncommissioned officer and loadmaster.

I keep hearing debates about pulling troops out of Iraq.

The costs are often cited. Recent articles cite $500 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan.

What was the cost of the loss of the World Trade Center towers, the damage to the Pentagon, the airliners, the money paid to the families of those who died in the Sept. 11 attacks, the hit to the stock market and all the businesses affected, the cost of improved security across the nation, the activation of the National Guard in many states and the grounding of aircraft across the nation?

Can we afford more? I would venture to guess that, so far, the war in Iraq has been cheap in comparison to the money lost due to Sept. 11. We cannot afford to bring this battle to the home front.

The new airman battle uniform is indeed better than the blue tiger-stripe proposal of 2004 [“ABU A-OK?” Dec. 18]. As someone who has worn the green fatigues, desert combat uniforms and woodland battle dress uniforms, I can say it is time for a change.

Having said that, I wholeheartedly agree with those airmen who rebelled against the T-shirt branded with the words “Air Force” on the back. Keep it simple, put our new emblem on the front, maybe write “USAF” too, and leave it at that. Simplicity is a wonderful tool. We don’t need the Hap Arnold legacy stuff on our T-shirts, and we really don’t need a whole lot of style either.

I understand the reason for creating T-shirts with “USAF” on them. The gray Army T-shirts have been in use for years, and no one seems to get too worked up about that. If we keep it simple, our people should come to agree with it, too. If we overdo it, then no one will appreciate the effort.

While sitting around the tent last summer at Camp Lemonier, Djibouti, my Army officer tent-mate asked, “Why don’t you create a T-shirt that is also your physical-training uniform T-shirt? Why have multiple T-shirts?” It is certainly doable and would save everyone some time and money.

So we waited 20 years for our new airman battle uniform, which is essentially the same battle dress uniform with different material. I don’t see any difference, do you?

Did anybody really think about the fact that when stripes aren’t ironed, they curve inward? That will make a great impression.

Some thoughts on the new airman battle uniform:

• It looks like something out of the movie “Tron.”

• There should be a joint forces uniform board.

• The military should have one BDU design for all services.

• Only the dress uniform should be different for each branch of the service.

Frankly, it is sickening that our new airman battle uniform will come in more than 230 sizes — that translates into logistics nightmares and increased costs. Creating a few extra sizes to fill the gaps between small, medium, large and extra large is probably a good idea, but 230 sizes seems ridiculous. I predict there will be a few highly sought sizes (as with the new physical training uniform) with many left collecting dust on the shelves. Why do we even have a men’s uniform with a 48-inch waist? It seems absurd to sanction such large waistlines in the Air Force.

As the defense contractor contacted in 2002 to start the Air Force’s airman battle uniform project, I am disappointed with the result. I advised against the first blue-gray tiger-stripe design, but nobody wanted to listen to the camouflage expert. The Air Force was singularly interested in standing out as Air Force.

Boy, did it ever succeed.

I introduced to the Air Force the first pixelated tiger-stripe pattern along with other advanced, battle-ready tiger-stripe digital designs and colors. The Air Force dismissed them all.

The Air Force would have had to pay for one of the advanced patterns from my company. This charge would have been no different from, for example, Boeing’s design charge built into the price of every aircraft. How much would the Air Force have had to pay for a state-of-the-art battle-ready pattern and color scheme? Maybe 25 to 35 cents per garment.

The Air Force decided it wasn’t worth the extra money to have the best, and it slashed the budget on the uniform. The officials weren’t even interested in fielding a test uniform using any of my advanced designs. That’s some 21st-century research and development for you.

Some may try to dismiss my comments as sour grapes, but it goes much further than that. For pennies more, the Air Force could have a truly sophisticated uniform. Air Force personnel deserve better; no, they deserve the best.

The new all-purpose environmental coat, for the most part, looks well thought out — the exception being the design of the chest and waist pockets. Most manufacturers slant pockets rather than run them horizontal. This aids in water runoff. Even with Gore-Tex or sealed seams, standing water will permeate the fabric. Where they failed with the airman battle uniform blouse, they will fail with the APEC unless they slant the pockets.

Shoulder pockets were ruled out for the ABU’s blouse, but the Air Force contradicted itself by adding them to the APEC. Why would we need them on the coat if we don’t need them on the uniform itself? I know this is going to sound odd, but did anyone bother asking Air Force personnel already conducting duties in the Army Combat Uniform or ask Army personnel about their thoughts on the ACU’s shoulder pockets? Better yet, did anyone think to try adding the pockets to some uniforms for testing? I have shoulder pockets modified on a few of my desert uniforms, and they have proven to be worth their weight in gold.

As for the rest of the blouse, it appears we kept the same office-friendly setup as before. The new interior pocket for small maps and notebooks may be the most impractical of all the additions. You’re telling me that I can reach into that pocket somehow when I am wearing my flak vest? I think not. Nor do I think it would be professional to walk into a meeting, undo my blouse and pull out my notebook. “Excuse me while I begin disrobing; I just need something to write on.”

Wow! After almost 4½ years and who knows how much taxpayer money, this is what the Air Force came up with? I’m not an expert, but I fail to see how this uniform blends into any environment, nor does partial pixelation disrupt the focus of the eye like our sister services’ fully pixelated uniforms do.

I don’t care how many airmen are deployed to hostile zones. It is the duty of the Air Force to provide them with the best equipment and the best combat uniform that can be had, and the ABU is not it.

I am fairly new to the Air Force, but it has been a part of my family for years. My father spent 22 years in the Air Force before retiring as a proud fuels troop master sergeant. Through the years, I never really noticed the changes in the uniform my father wore. As I look back in the pictures, it’s amazing how we have arrived at the new airman battle uniform and soon a new service dress.

Not once during my father’s tenure did the uniform revert to a previous style. Only now has the Air Force made a change to use/modify old uniform patterns. The ABU uses the tiger stripes from the Vietnam era, and the Air Force Uniform Board is looking at the Hap Arnold style service dress.

I understand the importance of paying tribute to our past, and I am more than excited to be part of 60 years of air power. I am proud of the generation that served before me, but I do not want to be them or re-create what they have done.

This is a new generation of airmen: an Air Force that is more modernized and efficient. We use state-of-the-art technologies to fight wars and win battles. Give us something that looks to the future, not the past. Scholars say history repeats itself. Who would have guessed this would relate to Air Force uniforms?