Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Air National Guard to Remain at Bradley

My house will no longer be buzzed by A-10s, but the Air National Guard mission at Bradley Airport will continue:
The Air National Guard will comprise C-21 cargo aircraft, which are to begin arriving in September, Gov. M. Jodi Rell and state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal announced Wednesday. The agreement between Connecticut and the National Guard Bureau and U.S. Air Force also calls for a command and control headquarters and a regional aircraft engine repair facility.

More than 400 jobs will be protected, though the presence of fighter planes in Connecticut has ended.

"Washington heard my message loud and clear," Rell said. "This is a significant success." (AP)

This is great news. I really wasn't expecting them to get anywhere with the Air National Guard. Rell and Blumenthal deserve a lot of credit--and Rell, at least, is taking it. Her campaign put out a jubilant release today, trumpeting the fact that "Team Connecticut is 2-0 against Defense Department recommendations to close major facilities in our state."

Source

"Conn. loses fighter jets, but gains cargo planes at Bradley base." Associated Press 26 July, 2006.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

In the words of Dandy Don Merideth on MNF ... "Turn out the lights, the pary's over..."

Gio said...

That's great Jodi--great. Now maybe you can stop cackling and lower some taxes, decrease spending, and get the govt to slim down. You know, things Republicans do.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

"..and lower some taxes, decrease spending, and get the govt to slim down..


That's where we come in.

She needs to be in a position to veto and have it stick.

We have to send her some help.

bluecoat said...

this is spin from Rell and Blumenthal to allow both of them to save face; it;s pretty much the realignment that BRAC intended all along with the A-10's leaving CT for MA and the graveyard with the cargo ships coming in to Bradley for maintenance.

bluecoat said...

I should clarify: it was what DoD intended all along and the recommendation that the BRAC let ride. A-10's aren't part of any kind of Homeland Security strategyt for CT as originally asserted by Commnder Rell and her ex-marine sidekick, Bloomie.

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

Gosh it pains me to quibble, bluecoat, but the plan was to remove the A-10s and replace them with ... nothing.

The fact that they're being replaced with another flying mission is a lot more than saving face. It's actually called saving the air wing and the jobs of a bunch of people.

Does it really pain you that much to admit it?

Anonymous said...

A year ago Jodi and Dicky B. were saying we needed the A-10s to defends us against a 9-11 type of attack. The deal is we get cargo plans. Either we are being left with a substandard defense under the deal or they were grossly misleading us a year ago.

bluecoat said...

A-10's are part of an offensive military attack strategy - Blumenthal and Rell didn't mislead anybody; they just had no idea what they were talking about when they challenged their removal - and cargo plane maintenance was always headed to Bradley as part of the Pentagon's plans. This was an opportunity for rell and bloomie to save face - you don't see any comment from DoD, do you?

bluecoat said...

BTW, the fighter jets - that can take can down aircraft and they ain't A-10's - that scrambled after the first hit on 911 came out of Otis AFB in MA - do the geography lesson!.

bluecoat said...

Here is Jodi's Lieutenant Governor's take on the team Connecticutvictories at Groton and Bradley; he conspiculously leaves out Blumenthal and I don't fully buy his take on Bradley but it's another view with maybe a few more comments than mine after time.

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

bluecoat, you're as full of crap as usual.

Here's the DoD recommendation, verbatim, from the BRAC report, Page 121: Realign Bradley International Airport Air Guard Station, CT. The A-10s assigned to the 103rd Fighter Wing will be distributed to the 104th Fighter Wing, Barnes Municipal Airport Air Guard Station, MA (nine aircraft) and retirement (six aircraft). The wing’s expeditionary combat support (ECS) elements will remain in place at Bradley, and Bradley will retain capability to support a homeland defense mission. Realign Barnes Air Guard Station, MA; Selfridge ANGB, MI; Shaw Air Force Base, SC; and Martin State Airport Guard Station, MD, by relocating base-level TF-342 engine intermediate maintenance to Bradley, establishing a Centralized Intermediate Repair Facility (CIRF) at Bradley for TF-34 engines.

Nothing in there about C-21 cargo planes. Nothing in there about a flight mission at all, in fact. Which was the crux of the whole issue - Connecticut would have had the only Air National Guard that wasn't in the air. Kinda tough to recruit flyboys for that kind of outfit.

Getting a flying mission here was the whole point of the fracas.

Not that you're gonna admit it, but this is a big deal.

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

And please - you're touting the sourest grapes in the vineyard from Kevin "Please, Somebody Notice Me! Hey! Somebody! Lieutenant Governor Over Here! Look At Me! Please!? I'll Be Your Friend! Really!!" Sullivan to back yourself up? Has it really come to this?

bluecoat said...

ADANR: from your comments I doubt you have a couple of gold clusters on your lapels; and you may wish to re-read the link that sent you to the LG's site; there was always a plan to bring cargo planes to Bradley but I agree they weren'the C-21's for the short term.

bluecoat said...

and I almost forgot ADANR: you also reference the BRAC report and not the original DoD recommendation; you really should tell whoever it is that feeds you your Rell talkning points to be more thorough in understanding the issues or you will just end up with the same reputation as ChrisMC but from the Rell camp instead of malloys'; this blog is not a place for the puff press releases that Rell relies on with most issues.

bluecoat said...

Both sides play with the submarine issue:Veteran senator to stump for Courtney By Keith M. Phaneuf, Journal Inquirer
07/28/2006

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

*Sigh*

The DOD recommendation was in the BRAC report, Major Malfunction. Which you'd know, if you looked at it.

But hey, take Kevin's word for it if it makes you feel better.

bluecoat said...

ADANR: you should really get ready, then aim and then shoot; I know you are full of shoot but really; nice spin as usual; just spin and don't don't deal with the issues like your in-denial saviour Jodi Rell..