US Air Force F-16 Crashes in Michigan After Pentagon Orders More Flyovers (abcnews.com) 216
The F-16 "experienced an incident," the Texas Military Department said in a statement, adding that "The pilot successfully ejected the aircraft and is receiving care at a nearby hospital."
ABC News reports: A Texas Air National Guard F-16 crashed in Michigan during a training mission on Thursday afternoon, sparking an hourslong evacuation near the crash site, according to officials.
The incident prompted the evacuation of homes and businesses within 1 mile of the crash site due to a "hazardous chemical spill related to the plane crash," Michigan State Police said... All of the Texas Air National Guard aircraft that were in Michigan for the training were immediately grounded, and will likely remain so for the next 24 hours, according to a U.S. official.
America's War Department has said it wanted to see more military flyovers writes The Daily Beast, adding that the F-16 "was due to perform a flyover at a high-school football game on Friday night, the Alpena News reported." The military said it was still investigating the cause of the crash, but one pilot told air traffic controllers that he believes his wingman hit a bird before the crash....
The accident followed a Pentagon X post on Thursday after widespread criticism of low-altitude flyovers and maneuvers. "The flyovers will continue until morale improves," it said.
ABC News reports: A Texas Air National Guard F-16 crashed in Michigan during a training mission on Thursday afternoon, sparking an hourslong evacuation near the crash site, according to officials.
The incident prompted the evacuation of homes and businesses within 1 mile of the crash site due to a "hazardous chemical spill related to the plane crash," Michigan State Police said... All of the Texas Air National Guard aircraft that were in Michigan for the training were immediately grounded, and will likely remain so for the next 24 hours, according to a U.S. official.
America's War Department has said it wanted to see more military flyovers writes The Daily Beast, adding that the F-16 "was due to perform a flyover at a high-school football game on Friday night, the Alpena News reported." The military said it was still investigating the cause of the crash, but one pilot told air traffic controllers that he believes his wingman hit a bird before the crash....
The accident followed a Pentagon X post on Thursday after widespread criticism of low-altitude flyovers and maneuvers. "The flyovers will continue until morale improves," it said.
Ah yes (Score:4, Interesting)
The fiscal conservatives at work again. What's the hourly cost to taxpayers for flying an F16?
Re:Ah yes (Score:5, Informative)
$22,000 per hour. The F35 will be nearer $42,000 per hour. These are under-estimates, as they do not include price hikes, crashes that close businesses, crashing into businesses, crashing into heavily-populated sports centres, etc.
Re:Ah yes (Score:4, Interesting)
$22,000 per hour. The F35 will be nearer $42,000 per hour.
Yes, but pilots have to fly from waypoint to waypoint in formation for training purposes. These flights over stadiums count for such training hours, so its not really an additional expense. Even if there are extra flight hours in some cases, pilots routinely complain they do not get enough flight hours. So any additional hours in the air is valuable experience to them.
These are under-estimates, as they do not include price hikes, crashes that close businesses, crashing into businesses, crashing into heavily-populated sports centres, etc.
Many Air Force bases are near cities and towns. There is already a risk of crashing near residential and business areas. We had one when I was a kid. The pilot lost power but had some control and did not eject since there was a nearby residential area. He risked his life and crash-landed in an agricultural area. He walked away.
Re: Ah yes (Score:3)
I will note that the bravery shown to risk oneâ(TM)s life to save others was in the far past. Although many in the military still follow that ethos, many others do not.
Admittedly most of us have never flown these aircraft and do not know what can be done to control the plane after a bird strike, but was ejecting from the plane and allowing it to crash into a populated area the best choice at that moment? Flying low does reduce your options and time to react. However many a plane has landed safely afte
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
They will blame the accident on DEI or Obama or even Hillary's emails.
Re: (Score:2)
Admittedly most of us have never flown these aircraft and do not know what can be done to control the plane after a bird strike, but was ejecting from the plane and allowing it to crash into a populated area the best choice at that moment? Flying low does reduce your options and time to react. However many a plane has landed safely after a bird strike.
The F-16 being a single-engine plane certainly makes a bird-strike a more serious issue.
Re: Ah yes (Score:4, Interesting)
Which is the reason for the "hazardous chemical spill related to the plane crash". Since it has only one engine, it has an emergency power unit that runs on hydrazine. Two engine warplanes usually have APUs that run on the same jet fuel.
Re: (Score:2)
Birds Aren't Real
Re: (Score:2)
Waterfowl are beginning migration there this time of year, cornfields and small lakes near Grawn draw clouds of them. (Grew up near there.) There are no safe altitudes around there this time of year. Of course Texas Guardsmen wouldn't know that.
Re: Ah yes (Score:2)
Re: Ah yes (Score:4, Informative)
Not really sure though that a Texas Air National Guard unit needs to be flying all the way to Michigan for this sort of training.
You misunderstand the training. A long flight with multiple waypoints, and a precise time on target, is the exact point of the training. And if disparate aircraft are being used, they typically come from different bases so the necessary aerial rendezvous adds to the difficultly. The cross-country flight more accurately fits the profile of an actual combat mission.
Re: Ah yes (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except there's no reason for them to go into combat, unless you actually think Mexico or Canada are going to invade.
Re: (Score:3)
But formation flying is at the basic end of what fighter pilots are trained for. It's flying, yes, but it's like work sending you to "trainin
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Trump: Directly using the federal government to destroy academic freedom and attack freedom of the press.
drnb:The true fascists are the people modding me down on slashdot.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Trump's DoE: Endorsing blatantly racist statements by a Republican candidate in Texas.
drnb:The true racists are the people modding me down on slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
They're like paper cups, right? (Score:2)
Hell, if they get in your way, throw them off the boat [bbc.com], we'll go to Costco in the morning.
And some as far as ruining businesses, eh, you gotta break some eggs. (No, I don't talk about the price of eggs.) This is about habituating the populace to domestic military presence, not something trivial like people's livelihoods.
Cost [Re:Ah yes] (Score:2)
What's the hourly cost to taxpayers for flying an F16?
$22,000 per hour.
except for the hours in which the F16 crashes. Those hours cost $80 million/hour.
Re: (Score:2)
The fiscal conservatives at work again. What's the hourly cost to taxpayers for flying an F16?
The pilots of these machines need to log actual flight time in order to be good at it. We set minimum training hours to maintain their flight qualifications, and then struggle to find something for them to do while they are flying around. Airshows and flyovers are done as ways to occupy some of those hours of flight time.
It is not a waste of money. It is money that would be spent anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
But.. during a real conflict they will have to be effective quickly, you do not want them to start learning at that time. Safe flying is not a good strategy during a real conflict either. So.. What are you trying to say really?
Re: (Score:3)
The point is why do we "need" so many pilots when the only countries we reasonably need to protect against are Mexico and Canada?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Two considerations:
1) Article 5 only requires other NATO nations to respond as they feel appropriate to their own national interest. Full involvement is not required.
2) Estonia is small enough that Russia could overrun the entire country in a couple of days, long before the NATO bureaucracy would be finished dithering about whether to respond or not.
As has been demonstrated in Ukraine and Iran, the US is now a paper tiger, with a military armed with finicky, high tech weaponry which is easily overwhelmed
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps you missed it, so I'll bold the important part:
1) Article 5 only requires other NATO nations to respond as they feel appropriate to their own national interest. Full involvement is not required.
What national interest does the the US have in any Estonia or any of the Baltic chihuahuas, other than as a foil to annoy Russia with?
Re:Ah yes (Score:4, Informative)
And we did it twice. But I need did you hear how she laughs? And let's not forget, Trump low prices, Kamala high prices.
New and improved Slashdot Subjects! (Score:2)
Basically I like (or at least concur with) your FP content, but not the vacuous Subject.
There was something in the following conversation about the need for pilots to log hours for training so it's free harm when they crash into places where people live. Remarkably stupid reasoning (hence my remark), but that's along the lines of old bot thinking. I guess someone can't afford a new genAI. Much better lies and hallucinations are available.
My ironic Subject is meta on how the stories seem to be fewer and long
Re: (Score:2)
These assholes are just thrilled to spend other people's money. And something like 30% of the voters are still cheering for that. Dumb and dumber.
Re:Cost is usually zero (Score:4, Informative)
Usually zero.
Quite literally impossible.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. It matters not whether a cross country multi-waypoint formation flight happens over an empty desert or a city football stadium. Its still a cross country navigation exercise. And in this military case there is also a precise time-on-target (arrive at a precise predetermined time) component. Multi-waypoint, time on target, this is a military training exercise from the pilot's perspective. Sometimes you can do two things at once.
Doesn't matter. Either way it's costing taxpayers money. An F16 costs around $3,000 in just fuel alone. So, the hourly cost to taxpayers for flying an F16 literally cannot be "usually zero" as you said.
Re: (Score:2)
$3,000/hr **
Re: (Score:2)
The point is it doesn't usually cost any additional money.
The question was never about *additional* costs, just THE cost. It's not the taxpayers' fault that the military (and government in general) mismanages the money and doesn't give their pilots enough training hours.
The pilots have to train either way
No one said they don't. However, they also don't need to do their training anywhere near populated areas.
No military pilot is happy with the actually hours they get in the air.
I don't care.
They all want more hours to further sharpen their skills.
Which is increasingly irrelevant with the advances in drone technology.
Re: (Score:2)
And the flyovers overwhelmingly also being valid training exercises is quite relevant to that.
Except they aren't valid training.
That is the exception not the rule for these flyovers. Normally they count as standard training hours.
No, the military is always bad at managing money. It's why they limit their pilot training because they're too busy wasting the money on other useless bullshit.
Actually, doing some time-on-target training over a specific urban target is useful. Targets are sometime urban, not desert.
Don't fucking care. I don't ask, or consent, to be included in their shitty exercises, so don't be practicing near my skies.
Iran was a major supplier and user of drones.
Irrelevant.
US pilots being more capable than Russian pilots seems to make a difference. BTW, Russian pilots are often even more starved of flight hours.
It doesn't matter how many hours Russian pilots get because all Russian vehicles and equipment are basically trash. They lose by default.
Re: (Score:2)
US pilots being more capable than Russian pilots seems to make a difference. BTW, Russian pilots are often even more starved of flight hours.
It doesn't matter how many hours Russian pilots get because all Russian vehicles and equipment are basically trash. They lose by default.
Not to worry, I'm sure the next step is for trump to offer free training of Russian pilots in exchange for access to rare earth materials or the right to build a hotel in Moscow. Pretty sure trump would sell Russia F16s if there was a big enough kickback.
Re: (Score:2)
All good points. Somewhat OT, I remember aircrews hating the Balanced Budget Reconciliation (2012 or so?), where the grownups in the Capitol decided to live within a budget, and each side gave up certain things. Training funds for the military was one of the losers.
Both sides hated it. Hated! And that was the last time the government tried to live within a budget, regardless of administration.
Re: (Score:2)
You do not seem to understand the navigational problem and skill level here. Multiple waypoints, time on target is not simple thing. Now add in aerial rendezvous for different aircraft type.
I don't give a shit. None of it needs to happen near populated areas of civilians.
I'm not referring to money spent elsewhere, just money spent on pilots in the air.
And if the military was better at money management, they could afford to get all of their pilots the hours in the air they deserve/want, but they blow their budget on useless bullshit and garbage contacts that force mandatory purchases to be made from places like SKILCRAFT (who make the world's worst toilet paper).
As I said you don't understand the point of the training.
Flyovers of populated areas of citizens does not have a valid point. If they start doing shitty flyovers in my tow
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, well that's what happens when they want you to stay within a budget but also force everyone to spend 3x as much on everything because of very poorly negotiated govt. contracts. Being a card holder for my unit's GCPC in the Air Force was one of the worst experiences ever. Need office supplies? Can't just go to the store and get the office supplies I actually like to use, no. I have to use their shitty portal to order stuff I don't want to have for more money than the stuff I want costs.
Re: (Score:2)
That's good, because it's fully erect and I'm not wearing any pants.
Re: (Score:2)
Iran is a major user of drones, which is why they control the Straight of Hormuz and have destroyed most of the US bases in the region. They took out a billion dollar radar installation with a drone that costs the price of a used BMW to build.
Re: (Score:3)
I find it difficult to believe that you are quite so uninformed about the real situation on the ground, but if you're a professional troll you're really bad at it.
Radar installations:
"Blinding the US? How Iran destroyed the $1.1-billion American missile radar in Qatar"
https://www.firstpost.com/expl... [firstpost.com]
Bases in Middle East:
"13 U.S. Bases in Middle East Nearly Uninhabitable After Iran Missile Strike"
https://defencesecurityasia.co... [defencesecurityasia.com]
Ship transits:
"commercial ship transits of the Strait of Hormuz per month"
https [globalmilitary.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Drones have already started replacing them. There is no maybe about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Not in the US, we're at least a decade behind the curve and our sclerotic military procurement system looks to keep us there.
Re: (Score:2)
We're behind the curve yes, but we are on it. We aren't turning back away from drones. Thus, their usage will only increase and pilots needed will continue to decrease as it has been.
Re: (Score:2)
Iran one of the largest manufacturers and operators of drones they have been quite ineffective
Iran is neither one of the largest manufacturers nor operators of drones.
The biggest manufacturers (and also operators) of combat drones:
-General Atomics Aeronautical Systems (US)
-Northrop Grumman (US)
-Baykar Technologies (Turkey)
-Israel Aerospace Industries
-Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group (China)
Even Ukraine is ahead of Iran in both categories. Maybe Iran's drone tech just suck donkey balls.
Re:Multi-waypoint time-on-target is military train (Score:5, Interesting)
Nope. It matters not whether a cross country multi-waypoint formation flight happens over an empty desert or a city football stadium. Its still a cross country navigation exercise. And in this military case there is also a precise time-on-target (arrive at a precise predetermined time) component. Multi-waypoint, time on target, this is a military training exercise from the pilot's perspective. Sometimes you can do two things at once....
If you lose a tactical jet in a MOA, Restricted Area, or Warning Area, there usually is not much chance of hurting anyone on the ground. Also special use airspace is NOTAM'd when in use to keep other aircraft not participating in the training exercise out of the area. Doing tactical training over populated areas just puts the public at risk for no good reason, other than to massage the Secretary of War's ego. As the situation in Iran continues to deteriorate for the US military, the Secretary of War will be needing more and more massaging.
Had a local crash when I was a kid ... (Score:2)
Abusive tactic (Score:5, Interesting)
"The flyovers will continue until morale improves," it said.
The original quote they are riffing on is "The beatings will continue until morale improves." Essentially this is a variant of the "make a threat, but in a joking fashion, but really functionally a threat" sort of thing that dangerous and abusive people will do. Trump uses versions of this all the time, and it isn't surprising that Hegseth and his people have picked up on this. I'd call this another warning sign about fascism but given everything else that's going on, including a grossly illegal war in Iran, Trump functionally threatening to undermine the upcoming election, and Trump having removed generals and other higher-ups in the military that he sees as insufficiently loyal (read, more likely to actually follow the law and morality when given an illegal order), and this incident becomes almost part of the rounding error.
Re:Abusive tactic (Score:5, Informative)
The originaler quote from 1961 is, "all liberty is canceled until morale improves." [archive.org] (page 55)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps the pilot crashed due to low testosterone? https://apnews.com/article/heg... [apnews.com]
Now Hegseth can personally taste samples from all the troops. https://abcnews.com/Health/pen... [abcnews.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The statement was at best tone deaf, and likely intentionally offensive. The US Military leadership is trolling the American public.
MAGA lives on outrage. They want liberal tears. Even if it hurts Americans.
It is called "winning".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The Apache pilots in the Kid Rock case first flew low over a No Kings protest, and then went to his house.
It was overtly political, and done without coordinating with anyone at their command. The commanders of *their unit* launched the investigation.
Hegseth cancelled the investigation. He values loyalty to Trump and Trump supporters like Kid Rock over maintaining actual military order.
Nope (Score:4, Insightful)
You think that because the fanbois flock to Blue Angel celebrations. What you don't see is all the people cursing at them everywhere else [imgur.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that's my experience too. I haven't seen anyone flip the T'birds the bird.
Back when Top Gun owned Miramar, I'd go down to a relative's house for the yearly airshow. The Angels had a rendezvous point nearby, and we'd see them go by at perhaps a 60 degree angle right over the house. It seemed like they were at 200' as we could clearly see the pilot looking out. Then we'd go to the nighttime show afterwards. Good times.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I'm sure those Genovese cable car passengers loved their flyover (under) experience.
Re: (Score:2)
And no one got in trouble.
Re: (Score:2)
So they got fired from a job.
Re: Americans love the flyovers. For many man deca (Score:2)
So they could still become president then.
Re: (Score:3)
Dmb is trying to make a slap on the wrist sound significant. One officer got six months (actually four and a half) for obstruction of justice (in a mass homicide case, mind you) for destroying the evidence and another plead guilty to obstruction and got no actual criminal punishment. The other crew members had their charges dropped. Basically, they got the merest of slaps on the wrist.
These were pilots who were flying low under the cable car cables for the thrill and to prove themselves. Basically toddlers
Re: (Score:2)
Just a thought... (Score:2)
...Modern ejector seats cause spinal injuries from which full recovery is "unusual". Smashing the spines of pilots might not be the most effective way to boost morale.
Re:Just a thought... (Score:5, Funny)
...Modern ejector seats cause spinal injuries from which full recovery is "unusual". Smashing the spines of pilots might not be the most effective way to boost morale.
Then I propose we get those currently in charge to fly the planes as they don't seem to have spines.
Re: Pilots welcome virtually any excuse to get in (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, pilots need flight hours. Navigating a slow speed, low flyover of a stadium does technically give them more time in the seat but in no way provides valid combat style training. Next you'll tell me that marching in lines to the best of a drum will keep our army battle ready.
Flyovers are cool in the moment but quickly fade away as soon as the planes are out of sight. Only someone who lacks sanity thinks increased flyover will have a lasting impact on morale.
If you want to watch more flyovers, attend some Mets home games. Plenty of lore flying planes there thanks to LGA
Re: (Score:2)
You keep resulting the same nonsense.
Yes, because you counter straw men not the actual points I make, ex time on target. I'm kind of hoping you eventually read what I wrote.
Yes, pilots need flight hours. Navigating a slow speed, low flyover of a stadium does technically give them more time in the seat but in no way provides valid combat style training.
You are mistaken. Its the waypoints, the time on target, and identifying a urban structural target rather than a desert locale. Speed over the target is a minor thing. An easily varies thing. What is absolutely critically important is the time of the overflight. That it is precisely the time planned.
Only someone who lacks sanity thinks increased flyover will have a lasting impact on morale.
Straw man, the point is that the publics love it. What the pilots love are
Migration season (Score:5, Interesting)
Flying low over the central flyway during migration season might not be a good idea.
Geese are non-compressible fluids as far as jet turbines are concerned. A sandhill crane even more so.
Re: (Score:2)
Flying low over the central flyway during migration season might not be a good idea.
Geese are non-compressible fluids as far as jet turbines are concerned.
Probably a Canadian Geese trying to sneak into America.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm surprised the species hasn't been renamed yet
Donald Ducks?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
LOL.
good one.
Re: (Score:3)
Flying low over the central flyway during migration season might not be a good idea.
Geese are non-compressible fluids as far as jet turbines are concerned.
Probably a Canadian Geese trying to sneak into America.
Canada Geese can apparently fend off Bald Eagles, so why not Falcons (F-16s). :-)
The Full Story Behind the White House’s Eagle v Canada Goose Post [newsweek.com]
T]he official White House X account reposted a photograph of a bald eagle pinning a Canada goose ... It appeared the image was intended to symbolize American dominance over its northern neighbor ...
The full set of pictures from the incident show the bald eagle launching multiple attacks against the Canada goose over roughly 20 minutes. At several points, the goose appears pinned to the ice and in danger of being killed.
However, the goose repeatedly stands back up, spreads its wings and confronts the eagle. By the end of the encounter, the eagle gives up and leaves while the goose remains alive.
Seeing that it's Michigan ... (Score:3, Funny)
LOL (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't think the IRGC have yachts?
Re: (Score:2)
If the crash happened in some other county the joke would be funny, but this happened in Grand Traverse. Check out the median home price there. Mission Point is home to a few wineries, and Boeing execs from Chicago have their summer homes there. A few years ago Traverse City built a new pier that can accommodate the larger yachts, as that was apparently a problem.
The crash was near Grawn, well away from the areas that are nice to live in. Last time I was there Grawn had more trailers than stick-built homes. Migrating waterfowl love the corn fields and small lakes in that area.
hazardous chemical spill? (Score:3)
The article makes no mention of the type of spill that occurred. I've never heard of an F16 carrying enough "hazardous" chemicals to prompt a 2 mile diameter evacuation zone. The image and video in the article shows what appears to be the crash site in a residential neighborhood and the video also makes no mention of the nature of the chemical spill. Perhaps the chemical was on the ground but then why would it be stored in a residential area? I was involved in the recovery of a crashed A6 back in 1987. Military jets crashing at high speed leave very little behind in the way of large pieces.Something is not adding up here.
Re:hazardous chemical spill? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, ok, did not know this. Yeah, that's nasty stuff. I figured the F16 has a RAT like many other aircraft, including the A6s I used to work on. Thank you for the information. I found an NIH report of an F16 crash in Turkey back in 2016 where hydrazine was exposed to the civilian population.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's the behavior control stuff they use to make chemtrails. Diluted into parts per billion when dispersed it just makes people apathetic and easily led. But concentrated like it would be in the F-16's holding tank it could turn a person into a complete vegetable who wouldn't even breath without someone ordering them to. The stuff breaks down when exposed to Oxygen in 20-30 hours depending on local environmental conditions.
Re: (Score:2)
You're going for funny, right?
Re: (Score:2)
With the username "PinkyGigglebrain" I think that's a given.
America's War Department (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Likewise the AP journalistic guidelines should require POTUS's name to be spelt 'trump', not 'Trump'. If it was ok to change the name of some thing as important as the 'Internet' to the 'internet' when then surely something as over rated as trump should get the same treatment.
Re: (Score:2)
That said, I will always call it the "Department of War." I always thought it should keep the original name and simply because congress wanted to manipulate the public with a less evil name like we are morons...and apparently most of us gullible as fuck.
I don't expect congress to do anything significant in a positive direction; in large part, because most the citizens are more incompetent and slightly less corrupt. It's Americans' fault they are so well represented (not being sarcastic.)
The flyovers will continue until... (Score:2)
1. As stated in the article, morale improves.
2. To instill "fear of this battle station" in the citizenry.
3. To please la presidenta.
4. To ensure that the citizens see the "all-powerful" military on parade.
So it seems we are sliding towards a Russian model of:" the almighty US government uber alles" Oh, and don't disrespect us because if you do we will punish you in a myriad of ways.
Training (Score:2)
I live in a very rural area. We have no military bases within hundreds of miles, but we are on a military training flight route. We see all the fighter aircraft on a weekly basis flying over (very low), and a very small rural airport somehow got set up to refuel Osprey's on their flight routes. So we see Osprey's nearly every day flying over.
My point is that scheduling a plane to fly over a game at a specific time is pretty much inconsequential because these things are flying CONSTANTLY around the country f
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in a similar situation. A-10s ripping around a low level. Soon there will be F-15EXs
War planes crash. They aren't intended to have stellar safety records.
Hegseth (Score:2)
Hegseth would so clearly be the villain in any war film.
Hydrazine (Score:2)
That's the hazardous chemical. At the Pope AFB crash many years ago (collision with a C-130 in the landing pattern), the hydrazine injured and killed more than the actual flaming wreckage as I recall.
Nothing against flyovers (Score:2)
They're good PR for the military. Just don'tt do them with reckless behavior and flights shouldn't be joy rides for your cronies.
Re: (Score:2)
That's no way to talk about Private Bone Spurs. He is the commander in chief after all.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds more like a Hegseth thing.
Re: (Score:2)
I spent $3000 at the grocery store last year. That's a $3000 deficit. If I stop buying groceries then the deficit goes away. Checkmate liberals!
Re: (Score:2)
No I personally toured America’s vast coffee fields.
Re: (Score:2)
The best irony is unintentional self deprecating irony.
Re: (Score:3)