Task & Purpose
"Air Force fires commander of Holloman maintenance group"
Story by Matt White
26 MARCH 2024
The commander of the maintenance group at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, was relieved of command by the 49th Wing commander “to ensure proper command climate and appropriate leadership of our Airmen,” according to a Holloman news release quoted in local media.
Col. Danzel Albertsen had been in charge of the 49th Maintenance Group since June 2022.
He was relieved by Col. Justin Spears, commander of the 49th Wing, on March 25.
Holloman is the primary training site for F-16 and MQ-9 pilots, training more than 150 F-16 pilots and 700 MQ-9 pilots and sensor operators annually.
The wing supports 21,000 military and civilian personnel through the 635th Materiel Maintenance Group and the 704th Test Group.
Col. Justin Spears, commander of the 49th Wing, relieved Albertsen when he “determined new leadership was necessary to ensure proper command climate and appropriate leadership of our Airmen,” according to KTSM, a local news station.
The base is also one of the most remote in the continental U.S., 100 miles north of El Paso, TX and 200 miles south of Albuquerque, N.M.
It sits on the edge of the White Sands Missile Range, which also encompasses the Trinity site, where the first atomic bomb was exploded.
A "mustang" officer who rose from the enlisted ranks, Albertsen has spent nearly all of his 33-year career in Air Force maintenance positions.
At Holloman he oversaw the 49th Maintenance Group's four squadrons and 2,100 maintenance personnel.
The group was responsible for 82 F-16s, 24 MQ-9 Reaper drones and 12 Ground Control Stations, totaling $2.5 billion in total assets, according to his Air Force biography.
A native of Saint Joseph, Missouri, Albertsen enlisted in the Air Force in 1991 and spent 10 years as a maintenance crew chief, including as a flying crew chief about KC-135 tanker aircraft.
He was commissioned in 2001 through the service's Officer Training School and has commanded twice at the squadron level.
His awards and decorations include a Bronze Star and the Defense Meritorious Service Medal.
The deputy commander of the 49th Maintenance Group, Lt. Col. Kristen Torma, will assume command of the group immediately, the station reported.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ai ... 18da&ei=25
THE DOD
Re: THE DOD
RED STATE
"It's 'Vietnam All Over Again' As Defense Department Prepares to Beef Up Number of US Advisers in Ukraine"
By streiff
April 20, 2024
The Department of Defense is considering upping the number of US military advisers stationed in Ukraine.
Politico said, "The advisers would not be in a combat role, but rather would advise and support the Ukrainian government and military."
“Throughout this conflict, the DOD has reviewed and adjusted our presence in-country, as security conditions have evolved."
"Currently, we are considering sending several additional advisers to augment the Office of Defense Cooperation (ODC) at the Embassy,” Ryder said in a statement to POLITICO, noting that “personnel are subject to the same travel restrictions as all embassy employees."
The ODC “performs a variety of advisory and support missions (non-combat), and while it is staffed exclusively by DOD personnel, it is embedded within the U.S. Embassy, under Chief of Mission authority like the rest of the Embassy,” Ryder added.
Ryder declined to discuss specific numbers of personnel “for operational security and force protection reasons.”
According to the most recent data (December 2023), 18 Army/Air Force personnel and one Department of Defense civilian are assigned to Ukraine.
Two anonymous US officials say that number could rise to 60.
The role of the current group of soldiers assigned to Ukraine is to provide security for the US embassy, as Defense data indicates there are no Marines in Ukraine, and oversee the accountability of weapons and equipment.
The new group will assist the Ukrainians with developing maintenance facilities for US-made weapons systems.
While necessary to comply with the level of accountability of weapons and ammunition demanded by Congress and the Department of Defense, the atmospherics are terrible.
One of the constant drumbeats one hears on social media is the inevitability of US "boots on the ground" (where else would boots be? Other than up your butt).
The unfortunate use of the word "advisers" will cause split aortas all over the rather large pro-Russia, pro-Putin segment of the online right.
The US has successfully deployed advisers into hot conflicts without mishaps or the US becoming embroiled in a war.
The last such instance was in El Salvador during Reagan's campaign to roll back communism.
The role of advisers in South Vietnam (Laos, Cambodia, and Thailand) did not lead to war but reflected a greater US role in a war inherited from the French.
The role of those advisers was combat-oriented; this is not the case in Ukraine.
One of the critical roles of US advisers in Southeast Asia was training indigenous armies.
This is done today by sending Ukrainian units out of Ukraine to the UK, Germany, or other locations for training.
Under a worst-case scenario, a Russian attack on US advisers only results in direct combat between US and Russian troops if the US president decides to pursue that course of action.
There is no legal requirement that the deaths of American servicemen be followed by a massive troop deployment.
In fact, the last forty or so years of US diplomatic history indicate that the quickest way to get America out of an area is by killing some Americans (see Beirut and Mogadishu).
Calling US troops in Ukraine "advisers" is the kind of footshot that we've grown accustomed to from the Biden Defense and State Departments.
Claiming that advisers inevitably mean direct conflict with Russian forces is the kind of hyperbolic conspiracism that parts of the right insist on trafficking in because they don't want to be taken seriously.
Streiff
Former infantry officer, CGSC grad and Army Operations Center alumnus. Also an amateur historian (Colonial America) and a dabbler in historical fiction.
https://redstate.com/streiff/2024/04/20 ... b7cc655b1d
"It's 'Vietnam All Over Again' As Defense Department Prepares to Beef Up Number of US Advisers in Ukraine"
By streiff
April 20, 2024
The Department of Defense is considering upping the number of US military advisers stationed in Ukraine.
Politico said, "The advisers would not be in a combat role, but rather would advise and support the Ukrainian government and military."
“Throughout this conflict, the DOD has reviewed and adjusted our presence in-country, as security conditions have evolved."
"Currently, we are considering sending several additional advisers to augment the Office of Defense Cooperation (ODC) at the Embassy,” Ryder said in a statement to POLITICO, noting that “personnel are subject to the same travel restrictions as all embassy employees."
The ODC “performs a variety of advisory and support missions (non-combat), and while it is staffed exclusively by DOD personnel, it is embedded within the U.S. Embassy, under Chief of Mission authority like the rest of the Embassy,” Ryder added.
Ryder declined to discuss specific numbers of personnel “for operational security and force protection reasons.”
According to the most recent data (December 2023), 18 Army/Air Force personnel and one Department of Defense civilian are assigned to Ukraine.
Two anonymous US officials say that number could rise to 60.
The role of the current group of soldiers assigned to Ukraine is to provide security for the US embassy, as Defense data indicates there are no Marines in Ukraine, and oversee the accountability of weapons and equipment.
The new group will assist the Ukrainians with developing maintenance facilities for US-made weapons systems.
While necessary to comply with the level of accountability of weapons and ammunition demanded by Congress and the Department of Defense, the atmospherics are terrible.
One of the constant drumbeats one hears on social media is the inevitability of US "boots on the ground" (where else would boots be? Other than up your butt).
The unfortunate use of the word "advisers" will cause split aortas all over the rather large pro-Russia, pro-Putin segment of the online right.
The US has successfully deployed advisers into hot conflicts without mishaps or the US becoming embroiled in a war.
The last such instance was in El Salvador during Reagan's campaign to roll back communism.
The role of advisers in South Vietnam (Laos, Cambodia, and Thailand) did not lead to war but reflected a greater US role in a war inherited from the French.
The role of those advisers was combat-oriented; this is not the case in Ukraine.
One of the critical roles of US advisers in Southeast Asia was training indigenous armies.
This is done today by sending Ukrainian units out of Ukraine to the UK, Germany, or other locations for training.
Under a worst-case scenario, a Russian attack on US advisers only results in direct combat between US and Russian troops if the US president decides to pursue that course of action.
There is no legal requirement that the deaths of American servicemen be followed by a massive troop deployment.
In fact, the last forty or so years of US diplomatic history indicate that the quickest way to get America out of an area is by killing some Americans (see Beirut and Mogadishu).
Calling US troops in Ukraine "advisers" is the kind of footshot that we've grown accustomed to from the Biden Defense and State Departments.
Claiming that advisers inevitably mean direct conflict with Russian forces is the kind of hyperbolic conspiracism that parts of the right insist on trafficking in because they don't want to be taken seriously.
Streiff
Former infantry officer, CGSC grad and Army Operations Center alumnus. Also an amateur historian (Colonial America) and a dabbler in historical fiction.
https://redstate.com/streiff/2024/04/20 ... b7cc655b1d