PCM Posted July 13, 2004 Share Posted July 13, 2004 - Minot AFB ... flies F-16s. <-- And I'm sure it's Minot State's fault that MAFB flies 16s. The air wing at Minot Air Force Base flies B-52s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 13, 2004 Share Posted July 13, 2004 I see this issue as a North Dakotan. Why? Because I have ties to all three cities that could be affected. I see this issue as it could affect North Dakota as a whole. It's pretty clear to me (at least) that ND will lose a base (AFB or ANG) in this round. I just hope that we don't lose a base and a unit (ND ANG). (Don't forget two key numbers: 34% over capacity on ANG space; only 25 of 40 ANG fighter units survive.) If saving the unit means having to blend it into operations at one of the AFBs, that's a trade North Dakotans have to be willing to make if and when that time comes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 13, 2004 Share Posted July 13, 2004 In today's Grand Forks Herald, Ryan Bakken's column gives Tony another excuse to hyperventilate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony Posted July 13, 2004 Share Posted July 13, 2004 I think ND's governor and congressional delegation see this as a problem that affects the state as a whole. As such, they have tried to come up with a strategy to deal with the challenge on those terms. From the stuff I've been seeing out of Grand Forks, the leadership up there has been doing things counterproductive to that strategy. Maybe I am wrong about this, but pulling crap like that does fit in with GF's history of behavior. Maybe GF's leaders are rationalizing their actions with the same unfounded speculation as some of you. Do you have any proof that combining a fueling wing with a fighter wing would make keeping either GFAFB or the 119th any more more likely? Sure, you can offer a reason or two it might makes sense, but you simply do not know if you're right. OTOH, the adjutant general of the North Dakota National Guard is on record saying it would be a bad idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 13, 2004 Share Posted July 13, 2004 (edited) Maybe I am wrong about this, but pulling crap like that does fit in with GF's history of behavior. You are wrong. Please provide some proof that Grand Forks is lobbying to close the Air Guard base in Fargo. Please provide some proof that the idea to "blend" the 119th with the Grand Forks Air Force Base was conceived by anyone in Grand Forks. The only position I've seen out of Grand Forks is John Marshall saying that rather than disbanding the Happy Hooligans, it would be better to blend the 119th with GFAFB. Do you disagree with that? Wouldn't it be better for North Dakota to have the 119th in some form at Grand Forks rather than having it cease to exist? As far as Ryan Bakken goes, he writes that stuff simply because he knows it drives people like you nuts. It's not meant to be taken seriously. But somehow, I just knew that you'd fall for it. Edited July 13, 2004 by PCM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 13, 2004 Share Posted July 13, 2004 Bakken writes that stuff because he knows it throws sand into the gears of Fargoans that read it. Seems to work. Do we know the context in which the GF folks were asked about blending? Are those the full quotes? And where is the report? Has Fargo (Mayor Furness) fulfilled the Fargo Forum's freedom on information request? What's in there that can't be shown to the papers? A lot of parties seem to be doing "for their interests" things already, but are seems and reality the same right now? We don't know. I've said all along the best for ND would be "keep all." However, I don't think that'll be reality. From that point on, I'd expect everyone to work to protect their own interests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airmail Posted July 13, 2004 Share Posted July 13, 2004 And where is the report? Has Fargo (Mayor Furness) fulfilled the Fargo Forum's freedom on information request? What's in there that can't be shown to the papers? What's in there? Probably those biased statistics that show without "blending", the 119th is a scratch. 15 out of 40 is not very good odds... no matter how many awards a unit has. Like Sicatoka mentioned, I also view this as a North Dakota issue. If our state can keep the Hooligans, in any way, its a win. Just like I'm secretly hoping SU's move to D-I is a success... it's good for the state. (the previous sentence may not be linked, copied, quoted, or even mentioned without my written permission) Somewhat related: I was at the MAFB recently, and am frequently at the GFAFB. If new/ upgraded infrastructure is any indication, the base near GF might be a little safer when it comes to potential closure. Ryan Bakken for Governor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bisonguy Posted July 14, 2004 Share Posted July 14, 2004 WDAY reported tonight that if the 119th "blends" with the GFAFB, GF's ANG unit (188th?) would have to be relocated due to lack of population for recruiting. Fargo, with the state's largest recruiting base and no ANG unit, of course, would be the leading candidate for the 188th relocation. Government at it's finest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 With today's Fargo Forum editorial: The 119th must find a new role, it seems official that the Fargo business community has officially thrown in the towel. But if they didn’t have other intentions for using the vacated Hooligans facilities, I doubt their stance would be as passive: Mid-American Aviation Foreign Trade Zone The growth of the aerospace industry in ND has been impressive: Cirrus / TAG / UND in Grand Forks, Goodrich in Jamestown, and KMM in Killdeer/Hettinger, among others. A major coup would be locating a future Cirrus Jet assembly plant in the state (seeCirrus Business Booms, Jets Next? ). Fargo, you can bet, is getting their bid together now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 What's wrong with the Forum? They wrote an editorial that didn't blame Grand Forks or UND for the potential demise of the Happy Hooligans. Didn't Jack Zaleski get Tony's memo? That being said (with tongue in cheek), I would prefer to see the 119th stay in Fargo and continue flying fighters rather than see the unit blended with Grand Forks Air Force Base, even if it does help this region economically. I'd really hate to see the Happy Hooligans go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choyt3 Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 Apparently the Forum didn't get the memo that it was Grand Forks leaders that are behind the blending plan. The Forum was never before shy about bashing GF when it had the chance, so it is odd that they would not take the opportunity this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 Great minds, Clayton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choyt3 Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 PCM, That's scary stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenTundra Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 I don't think a civilian business would move into Grand Forks AFB if it closed, at least not anytime soon. The communities that survive base closures the best are bigger cities that have grown right up to or around the base. For example, Luke AFB, AZ, if that base closed, which it probably wouldn't, developers would make a mint because Pheonix is growing and land is valuable. Without the Grand Forks AFB, all you have is a barren, windblown, aklai field. Just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 I know that the private flyers (Fargo Jet Center, et al) have their space on the NE corner of the Fargo airport area, but I'd think they'd love to have their chance at the space the 119th is currently in also. In terms of "North Dakota: Empty space just north of 19th Ave N and University in Fargo would have a much better chance of recoving and providing economic value to the State (tax revenues) than would empty space a mile or so north of Arvilla. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 Speaking of a nascent aerospace industry: Hop to Hoople Takes on an Aerospace Meaning ? Any civilian applications out there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 Sunday's Grand Forks Herald includes an editorial advocating that Grand Forks help keep the 119th at Fargo. Editor Tom Dennis writes: To the extent Grand Forks gets involved at all, the community here simply should remember to consult its heart as well as its head, and be confident that we're doing our best to be good neighbors as well as loyal fans of Grand Forks. That means Grand Forks should support Fargo's efforts to save its wing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 The GF Herald editorial kind of caught me by surprise (a pleasant one, for once) after the posts on this forum and the column by Ryan Bakken. In fact, with two exceptions they said everything I said. First, the Herald stated that the only real danger to the continued existence of the 119th in Fargo is that it will get blended into a GFAFB - something that I didn't feel comfortable stating. Second, I speculated that there were elements in Grand Forks trying to convince Washington that the state supports blending the 119th into the GFAFB. I can see why the Herald didn't publish that type of speculation. Here's why I made the leap that Grand Forks was behind this: There was this quote from the Spectrum Group's report: Unfortunately, there is confusion and misunderstanding from previous discussions that has led to the belief that the state of North Dakota might favor such a move," the summary said. There doesn't ever appear to have been any support for blending at the state level. Somehow, the folks in DC got a different impression. I made the leap that the people putting forth this idea would be the only people who have a strong motive to do so (Grand Forks leadership). I supported this hypothesis by pointing out other examples where leadership at GF and UND have exhibited similar behavior (that was probably a mistake on my part - too inflammatory, soon after I posted that, you guys seemed to lose sight of everything else). Anyway, if I'm right this is really bad. Not only would this mean there are folks working against North Dakota's interests, but they are also misrepresenting the state's position to Washington. It didn't stop there, I soon found out that none of you guys would admit to having a problem with this kind of behavior. At most, you asked me to prove the Grand Forks was behind this "misunderstanding." However, even if I had absolute proof, it wouldn't matter. You'd just say something inane like, "Well, Fargo would have done the same thing," just like you excused Bakken's idiocy by saying the Forum has done similar stories on Grand Forks (funny that you didn't have any examples). I was really disappointed by the posts on this forum. For once I came into a discussion thinking that maybe their would be some agreement about the right course of action. However, most of you sounded like an unattractive blend of Thomas Hobbes and Ryan Bakken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 I was really disappointed by the posts on this forum. For once I came into a discussion thinking that maybe their would be some agreement about the right course of action. Most of you sounded just like Ryan Bakken, a guy who couldn't pass the written exam for becoming village idiot in most towns. Nice spin, Tony, but before anyone on this board expressed any opinion one way or the other about what should happen to the 119th, you wrote: Interesting difference in perspective. Sounds like the leadership in Grand Forks has their own game plan, different from the state's. (i.e. screwing your neighbors versus cooperating with them). What sort of response did you expect her after making that unfounded accusation? And you really do need to stop taking Ryan Bakken so seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Saturday's Fargo Forum: Base fight urged: Haugen says 119th should seek growth I love the expanded role and growth concepts for the ND ANG and ND's two AFBs. I'm not sure if it'll be possible or not. I think that's beyond the scope of the BRAC. I think it's survive the BRAC, then try to grow with new things (like the Air Space Initiative). What could be limiting to growth (if growing becomes a possibility) at the 119th's current location: Space (real estate). They are held in on two sides by major streets (University and 19th Ave N) and I'm not sure how much Hector Airport wants to give up to them (which could stunt their possible future grow if land is needed). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 PCM, I have stated my case for the hypothesis that GF leadership was behind the confusion in Washington. If you lose higher brain function every time I write something that upsets you... well, that's your problem, not mine. No diplomats in my family (as you may have deduced ) You continue to claim this hypothesis can't possibly be true (or if it is true, it doesn't matter because if you had your way, the Golden Rule would read, "Do unto others as you think they'd do unto you." At least give me another hypothesis that makes sense instead of asking me to prove something when I don't have any investigatory apparatus of my own. Basically, I'd have to go to DC and ask the people there who told them that North Dakota wanted the 119th blended into GFAFB. Seems to me that the media should be doing that. Anway, suppose my speculation is accurate and GF did try to sell the blending idea to DC wouldn't you and The Sicatoka simply tell me to grow up and accept the idea that this is the way the world should work? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 At least give me another hypothesis that makes sense instead of asking me to prove something when I don't have any investigatory apparatus of my own. Translation: I have no idea whether or not my hypothesis is true and I really don't care if it makes absolutely no sense. It's what I choose to believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bisonguy Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Saturday's Fargo Forum: Base fight urged: Haugen says 119th should seek growth What could be limiting to growth (if growing becomes a possibility) at the 119th's current location: Space (real estate). They are held in on two sides by major streets (University and 19th Ave N) and I'm not sure how much Hector Airport wants to give up to them (which could stunt their possible future grow if land is needed). Looks like Hector Airport is already giving the 119th some land-Happy Hooligans gain some land There was a news report last week stating that Hector Airport was willing to add a substantial portion of land to the lease of the 119th if needed. From The Sicatoka's link provided above- "Every factor we've seen indicates that recruiting deficiencies in Grand Forks would be difficult, if not impossible, to overcome," Scharratt added. Haugen, former wing commander of the 119th, said the North Dakota Army National Guard's 188th Air Defense Artillery unit would have to be moved out of Grand Forks if the 119th moved north. The 188th's recruiters already face a recruiting challenge from Army and Air Force ROTC programs at the University of North Dakota, he said. It only makes sense for government efficiency to move the 119th to Grand Forks and move the 188th to Fargo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 The avenue will become part of the base partly to accommodate new U.S. Department of Defense security requirements, Somdahl said. They (119th) needed (had to have?) 23rd Avenue, but it's not really "expansion" space. Is there a map of who-has-what around there? Is there enough space if need arose? And moving both the 119th and the 188th would be a classic "we're from the government and we're here to help" move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moser53 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 On July 14, 2004 at 9:01 PM, star2city said: With today's Fargo Forum editorial: The 119th must find a new role, it seems official that the Fargo business community has officially thrown in the towel. But if they didn’t have other intentions for using the vacated Hooligans facilities, I doubt their stance would be as passive: Mid-American Aviation Foreign Trade Zone The growth of the aerospace industry in ND has been impressive: Cirrus / TAG / UND in Grand Forks, Goodrich in Jamestown, and KMM in Killdeer/Hettinger, among others. A major coup would be locating a future Cirrus Jet assembly plant in the state (seeCirrus Business Booms, Jets Next? ). Fargo, you can bet, is getting their bid together now. Fargo you bet gets it. When you talk about unmanned aircraft - drones Fargo Air Guard has all the $ they want from Uncle Sam. Drones in Fargo how do they sell it. Good air service Hector Airport air guard right there. Let GF be a world leader in drones. That wouldn't sit well with the NDs other cities Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.