Youtube comments of afcgeo (@afcgeo882).
-
1500
-
In the USSR the “Loaf” was used in the military, as a rural ambulance, by utility companies, police and fire, and as rescue services. They were mostly used in rural areas, so in cities you didn’t see them as often, but they were generally very common and came in all kinds of body configurations, including stake bed truck, box truck, crew cab truck, cargo van, passenger van, ambulance, etc.
Not sure why he put a V8 into this… a modern I4 would have served it well I think. It can’t go fast either way.
462
-
398
-
343
-
326
-
Preston, I was born and grew up in Russia, but served in the US Air Force, including a deployment in AFG. It’s not really comparable, even to remote FOBs. Russian forward bases lack infrastructure (housing, food, clean water, showers, etc.) on permanent basis. Ours did not. If you were at a remote location, you were there for a week, two tops. Then you came back to a larger base for a while. Not the Russians. They don’t have the logistics for it. They get supply trains, but they’re not getting the big stuff or quantities. There are no C-17s, C-130s or even Chinooks full of stuff coming their way. All their stuff is brought by stake trucks or flatbeds. That’s why they went into towns for toilet paper, food, soda, booze, batteries. blankets, etc. They have no PXs. They don’t do MWR. There are no movies, no gyms… nothing.
Without the ability to go into a town they have nothing, which feels like a prison.
292
-
260
-
248
-
219
-
217
-
201
-
158
-
152
-
149
-
142
-
107
-
101
-
98
-
89
-
85
-
78
-
76
-
74
-
73
-
70
-
53
-
51
-
51
-
49
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
47
-
45
-
43
-
42
-
41
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
@Scoots1994 Quite the opposite. Direct injection is very happy at high RPMs and can easily “keep up”. Valves also don’t need cooling.
“How It Works
According to Toyota, during low-to-medium engine loads, both direct-type and port-type fuel injection are used together, or one of them is used to create homogeneous mixed air and fuel, thus contributing to stable combustion processes.
During high engine load ranges, only the direct-type fuel injection is used to cool down the intake air with the chilling effect of vapors in the fuel, which is injected into the cylinder, improving charge efficiency and anti-knock properties. Under some conditions, the intake valves open to allow the homogeneous air/fuel mixture into the combustion chamber, and fuel is injected during the first half of the intake stroke.
During a cold start, the system times the opening of the port and direct fuel injector to decrease emissions and achieve stratified combustion. Immediately after a cold engine start and during the exhaust stroke, fuel is injected into the intake port from the fuel injector assembly (for port injection). Fuel is also injected from the direct fuel injector near the end of the compression stroke. This results in an air-fuel mixture that is stratified, and the area near the spark plug is richer than the rest of the air/fuel mixture. This process allows a retarded ignition timing to be used, raising the exhaust gas temperature. The increased exhaust gas temperatures promote rapid warmup of the catalysts and improve exhaust emission performance.
It is impossible to detect where the changeover from port to direct injection occurs. The only way to see the different fuel injection operations is with a scan tool.”
“Tomorrow’s Tech” article from their website, March 21, 2019.
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
The other aspect of this is that large, strong airlines like American, Lufthansa Group, Delta, etc. have voiced that they will use this as an opportunity to shrink back to more profitable, leaner organizations by speeding up retirements of older, less efficient aircraft, eliminating less profitable, non-essential routes and not re-hiring everyone who worked for them before, especially contractors. They are expecting that the industry won’t rebound for another 2-3 years, given the spread of the disease and the lack of vaccinations.
On the flip side, a shortage of pilots is no longer an issue.
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
Okay, so I’m half Ukrainian, 1/4 Russian and 1/4 Belarussian, but born and raised in Russia (US citizen for over 30 years now and a US veteran).
Russia DOES have combat medics, but they are considerably fewer than in the West and generally aren’t found in combat units. They are mostly women and their job is to provide CASEVAC whenever possible. They have pretty rudimentary medical training, akin to Western EMTs. Their job is simply to evacuate to a rear field hospital.
As far as private hospitals… no. They first evacuate to field hospitals, which do exist. Then, once the patient is ambulatory, he may be moved to a rear hospital, usually a civilian (not private) facility, as military hospitals are only in Russia itself. This is kind of how the US military works too. The wounded are CASEVAC’d into a field hospital, where they are hopefully stabilized, and then flown out to a regional military hospital in Germany (Landstuhl) or Japan (Yokosuka, Okinawa) or Korea (Yongsan), and when well enough to make a long journey, flown back to a military or civilian hospital in the US.
The difference is that Russia has no aeromedical evacuation platforms. They can’t fly patients anywhere.
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
I think it's because Doug doesn't know that this is a commercial van not meant for families and he's comparing it to family minivans, which are completely different vehicles. It's like comparing a truck to a bus. They're both big and they're both somewhat similar, but they have very different uses, so a truck makes a terrible bus and a bus makes a terrible truck. He thinks it's just another minivan, but done terribly, so he's comparing it to minivans. Also, there's no doubt that Doug thinks he knows more about cars than anyone else on the planet, including all the Daimler executives. That causes him to stick his foot in his mouth quite often. He's entertaining, but he makes A LOT of mistakes and assumptions, which is quite unprofessional. That's just my opinion though.
Notice that Doug didn't mention even once that this is a commercial application vehicle sold through a commercial dealer network. Not once did he mention that this van carries 8 people instead of 7, which is maximum in any regular minivan. He never mentioned that the load floor is low, making entering and exiting all rows of the vehicle super easy compared to minivans and making it super easy to load/unload the cargo in the back. He failed to mention that all the seats seat upright unlike the 3rd rows of minivans, which have an odd, upward-angled seat, that there is more legroom and much more head room for all passengers (partly due to that upright seating and a tall, box-like shape of the vehicle.) That since it's a commercial van, it wouldn't be driven by the owners, but by chauffeurs on their shift, which is why they're low in driver amenities and comfort. That the wheels are tiny because it works MUCH better for fleet applications and gets a better ride quality than large 17"/18" wheels (though it looks worse). That third row bench is meant to be either moved to points front/back to customize the interior or be completely removed to provide a flat, large cargo interior, which fits standard dry wall sheets btw. Him tilting it is idiotic because that lever is for disconnecting the bench and pulling it out. All the seats come out or can be re-arranged. This van is super popular as a cab in Europe and is picking up here in NYC as well. It's also easily customized as a wheelchair accessible van.
Then, in the comment below, he belittles his followers by calling them "sweetie" while talking complete nonsense, "Well, sweetie, it's nice that Mercedes-Benz marketing has convinced you of this -- but it's the same size as a Sienna/Odyssey, with the same price as a Sienna/Odyssey, and the same scope as a Sienna/Odyssey.
If I were buying a "commercial shuttle van," I'd literally fall over laughing at the Metris ... annnnnd then I'd buy a Sienna/Odyssey. Which is what everyone does anyway."
Yeah... NO ONE buys Sienna/Odyssey vans for commercial use. NOT ONE PERSON. People buy Ford Transit Connects, Ram PromasterCity, any full-size van or back in the day an Astro van, but no one buys soft, short and narrow Siennas or Odysseys for commercial use. The load floor is too small and too high for that. The only minivan that has been used for commercial use is the Dodge Grand Caravan and they actually made a W/T version of it. That's because its interior is boxy and low to the ground, giving people an easy loading hight and an interior that can actually fit large things.
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
@Oddball_E8 You’re not arguing! You’re trolling! You haven’t presented ANY evidence for your claims at all! I’ve been in the US Air Force for 22 years now. Trained and fought all over the world, including in Svandinavia. Most countries operate from dedicated military facilities, but have back-up plans to operate their fighters from alternate air fields, including unimproved, and from highway stretches specifically designated for that purpose. Even the US has a few of these, although it has little to no need, due to incredible numbers of small, paved airports everywhere. In Europe, the Cold War doctrine created this use in every single country, in the West and in the Warsaw Pact as well. It’s LITERALLY normal, and if you bother to do some research, you’d find it to be true. Sorry that your ego bubble was burst by reality, but Swedes aren’t at all unique in this.
You were saying that Sweden uses highways as its regular operational sites fir its air force, which is 100% a lie. It doesn’t. It occasionally trains its air force on how to use highways as air fields, in a WAR EMERGENCY. This is because Sweden doesn’t have many developed airports throughout its country. Most of Sweden is sparsely populated and heavily forested. It has no major cities in its interior, so no airports either. Almost all of its airstrips are on the East Coast. Most are general aviation, about 400m - 2,000m long.
Sweden didn’t make its highways into runways. Quite the opposite. It designed small airbases called Flygbassystem 90 and then converted their runways into highways and roads, along with hard stands for heavy aircraft. That’s what’s unique about Sweden.
Any country can operate from highways, but only Sweden built these small bases and converted them to highways. By the way, most of the Bas90 system has been shut down and eliminated since the 1990s.
That brings the main point - Ukraine didn’t! They don’t have these layouts, hard stands or maintenance hangars on their roads. They don’t have the heavy forests to hide them. They don’t need STOL aircraft. They are a MUCH larger nation, with a lot of vast, open areas. They have lots of existing airfields and plenty of ways to operate the F-16, just as they operate the MiG-29 and SU-25.
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
@huntergatherer7796 It’s Slovenia, not Slovakia, and they supplied T-55S, modified by an Israeli company in the late 1990s. They have a 105mm British rifled, stabilized gun that can shoot modern sabot rounds, a fire control computer, so it can fire on the move, a laser warning and defense system for ATGMs, ERA, modern tracks, an upgraded suspension, and a new (at the time) 600hp engine.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@filipinorutherford7818 So in the US Army there are branches. Combat Arms branches are infantry, cavalry, field artillery, air defense artillery, armor, combat aviation, combat engineers, cyber and special operations. These are branches whose PRIMARY job is to seek out and engage the enemy. In other words, there are offensive troops. This DOES NOT mean that combat support branch troops do not see combat or do not get tasked in offensive operations. Quite to the contrary, the Army job that has seen the most combat in the last 50 years has been transportation specialists (truck/bus drivers). Please note that Cyber is now a combat arms branch despite the fact that they don’t physically engage seek out or engage the enemy. This is because it is the offensive use, not involvement in combat, that makes a branch “Combat Arms.”
In contrast, the US Marines designate only the infantry as combat arms. Artillery, armor, combat engineer, assault amphibian, etc. are all combat support to them.
I say this to distinguish that each organization assigns definitions to these things themselves and what the British, Aussies or anyone else do is not reflective on what the US Army does.
Non-combat engineers (US Army Engineer Corps), Intel and Signals Corps are not combined arms branches in the US Army. Along with the Chemical Corps they constitute Combat Support branches.
The US Army has a total of 16 branches.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
The gulags for sure existed, but were not instruments of extermination, especially of any particular ethnic or religious group. They were harsh prisons almost exclusively for political prisoners (anti-Communists). They were almost entirely male populated and without any children. While Stalin was certainly anti-Jewish, he had made no attempt to exterminate them. Toward the 1930’s he actually made anti-semitism a major crime, punishable by the death penalty, technically. He even established Yiddish as an official language in the USSR, after creating a Jewish autonomous region in 1928. While many of the victims of the Great Purges were Jewish, Jews were not targeted specifically. This was purely coincidental. Stalin was bothered by the Jewish dominance in Leninism, which saw as a competing movement to his own and was rooted in Trotsky.
In fact, after WW2, Stalin adopted a pro-Zionist stance, believing that any Jewish stare would become Socialist. When the West started to support Israel, he changed his stance, being afraid of a Jewish subversion.
Also, your number is far off. The actual number of people that were killed under the Stalin rule is closer to 20 million. Still a lot, but it’s not the same as what was done by the Nazis because it was political fear, not ethnic cleansing.
I’m Russian-American and a Jew from the Soviet Union originally. I would love to agree with you, but it’s simply not true and overly simplified.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
When you talk about power, Doug,.. you must also talk about the weight that power is carrying, not the "size" of the car. Not a terribly difficult concept to think about. The 2018 AMG E63's curb weight is 4669lbs with 603hp or 7.4lbs/1hp. The Panamera Sport Tourismo weighs in at 4486lbs with 550hp or 8.16lb/1hp. That's the explanation for it being a bit slower. However, that's a tiny difference and can easily be negated by the transmission, engine tuning or even the exhaust setup. Had the Panamera been heavier than the Benz, it would be a significant number, but since it's actually lighter, it isn't.
Now... you have a 2012 AMG E63 and its curb weight is only 4282lbs, but it only makes 550hp giving you 7.78lbs/1hp, for an even smaller difference.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Not safe? How is it not safe? The GC is perfectly safe. It may not be IIHS "Top Pick", but it's still very safe. The NHTSA rated it 5 stars. The don't even compare the two classes against each other and have odd tests that have always been called out by owners, manufacturers and the government. For example, to get the "IIHS Top Pick", a car must have automatic braking (front crash prevention). Your Compass trim may not even have that feature, so it wouldn't actually make "Top Pick" anyway. The GC is taller, so the center of gravity is higher, so you can't drive like a maniac or you'll flip over. That's the case with any tall vehicle. It has all the crumple zones and air bags a car can handle. The IIHS rated it "Marginal" and "Poor" on its controversial "Small Overlap Front" test, even though it then commented that the likelihood of serious injury of those passengers is low. The Small Overlap tests primarily the A pillar and the area below it, and is an unlikely type of a collision. Even the 2018 Toyota Rav-4 performed "Poor" on that test. The Grand Cherokee has the latest (for 2017) active safety gadgets. It also has a very reliable RWD system, a reliable engine and a resale value you'll NEVER get on a Compass. If you think you'll have a baby soon, you'll really appreciate the rear seat space for the rear-facing child seat. The Compass doesn't really have enough space back there for the front passenger to still sit comfortably. I would definitely go with the used GC.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Sylling Boy Back up a source for visibility? Get into the cockpit and judge for yourself! I’ve been in both! Without that, look at videos and notice the shape of the canopies and the relative sitting position of the pilot. It’s VERY easy to see that the sight lines out of a Hog are superior.
LIFT, not engine thrust is what adds to an aircraft’s maneuverability. Forward motion is NOT maneuverability. Lift can be had with wing and surface area rather than speed. The faster a plane has to fly, the less tight the turning radius is. Thus, a slow aircraft can always out turn a fast one. In fact, that’s why the A-10 performs its role (air to ground attack) so well. It can simply out maneuver anything on the ground and attack multiple targets faster, including purely visually. That’s why it has straight wings, turbofan engines and a less than aerodynamic shape. It was built to go in after air superiority has already been established and SAMs have been extinguished, to attack infantry, armor and logistical ground targets and provide CAS. It does not need to defend itself against enemy fighters, go fast or climb quickly. No reason to. It needs to turn on a dime, deliver massive firepower onto the ground, loiter a long time, and survive small caliber fire from the ground. That’s its role. The Sukhoi has the same role, but it simply wasn’t built to fulfill it as well. It was a compromise between a fighter and an attack aircraft.
USAF believes the A-10 is old (it is), requires a lot of maintenance (it does) and that its role can now be achieved by multi-role networks of F-22s and F-35s. To some degree, it can. The O/A-10’s observation role can be done with technology while its ground attack role can be partially achieved by fighter-bombers, the way the F-16 and F-18 have, but only partially. That’s why USAF hasn’t retired it. The actual combat studies show that it can do things no other aircraft can and that those things matter in actual combat.
STOP TROLLING!
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
This demonstrates clearly the duality of Eastern European countries. On the one hand, they want to be like Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, etc. and on the other, they have cultures and a way of thinking that simply isn’t compatible with those values. They use the EU solely as a source of money and do not - cannot subscribe to the ethical values.
Ukraine, for decades, voted to stay out of the EU and NATO, choosing to be friends with their Russian brothers. They were warned, repeatedly, of what may, and will eventually come. They CHOSE not to accept themselves as a part of the Western family, even when other Eastern European nations did. Now when the predictions have arrived, they call the West… the only ones keeping them alive, “cowards”. Why? Ukraine did this to itself. Ukraine chose this for itself.
Ukraine isn’t alone though… the domestic policies of Poland, Hungary, Northern Macedonia, Bulgaria and Romania are also at odds with the ethics valued by the EU. These countries are only in the union fir their own benefit, not the benefit of the whole. To be fair, they’re not at odds with just the EU, but Western Europe as a whole, as well as Canada, the United States and other progressive nations.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@yakinthebox You mean not Bosnia, Korea, Côte d’Ivoire, Chad, Burundi, Somalia, Angola, Mozambique, the Congo, Haiti, or Indonesia.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@billrobbins5874 That depends on the court and what you did. If you’re convicted of spreading “false information” you can receive up to 10 years in a penal colony, or up to 15 years if there are “grave consequences” to your actions. The financial penalties go up to 1.5 million rubles. Echo of Moscow, had to pay 150,000 rubles. Pskov Lenta Novostey had to pay 200,000. This is not the same law that restricts public protests/speech. That law requires that mass gatherings receive a permit first. Without that, you’re breaking the illegal assembly law and you can get 15 days in jail for that, similar to “disturbing the peace” in the US. If you break that law three times, you can then receive up to 5 years in prison. Minimum sentencing is rarely written into Russian law, which gives judges broad discretion on sentencing. Yes, that creates a lot of opportunity for bribery or coercion. That’s sort of the point.
The funny part is that these laws are in direct breach of the Russian Constitution, but there’s no redress process in place for citizens as the entire system is run autocratically, and both, the legislature and the courts technically are subject to the President.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@vbscript2 You don’t have to consider it. There are FAR more airlines that offer 30” than 31”, sadly, and the width of seats depends on the aircraft, not the airline, most times. Almost all 787s and 777 have 17” wide seats. 767s and 747s are 17.4”-17.6”. Most A330s, A340s, A350’s and A380s have 18” wide seats, but some airlines install narrower.
However… almost all A320 family aircraft have 18” seats.
The pitch has NOTHING to do with the hull of the aircraft. JetBlue had the highest pitch in economy (32”) in the entire industry and they have no wide-bodies.
Delta A350 main cabin: 17.4” width, 31-32” pitch. A330 18” width, 31-33” pitch. 764 17.9” width, 31-32” pitch.
Air France A350, A332 and 787 economy is 17” wide with a 31” pitch.
KLM A330, 772, 773 and 787 pitch is 31” with 17.5” wide seats.
Air New Zealand 787 and 777 economy seats have 31-33” pitch and 17.2” width.
Someone didn’t do their homework!
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
In the United States, Credit Card agreements require lending banks (credit card bank) to forgive fraudulent transactions and return the money to the customer when a legitimate complaint is filed and investigated. They purchase insurance for such things and consider it a simple cost of doing business. They also have much stronger anti-theft protocols than you think, including algorithms that look into your purchasing history, amounts and locations. When it comes to debit cards/checks, there are a lot fewer protections from fraud. If someone hacks your debit card and you don't report it within a few days, you may very well lose whatever amount you were taken for. They will shut down further debits and issue you a new card, but the money that's lost may be lost. The same with checks. Unless they track down the thief and find definitive evidence of fraud, you likely won't see that money back. That is why Americans are more prone to using credit cards than debit cards/checks. At the same time, technology implementation is much more difficult in the United States due to so many states having different laws for commerce, federal laws for interstate commerce, a HUGE amount of independent businesses and the overall attitude of the government not getting involved in business until it absolutely has to. Mandating a form of payment is not an option, like it may be in smaller countries. You cannot make a small business owner invest in particular technology. Checks didn't need any technology. They are paper. That said, businesses are moving to more technological systems on their own and you will RARELY see checks used in places like grocery stores anymore.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Yes, but the prices have fallen because the demand for their oil plunged. In a sense, there are now two distinct grades of oil on the international market: Russian and non-Russian.
Because the West stopped buying Russian oil, its value fell. That caused many less developed nations to switch to buying Russian oil, but still at very low prices (they aren’t going to pay more). At the same time, Russia is increasing production to sell more of it, to get more revenue. That, in return, lowers oil prices too. That’s why long-term it’s a failing strategy.
Since those nations switched to Russian oil, the demand for all other oil didn’t go up, so the prices have stabilized.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@TruthHasSpoken Right... my issue is that no one should praise a car on its ability to satisfy the lowest common denominator and nothing more. The truth is, lots of people simply don't have empty highways with 1/4 mile on-ramps, perfect traction and empty roads to drive on. Subarus aren't made for that anyway. Most Subarus are sold in New England and Colorado where they drive at high altitudes (where naturally aspirated engines are even weaker), the roads are old, narrow, twisty and full of traffic moving at high rate of speed, even in poor traction conditions. This is what Subaru has always excelled at. These conditions. It isn't popular in Arizona or Florida or California. It's isn't made for those places. To be honest, there are far better cars for those areas. This car needs more power to successfully navigate the conditions I just mentioned. So far, according to your experience, it's fine for the lowest common denominator, but let's face it, so is everything else.
4
-
4
-
Nick Moscho I can try.
First off, it didn’t stall in any accident. Hopefully you know what a stall is. MCAS was designed to trim the nose down if the plane was being accelerated. Planes with engines under wings pitch the nose up when throttle is added. It’s physics. On the MAX, because of the position of these new engines, it pitches the nose up more than on the previous 737, the NG. The same system would pitch the nose down automatically if it sensed a stall coming (the nose pitching up too high for the current speed). The pitch of the nose is called “Angle of Attack”.
So a choice had to be made: either teach pilots how to operate the plane differently or add a system that will make flying of it feel just like the NG. Boeing chose the second option.
The plane’s sensors are always looking at air speed and AoA to warn the pilot if a stall is coming, and that is through loud audio signals and blinking AoA indicator gauge and on HUD displays, but also eventually through the yoke (stick shaker). The MAX would also pitch down up to 20° to avoid a stall. That was based on what the AoA sensor was showing. There are two AoA sensors on the 737 (and most planes). Because of (what I think ) a stupid measuring of risk, the FAA required that the MCAS be connected to just one AoA sensor instead of both.
In the Lion Air crash, one sensor was malfunctioning for days, was eventually replaced with a bad one, and not checked. So during take-off, it showed an AoA higher than allowed for the still slow speed. The other AoA showed everything as normal. Pilots fought the plane back up, but it kept pitching back down, thinking a stall was happening. That went on until they hit the water. The pilots did not understand why the plane kept trimming the nose down and did not follow procedure to turn the automatic trim off.
The Ethiopian crash was also on take-off and again, one of the AoA sensors malfunctioned. The investigation has not finished, so we don’t yet know why for sure, but I heard that maybe a lightning strike. Not verified though. So again, by bad luck, it was the sensor that controls MCAS and again, it showed the nose was too high and tried to pitch down. In this case, they were a little higher and a little faster than Lion air was when it happened. The pilot fought it a bit (it inly turns on for up to 20 seconds at a time, but repeats) and eventually turned off the automatic trim. 737 pilots know that if automatic trim is not responding properly, it needs to be turned off, and worked by hand. That is called a runaway trim. The Ethiopian crew did that, but by then were pointed down and going very, very fast. Because they were going so fast, they could not pull up by yoke alone, but also could not spin the trim wheel by hand to adjust the trim. The forces on the elevator are too high at those speeds. There is a technique to use to do that where they need to reduce throttle to slow down and then pull the yoke up a little and trim a little, but then release the yoke to let off the tension, then repeat. The pilots didn’t do that. Perhaps they didn’t know it. Anyway, they could not do it by hand, so they panicked and turned the automatic trim back on, so the MCAS started to pitch it down again (still a bad AoA sensor). They went into the water.
The Lion air crash investigation by Indonesia determined that multiple factors played into the crash. Like the Europeans, but not Americans, they don’t assign levels of blame (what was most or least responsible). They just list them. They were: Poor maintenance, poor maintenance records, improper pilot procedures (no runaway trim procedures performed), the repairs made of the AoA sensor by a Florida company were improper, and MCAS.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@JacobDlougach Did you actually read it? It doesn’t at all say what you think it says.
“3) On 28 February 2022 the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2022/335 amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP. That Decision imposed further restrictive measures prohibiting Russian air carriers, any Russian-registered aircraft, and any non-Russian-registered aircraft which is owned or chartered, or otherwise controlled by any Russian natural or legal person, entity or body from landing in, taking off from, or overflying, the territory of the Union. It also prohibits any transactions with the Central Bank of Russia.”
“Regulation (EU) 833/2014 is amended as follows:
(1)
in Article 1, point (r) is added:
‘(r)
“Russian air carrier” means an air transport undertaking holding a valid operating licence or equivalent issued by the competent authorities of the Russian Federation.’;
(2)
the following Articles are added:
‘Article 3d
1. It shall be prohibited for any aircraft operated by Russian air carriers, including as a marketing carrier in code-sharing or blocked-space arrangements, or for any Russian registered aircraft, or for any non-Russian-registered aircraft which is owned or chartered, or otherwise controlled by any Russian natural or legal person, entity or body, to land in, take off from or overfly the territory of the Union.
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply in the case of an emergency landing or an emergency overflight.
3. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the competent authorities may authorise an aircraft to land in, take off from, or overfly, the territory of the Union if the competent authorities have determined that such landing, take-off or overflight is required for humanitarian purposes or for any other purpose consistent with the objectives of this Regulation.
4. The Member State or Member States concerned shall inform the other Member States and the Commission of any authorisation granted under paragraph 3 within two weeks of the authorisation.”
NOWHERE does this target individuals operating said aircraft. It targets Russian “air carriers” - airlines and Russian-registered aircraft. If the aircraft is owned, chartered or controlled (in the legal context) then it restricts that aircraft. Being a pilot is NONE of those things.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
+Jamie Malawkin The same exact thing would have happened. Why? It's called business. You see, there's such a thing called a business contract which is enforceable by law. In the airline business, it is called the contract of carriage. Airlines are required to either perform the flight or cancel the flight. If they cancellation is due to their fault (not weather or airport or something out of their control) then they are required to compensate the ticket holder. If it isn't their fault, they are required to simply refund the ticket holder. There are DOT regulations in place to make sure this happens.
Managers are also employees. There are literally thousands of managers working at American Airlines. It is the world's largest airline. Customer service managers do not schedule aircraft. That's operations' job. The operations of an airline are mind-numbing. AA flies thousands of aircraft each day on thousands of routes. Airplanes don't just sit around because that's a loss to the company and they'd just go out of business if they did that. The only airplanes sitting around are those that can't be flown due to maintenance. Furthermore, airplanes come in many different sizes. Getting a Boeing 737 for 300 people is useless since they only fit a little over 200. Even if you manage to get a plane that isn't scheduled for another flight, you still need someone to operate it. If it's exactly the same as the original plane, you can use the same crew. If not, you have to find a new crew who is certified in that aircraft type. You have to call their homes and then wait for them to get to the airport. That all takes hours! While operations coordinates all that with crew management, they're also checking they aren't breaking any union contracts and making sure all the support functions for the aircraft are set. They have to coordinate things with the caterers to offload the original plane and move things into the new one. They're busy too. They have to re-fuel, get the flight re-programmed by the FAA and the control towers (multiple) and then program a new flight path into the incoming aircraft.
Meanwhile, the customer service staff have no idea of how long it'll take to get that done because everything depends on so many variables. There is no manager at the airport that can give you an accurate timeline since all this gets worked through the company's main Operations desks in Dallas and Chicago and then with LAX as well.
Please, don't comment when you clearly don't know.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@rustleweighed-thrasher Here are some statistics for you to chew on…
According to the NIH, a firearm is stolen every 90 seconds, with around 380,000 stolen every year. Most are stolen out of cars.
Last year the TSA confiscated 5,972 guns at airport security. One gun for every 97,917 passengers. The highest number in history.
The Border Patrol confiscated 546 firearms in 2020.
The NYPD had recovered over 6,000 firearms in 2021.
Philadelphia recovered 5,920 guns that were suspected used to commit crimes in 2021.
San Diego seized 1,089 in 2021.
Baltimore and DC seized 752 “ghost” guns alone in 2021.
On average, around 9,000 guns are seized and destroyed by the federal government each year.
In 2021, a single 3 month operation (Pegasus) in Dallas (Pleasant Grove neighborhood) resulted in 47 arrests and over 100 firearms seized.
The ATF reported that in 2020, 87,000 time-to-crime (legal to crime under 1 year) were recovered. 68,000 of them were under 7 months time-to-crime.
Last year California seized 1,400 guns from people who were banned from ownership alone.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@tamoroso Don’t be such a drama queen. European nations are CONSTANTLY in the same situations. There’s political polarization going on all around the world. And no, most Americans don’t have their heads in the sand. They’re just realistic about the world. Every world region, every nation… every person even, has their own agenda and what they want from the US and the thing is… they often clash with what others want. As they say, you can’t please everyone. Despite Trump’s obvious flaws, he also had a couple of good ideas, although he went about them the wrong way. One of those was to compel NATO nations to spend at least the minimum required by the treaty on defense. Do you know which countries spend way below the required 2% of the GDP? Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Italy, Spain, etc. Do you know who spends the most after the US? Greece. One of the poorest countries in Europe spends 3.82% of its GDP on defending Europe while the Netherlands spends just 1.45%. Does Europe care what anyone else thinks of them? Absolutely not.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
PJs are FAR more than combat medics. On the medical side they’re licensed paramedics, with rotations on ambulances and in local hospitals in New Mexico, plus a combat rescue medicine course that takes them into advanced trauma and basic surgery. They’re combat diver, free-fall, mountain, desert and arctic rescue qualified. They’re water rescue swimmer qualified. They’re special tactics combat certified as well. PJs assigned to the 24th ST Squadron are Tier 1 operators attached to DEVGRU and CAG missions. They get farmed out to SF, Raider and SEAL teams all the time.
Other PJ units focus on CSAR, which is advanced CASEVAC. They have lighter equipment, smaller helos, larger teams. They will respond to emergencies in CONUS, whether it’s a hiker hurt on a mountain, a sinking boat in the ocean or a lost person in the woods. These teams are known as Guardian Angel squadrons and operate HH-60G Pave Hawks.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
You’re incorrect on point 3. From the US Dept of State on the US Security Cooperation with Poland, “Together, the United States and Poland maintain a forward posture to defend the Alliance and counter Russia, which continues to undermine the rules-based international order. The United States leads the enhanced Forward Presence (eFP) Battle Group in Poland and deploys a rotational Armored Brigade Combat Team under Operation Atlantic Resolve, funded through the European Deterrence Initiative. Currently, approximately 10,000 U.S. personnel are on rotation in Poland. Poland is a regular contributor to NATO missions, including the eFP in Latvia, the tailored Forward Presence (tFP) in Romania, and NATO air policing missions in the Baltic, Iceland, and most recently, Slovakia. In 2019, the United States and Poland signed two joint declarations that listed planned locations for enhanced U.S. military presence in Poland and in 2020 our two countries concluded an Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA). The EDCA supplements the NATO Status of Force Agreement, further streamlines the functioning of U.S. forces in Poland, and establishes a mechanism for cooperation on infrastructure and logistical support for enhanced rotational presence. Additionally, the United States is building an Aegis Ashore facility in Poland as a contribution to NATO Ballistic Missile Defense.
President Biden made a historic announcement at the June NATO Summit in Madrid that the U.S. Army V Corps Headquarters Forward Command Post, an Army garrison headquarters, and a field support battalion will be permanently stationed in Poland. These forces represent the first permanently stationed U.S. forces on NATO’s eastern flank and will improve our command-and-control capabilities, interoperability with U.S. and NATO forces, and management of prepositioned equipment.”
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
While Japan, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia and Singapore are indeed allies of the US, they are in no way “Western Nations.” Don’t confuse the two.
Also, leadership in the White House is and can be a lot of things, but stagnant it is not. Elections are held every 4 years and a President can only serve 2 consecutive terms.
You’re welcome to “cut the cord”, whoever you are, just as long you understand the downsides of it (which you clearly do not.) Thankfully, YT fonts like you aren’t actual policy makers anywhere.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@pwnsolo443 To be fair, our allies in AFG were Georgians, Australians, Japanese, New Zealanders, Jordanians, Armenians, Azeris, Finns, Mongols, Croatians, Montenegrans, Arab Emiratis, Albanians, Bosnians, Icelanders, Swiss, Bahranians, Salvadoreans, South Koreans, Tongans, Singaporeans, and NATO allies too.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Aeromedical evacuation squadrons in the US Air Force are medical units. They do not have dedicated aircraft. They all utilize Air Mobility Command’s regular aircraft that are available at the moment, and so each unit is trained to utilize C-130s, C-17s, C-5s, KC-135s, KC-10s and now KC-46s. They used to have regional medical evacuation aircraft called the C-9A Nightingale and those were mostly devoted to AE, but they were retired in 2005. Each AE squadron is a part of an Air Mobility or Airlift wing which has its own set of aircraft, so the AE squadron mostly trains with them, but members of the AE squadron deploy independently of those aircraft and use whatever is assigned to them every mission in the theater.
For example, the 109th Airlift Wing of the New York Air National Guard flies C-130 Hercules. The 109th Airlift Squadron does the flying. The 139th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron is the AE unit. They mostly train together, on their C-130s (mostly LC-130H), but when needed, selected members of the 109th AES will deploy as a team on a mission, on whatever aircraft the Air Force assigns and brings them or deploy to meet other members from other AE squadrons to make up an expeditionary AE squadron overseas, or to backfill/supplement other AE squadrons.
A typical assignment could be to the 10th Expeditionary Aeromedical Evacuation Flight at Ramstein, AB, Germany, the 18th AES at Kadena AB, Japan, 379th Expeditionary Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron at Al Udeid AB or any other expeditionary or overseas unit. As such, the members need to be trained on using not just their typical C-130 aircraft, but any available aircraft that is designed for aeromedical evacuation.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Well… you didn’t account for anything else that’s likely to break on a high mileage car, including engine, cooling, exhaust, suspension, steering and HVAC components. A new car would have none of those costs. A head gasket repair alone will set you back another $2k easily.
130k miles doesn’t sound like much to most Toyota owners, but this is a big city car. It’s a Chicago car. That means many times more wear and tear, per mile, than the average. This car is over 15 years old, so major corrosion issues. Things like engine mounts, steering rack, door mounts, seat mounts, interior panels, gear shifter, switches, etc will all have much more wear because this car makes a lot more trips to get to its 130k mileage. An average trip for this car is likely around 10 miles. So those components see a lot more use. An average big city car starts seeing lots of problems around 100-125k miles, even a Toyota.
That means the ACTUAL cost per mile on that Camry is likely to be 4-5 times higher than 5.8 cents/mile.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Флаф Блаф The Russian people are no more Nazis than the Ukrainians, that is to say both countries have significant Nationalist movements, with extremist views, but in general, no one is saying all Russians are Nazis. No. Putin is a fascist. The leadership of Russia are fascist. The people aren’t. To be fair, most Germans weren’t Nazis either. Much like the Third Reich, the Russian Federation also attacks gays, Jews, Muslims, and other groups in Russia. Russia is intent on re-unifying Slavic/Russo countries of Belarus and Ukraine and keeping Serbia close. Those are all actions exactly in line with the fascist Germany, Italy and Spain of the late 1930’s, if you know history.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Jonathan-cz4ky The discussion is of the military invasion, not your view of morality! Get with the program! Despite the nation being closer, there are major considerations to consider, like the fact that Ukraine has been building up a solid military for over a decade, one that has been fighting in Donbass for years (experienced). You have to consider that Russia isn’t willing to carpet bomb and that unlike in the Middle East, it’s literally impossible to tell Ukrainians from Russians by sight alone. You can’t even distinguish them by language because most Ukrainians speak fluent Russian. They also have the same weapons systems, mostly, the same vehicles, rifles, etc. Finally, you’re so far inly witnessing the softening of Ukrainian defenses, not really an invasion. You must not know ANY history or how long military conflicts actually last. A week is NOTHING!
Also, you don’t even know the difference between an invasion and an occupation (very different things). Talk about someone who doesn’t know anything and lacks intelligence!
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I’m sorry… why are we listening to an Australian general? Australians are good guys and I worked with them in Afghanistan. As individuals, they are capable warriors. However, as a military force, Australia is woefully undertrained, underfunded, inexperienced in any type of combat, and incapable. At best, they can defend their shores (which no one seems to care to invade). They simply lack the power to project, militarily, outside of the Oceania region and play small support roles for NATO operations. The general clearly lacks an understanding of how NATO and specifically the US militaries plan strategically and what their actual capabilities are. Lets just say this, if Russia had invaded Australia instead of Ukraine, there would already be a Russian flag over Canberra.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@BobK-NH the great thing is that you never really need that type of trim change and that even a small trim change affects the aircraft to a large degree. Remember, once the power to the trim is off, you still use the yoke to pull up. The trim assists, but the main change will come from the yoke, so as the aircraft pitch changes slowly, the trim wheel will keep up. Is it was said, it's a HEAVY wheel and it's not that easy to do, but you can go from full down to neutral in seconds. That said, no, if there are heavy forces being applied to the stabilizer (such as speed), then it will not be anywhere as fast as the electric motor, but it will be enough not to crash, unless you're right off the surface.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1991 was a long time ago, and people didn’t really know what will happen next. I think establishing a single national language was a big mistake for Ukraine. Had they gone to a bilingual system and embraced their Russian-speaking brethren, they would still have a peaceful and prospering society. Sadly, Western Ukraine is too nationalistic for this and a split nation was almost inevitable. I’m not supporting Russia in this at all, but I understand where some of the separatists in the East are coming from.
Ukraine was artificially created out of very different people after centuries of divisions, fighting and occupation. Its modern borders don’t really reflect a single people. Creating a single nation out of two people is a real challenge, but it has been done, successfully (Belgium, Canada, Switzerland, etc.)
Russia saw an opportunity in this national division and seized on it.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The US Marines are, in essence, Naval Infantry, though they have more than just infantry as far as capability. Their primary job is amphibious warfare - invasion via beaches. They are supposed to invade, destroy:overcome the enemy and hold for up to 1 month. For that, they deploy aboard specialized Navy ships, have amphibious armored vehicles, use Navy air cushioned transports (LCAC), various helicopters (transport and attack) and landing craft. The Marines can also fight in any environment, not just beaches. They have a training center in the California desert, one in the mountains of Vermont and they train in tropics as well. The Marines also have their own M1A1 main battle tanks, Howitzer cannons, C-130 transport planes, F-35 and F-18 fighter jets and their own special operations force for reconnaissance. They are purposefully self-sustained. The Marines are their own branch, but report to the Department of the Navy. Their officer training is with the Navy.
The Army is bigger, more general, and is designed to hold objectives far longer. They do not have their own transport aside from a few specialized ferries and trucks, of course. They also have no combat airplanes or large combat drones. The Air Force does air transport/fighting for the Army. The Army is under its own department and has its own academy (West Point). The Army is the branch with paratroopers in it, though others have some select people trained in parachutes.
The two services are designed for different use and so not comparable. One is better at some things, while the other is better at others.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@michaelcharnley-heaton4063 Oh wow... the Compass is MUCH cheaper in the States and the Stelvio is a bit more expensive. The Compass, with the manual transmission, FWD starts at $21,845 and the very top trim (High Altitude) AWD, 2.4 petrol, with every imaginable option, including panoramic sunroof, sat nav and all safety gadgets and an electric boot door tops out at $34,860, but you can likely get up to $5,000 off at the dealer. The Alfa starts at $42,590 for a RWD with only a choice of white or red colours and that's it. So for similarly equipped cars, I could pay $30k for the Jeep or about $48k for the Alfa. As such, they're not actually comparable here, at all.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@kurtratzlaff8732 neither has a 4x4 system, actually. They are all All Wheel Drive. The Train Rated Compass has more ground clearance, underside body protection, heavier shocks that allow for more articulation, Active Drive Low system that includes a 20:1 crawl ratio, Hill Descent Control, high air intakes and extra water sealing for water fording, and better approach, departure and breakover angles. Yes, Jeep is actually fooling people into thinking that all of their systems are 4x4 because legally there is no distinction, but mechanically there is and uninformed buyers can fall victim to assumptions. Yes, in my mind that's false advertisement, but you won't be able to sue them for it because again, there is no distinction, legally, between AWD, 4WD or 4x4. If all 4 wheels receive torque at some point, any of the monikers are legal to be used. Meanwhile, the only Jeep vehicle that comes with an actual 4x4 system is the Wrangler. The rest get different kinds of AWD systems. https://www.autoevolution.com/news/jeep-s-awd-and-4wd-systems-explained-106633.html
https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a24663372/all-wheel-drive-four-wheel-drive-differences-explained/
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Norm T none of the models sold as many as Honda sold CR-Vs, that’s considering that GM sold most of them to rental car fleets. They sold so many Equinoxes to fleets that for 2019 the offered a fleet-only package. https://www.automotive-fleet.com/313773/2019-chevrolet-equinox-offers-fleet-only-options
You’re trying to say that together, the Equinox, Terrain and Envision outsell the CR-V, but separately, none of them have, EVER. They’ve never outsold the RAV4 either. While the three have common underpinnings, they are sold separately, styled differently, packaged differently, priced and marketed differently as well. For all intents and purposes, they are different cars from different brands and must be compared separately.
Meanwhile, Honda only sells to ZipCar, which amounts to just a few hundred CR-Vs a year. They sell to no other corporate or municipal fleets. It’s their corporate strategic view and well publicized.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Here’s my take, as a Russian immigrant: Biden and his team have NO clue of they’re doing on the international front. They clearly don’t understand Putin or what motivates him, and they clearly don’t understand Middle Eastern affairs, making Qatar strategic military ally, when the entire Arab peninsula hates Qatar and Qatar supports the Taliban. As far as Putin is concerned, he is a man with a very big, but fragile ego, much like Trump. He’s doing this SOLELY because he has an innate desire to be counted, to be important. The fact that he’s been removed from the G8 and all important world devisions and that all wyes are on China drives him up the wall. He’s bluffing with this move, only to get the West not to be dismissive of him. He wants to remind everyone that Russia, but more importantly he himself, are not to be taken for granted.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I don’t know how such seemingly intelligent men are having such a stupid conversation, honestly. Truly small minds from very closed off countries.
Russia is a HUGE country with a HUGE population. I know it must he difficult to grasp for people living in such tiny, monoethnic countries, but Russians aren’t all the same. They’re all different. They all have different opinions, backgrounds, stories and experiences. Many are smart, many are not, just like everywhere.
When it comes to their military… their professional combat arms personnel are mostly well-equipped and trained, but that’s honestly a fairly small portion of the soldiers. Most are not combat arms, as the support tail ratio is at least 3:1 and growing. Russia also sent in a large quantity of poorly trained and equipped reservists. The facf is that any European nation would be in the same situation if they had to send in reservists. The professionals would be clearly better armed, equipped and trained.
As per waves of cannon fodder… it exists, but it is not all that common. Remember, you only see what they want to show you (on both sides).
The Russians are resilient and numerous. This war will continue for as long as Putin is in power. That is to say that we all need to focus on removing him, not just pushing back the Russian army, because they won’t just stop fighting even if you push them back to the border.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@deadboy3646 The Hiawatha crater’s age is still completely unknown. It’s thought that it possibly could have happened within the last 100,000 years, possibly as recently as 12,500 years ago, but also possibly much, much earlier.
There is an issue of faulty scientific thinking at play the team of geologists that found it were looking to find why there was a sudden climatic change about 13,000 years ago (Younger Dryas), so there’s a bit of a confirmation bias involved. The evidence collected was inconclusive and it’s a difficult place to do research as the area is cold, extremely remote, and the crater is below a moving glacier. Jay Melosh, an impact crater expert from Purdue Univ. believes the crater dates back much further.
The LC-130 ANG unit in Scotia, NY has been flying over it with various ice-penetrating radars, trying to map it at least, but what they need to date it is soil core samples, which are just too deep under the ice for us to obtain right now.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Prigozhin is many things. He’s a thief, a pimp, even a restauranteur, but what he is not is a military strategist. What Wagner is doing is following direct orders from the Russian MOD. They fight limited battles on behalf of the Russian Army, nothing more. That’s why no one on either side will be paying any attention to his “predictions”.
That said, you can throw out prediction number one and number two. No one in Ukraine wants anything to do with Belgorod. It has no use other than to motivate Russian citizens to support the war. Prediction number two was said by Prigozhin in order fir Wagner to get more funding, ammo, etc. Ukraine will not try to encircle Wagner. It will keep Wagner preoccupied in Bakhmut until mid-Summer, when it will run out of all supples. Why?
Because Ukraine will start with prediction number 4, which will draw major shifts of personnel, vehicles, supplies and attention from Bakhmut, South, leaving Wagner to fend for itself. That’s when Ukraine will start to push East, just South of Bakhmut, toward Donetsk. Wagner will withdraw from Bakhmut to reinforce Donetsk. The Ukrainians will split DPR and LPR and take Melitopol, cutting off Crimea from Donbas. Will Ukraine hold on all those fronts? That’s to be seen.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@swagedelic There is still little to no barrier on trade for Russia, with the West or otherwise. Russia continues to import technology from where it’s primarily made: Israel, China, India, and South Korea. You’re very mislead if you think tech in Russia comes primarily from Europe or North America. It simply doesn’t. Russia also has a ton if domestic developments.
Look, I’m no proponent of Russia, having fled from it in 1989, but I’m much more aware (quite apparently) of its realities than you are. There’s a reason the Ruble bounced back despite sanctions, and why Russians aren’t feeling their pinch. Russia is much more independent, financially, than the Western propaganda claims it to be. Yes, there’s active propaganda on both sides. Shocking, I know.
Also, I never defended the invasion. All of my ancestors on my maternal side are Ukrainian and I used to go there in my childhood quite a lot. You’re clearly unhinged and ignorant. You’re also now muted and reported.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@justsomestreamer8315 False. You are referring to the NATO summit in Brussels where in talking to the heads of NATO, Trump said it was, “sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia, where you’re supposed to be guarding against Russia.” This was said by Trump to criticize Germany for spending so little on NATO and its defense. In that speech Trump lied in saying that 50-70% of Germany’s energy will be reliant on Russia. First off, the pipeline that was being discussed only bring in natural gas, and not crude oil. I know in Trump’s head it’s all the same, but in reality it isn’t. Even though half of German natural gas came from Russia, that accounts to just 10% of German energy supplies and consumption. The pipeline in question was NordStream.
Furthermore, Trump was being naturally disingenuous because he knew very well that Germany had no other possible source of natural gas. The US was (and is) unable to export any sizable LNG quantities to Europe.
Meanwhile, the US imported 672,000 barrels of crude oil from Russia EACH DAY. On top of that, Russia was one of the largest suppliers of unfinished oil and fuel oil to the US, peaking at about 370,000 barrels per day for unfinished oil in 2019.
Furthermore, no one laughed at those comments. You’re just a pathetic little troll. Sad.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
“Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I think a lot of people confuse the winter of ‘41 with the winter of ‘43. The former was a typical European winter, something most Germans could handle. 1943 was uniquely cold. By 1943, a large percentage of Soviet forces had been from the central and Eastern parts of the country that are used to extreme temperatures, were outfitted with cold gear and knew how to navigate the snow/ice. The other issue with the Russian winters was that the Soviet railroads were mostly intact and could operate from the East to the front lines, but the Germans had no railroads to help them East of the original soviet border. The train tracks used a different gauge, the partisans kept blowing up rails, switches and depots and during Barbarossa, Germans destroyed much of the network themselves. During the entire war, the USSR was fed, fueled and supplied from its central, Caucuses and Eastern regions. Germany just didn’t have those resources.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@juliek5094 No one except Putin knows for sure what makes him tick. He’s known to have a troubled youth, often getting into fights in school. He was a bully. His time in the KGB is, of course, still classified. Some say he was just a paper-pusher. Others say he kept an eye on Stasi agents. Both are probably true. One can keep an eye on agents through administrative means. Since then he’s been an opportunist, a staunch believer in suppressing dissent and generally being extremely conservative. His experience through the 90s in St Petersburg, as the deputy mayor shaped him a lot, gave him contacts with the forming oligarchs/organized crime, whom he used to make his way to the top. He is a staunch nationalist and he does believe that Belorussians and Ukrainians belong under the Moscow umbrella, though not exactly in their equality. His main objective, like of others in his position, is to increase his personal power. He truly believes he’s a genius.
Am I angry at him to what he’s done to Russia? I don’t consider Russia to be my country anymore and I don’t hold a Russian citizenship anymore either. No, I’m not mad at him. To be honest, Russians knew what was going on, know what’s going on, and mostly support him. They, like many others in the world, love a dominating figure in charge, and as long as it benefits them, it’s fine. That’s his job as the President - to strengthen Russia and the lives of Russians.
My father moved back to Russia many years ago, even though he’s a US citizen. He knew it was coming, and he knows what’s going on, but to be honest, he doesn’t really care as it doesn’t impact him… until it does. He’s mad about the sanctions creating financial woes. Ukraine is inconsequential to him. My mother, on the other hand (they’ve been divorced for 30 years) is Ukrainian by both of her parents, and has relatives (or had now) there. Thankfully, they all live in the West now, the last smartly leaving everything they own in Odessa and escaping the first day of the attack.
To Russians, Ukrainians, all those following Russia’s and Putin’s affairs, none of this is a surprise, really. Not after the attacks on Crimea and Georgia. Anything short of a coup d’état won’t change a thing, but here is something no one in the West knows or considers: The alternatives. The top five parties in Russia are nationalistic, with Putin’s party at the top, Communist in the second place, and numbers 3 and 4 are nationalist radicals. Who will take his place might be radically worse. Putin has been ensuring no reasonable candidate existed over the last two decades.
One of the biggest flaws of democracy is the chance that people might willingly elect a monarch/dictator and prefer that type of ruling. It’s something even the US founding fathers worried about.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
That’s correct. In the 1980’s this car had two basic roles in the USSR: taxi fleet and government fleet (first responders, KGB, military (non-combat, obviously) factory executives, and other chauffeured roles.) Ordinary Russians had no access to this, could not afford it, and even if they could, the order wait times were around a decade. Compared to the Ladas, Moskvich, and Zapotozhets of the time, the Volga was a large and comfortable sedan. This specific car seems to be the uprated 100hp version which required 92 octane. The 90hp version ran on a more common 76 octane fuel. The top speed on this version was 91mph or 147km/h.
The taxis were technically 24-11s and 24-14s as they ran on 80 oct gasoline.There were also natural gas (24-17) and a station wagon (24-12).
The best part is that V8 powered Volgas were also produced as special pursuit vehicles for federal security in two versions: 195 and 220hp.
The Gaz 3102 Volga was a government service (politicians) vehicle derived from this.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@adangamez3608 You’re not very bright… are you a child? Also, the war in Ukraine is a civil war, not a war for independence. Oh and it’s still going on.
By the way, the US Air Force Air War College is a post-graduate level (master’s degree) senior professional military education institution. There are numerous areas of study, but all of them focus on joint force operations and strategic planning. What you think you know about war is like kindergarten to AWC graduates.
Having been born in Russia, with my mother’s parents from Ukraine, I chose to become an expert on Eastern European military and political affairs. It’s literally my field. You won’t win an argument with me, not on this topic.
I agree with most of what you originally said, except that military exercises of over 150 thousand troops near a border can be random. It takes a ton of planning, consideration and strategic thinking to execute a maneuver of that size, especially since it involves all of Russia’s branches of the military and some of its partners (Belarus).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ Alaska produces just 4% of domestic oil and much of that stays in Alaska. The rest gets shipped around the world and to two US refineries, one in Washington and the other in California.
Alaska’s in-state refineries make jet fuel, heating oil, gasoline, kerosene, asphalt base, marine Diesel, ULS Diesel, and military fuel (JP-5 and JP-8). A giant system of pipes brings it all to Valdez.
As per Albany, the oil and fuels get brought up the Hudson by barges from NJ, not from all over the country. The Colonial Pipeline brings it to Linden, NJ from Houston, TX and points between. However, there are no refineries in Albany, NY. Albany has an oil terminal, which simply receives fuels (already refined) and then that fuel is put on trucks for deliveries.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@_zigger_ It’s not their master’s measurement, it’s history. By the time the metric system was invented, all manufacturing and trade measurements in the US were standardized in the Imperial form. Everywhere else, however, all kinds of measurements were used and nothing was standardized. That’s why the metric system took off there, quickly. However, there was no need, but a giant expense, to change over an entire booming economy in manufacturing standards as by the time the metric system was standardized, the US was already the world leader in those sectors. In fact, there are many things that are still standardized in inches and pounds and then just converted into random metric measurements.
#history #factsmatter
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ You “THINK”? Are you sure about that? It really reads as you ASSUME OUT IGNORANCE. “Our” cars ABSOLUTELY pass NCAP tests, even the worst of them, demonstrated by Jeep Wrangler sales in Europe. On the other hand, a Suzuki Jimny would get terrible scores in the US/Canada.
Ford builds Kugas/Escapes, Modeo/Fusion, Focus, Fiesta… all exactly the same as the US, except lighting, which is more restrictive in the US. And sadly no, they are not of better quality. European cars are NOTORIOUS for being very poor quality, although Audi and BMW are obviously known for performance. The Japanese brands are the quality cars (esp. Toyota, Honda and Subaru), and you know what… that’s the case on the rest of the planet too. Australians, Africans, Brazilians… everyone is in agreement on these things except Europeans and it’s purely out of European pride left over from colonialism, which is ironic since British brands are now owned by Indian and Chinese ones.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Why have theories when the truth is well-publicized and known by people who care to know? Oh... it's for those people who prefer to stay ignorant.
The Metris (or the V Class as it's known in Europe) is a rear or all wheel drive work van that's sold in 3 different lengths and with 4 different available engines in Europe. In the past, the commercial and passenger versions were separated by different names (Vito and Viano, respectively) with the latter being completely differently equipped on the inside and slightly differently styled on the outside than the former. About a decade ago Mercedes considered whether they should bring the Viano to North America, but after lots of researched decided that the luxury minivan segment would compete against Escalades, Navigators and the like and that there wouldn't be much profit in it. They dropped it. However, the Mercedes Commercial Division saw the success of Ford Transit Connect and the Dodge Ram PromasterCity with fleets and decided to do the same with the Vito, which by then was renamed into simply the V Class, alongside the Viano. Thus, the cargo V vans are shipped to the US and then some are converted (to avoid the chicken tax) into passenger vans by addition of windows and seats. These vans are NOT sold through the regular M-B channels and you won't find them on their regular website. They are sold through the M-B Commercial Division and a website set up for them and Sprinter vans. They are meant for shuttle duties. They are durable, economical, spacious and easy to maintain, unlike the M-B passenger cars. They are sold and serviced at M-B commercial dealerships. These are FLEET vehicles sold as corporate vans, Uber cars, taxis, airport shuttles and light cargo trucks. They are NOT family haulers. What makes them popular with those crowds are a box shape that fits cargo and people well (8 grown adults fit easily), low floor, high torque with low horsepower (economical), able to tow heavy trailers and easy to maintain. They are not meant to be stylish or comfortable for long trips or luxurious. They're tiny buses.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
“Base pay for a sailor is about $22,000 a year.”
While a fact, it’s misunderstood by most. First off, ALL military branches in the US are paid the same, according to federal law. There are pay grades. For most (not all) recruits, the base pay is E (stands for enlisted) - 1. E-1 base pay in 2022 is $1833.30 per month. It is taxed, federally. However, service members get allowances in top of base pay. There are allowances for food, housing and special duties.
Currently the BAS (food) is $406.98 (not taxed.) During initial training you get all meals free, so no BAS. After that you pay for them out of that allowance.
Housing is usually free for junior members who are not married (aboard a ship or in barracks), but if they didn’t receive free housing, an E-1 sailor without a dependent (spouse or child) would additionally receive $1,350 if they were stationed in North Chicago. The rate depends on where you are stationed. This amount is also tax-free.
You get free uniform issue occasionally and get an allowance for additional items and upkeep.
As mentioned in the video, submarine service gets extra duty pay, just as flight duty, hazardous duty and many others.
You also don’t stay E-1 for long. You are automatically promoted to E-2 at the completion of boot camp (in the Navy, other services are slightly different), and then to E-3 after nine as E-2 and passing exams. So your base and housing allowances progress pretty quickly. E-3 base pay is $2,160.60 per month.
The longer you serve and the higher your rank/pay grade, the more you earn.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@wingracer1614 Again, you DO NOT need to show motive or opportunity. There are NO legal standards that need to be shown. In FACT, many murder cases are tried without evidence of motive or opportunity because many murders aren’t premeditated. Lots of photo and video evidence nowadays plainly shows who killed someone and if there’s no evidence of self-defense then that’s that. You’re confusing specific charges needing to meet specific legal standards with juries needing them to convict. For example, murder in the 1st degree usually needs an element of premeditation shown.
In my friend’s case, there was no motivation. It was a street shooting by a couple of thugs. They shot a bystander by accident instead of their target. A woman saw it and gave incredibly detailed descriptions of their fairly unique clothing. The cops got them 2 or 3 blocks away, matching the description put out on the radio/computer EXACTLY. It was at night on a pretty empty street. No gun was recovered. The shooter was found guilty of assault 1 (NYS) on the woman’t testimony of having seen them chase and shoot at people and calling 911 with a very exact description of their appearance and the clothing of the shooter having a very rare design logo.
No ballistics, no DNA, no fingerprints, no video, not even GSR on the shooter. No victim testimony was used, although PD and EMS records were included to show the crime took place and where. There was also “gun spotter” system data admitted to show that gun shots were fired in the vicinity at that time. That’s pretty much it. If the victim had died, the plan was to upgrade charges to manslaughter. He survived, thankfully.
You’re trying to quantify the evidence that’s needed to convict. Don’t. A jury simply needs to hear enough evidence to satisfy the burden of “beyond a reasonable doubt” a prosecutor that will connect/explain that evidence, and a defense attorney that doesn’t refute it. Whether it’s a quantity of weak evidence or a little but of very strong evidence is irrelevant. It just needs to convince the jury that the accused committed what they are charged with.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Ideal serving temperature depends on the specific beer type and method of preparation. Thus, Ales are traditionally consumed at room temperature (they are brewed hot). Lagers are traditionally served just above freezing temperatures and are brewed cold. Other types of beers fall somewhere in the middle. Some of the issue is flavor and alcohol content, but much of it has to do with effervescence as well. As your beer gets warmer, it loses its natural gasses and that makes some beers less enjoyable. Ales are generally flat compared to lagers and Pilsners, Helles, Kolschs and wheat beers.
Here are some examples of ideal storage/serving temperatures:
35–40°F (2–4°C): Mass market light lagers.
40–45°F (4–7°C): Czech and German Pilsners, Munich Helles, wheat beers, and Kölsch.
45–50°F (7–10°C): IPAs, American pale ales, porters, and most stouts.
50–55°F (10–13°C): Belgian ales, sour ales, Bocks, English bitters and milds, Scottish ales
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Mark C That has nothing to do with law school. It has to do with our history.
North America was (and still is) a vast frontier land that was mostly uninhabited when Europeans came here. Guns were necessary for them to survive: to hunt and defend against native tribes that attacked them. I won’t get into the ethics of colonization here. Suffice to say that the average resident European needed a gun to protect himself and hunt. When America rebelled against England, King George decided to use regiments of the regular British Army to quell the rebellion, so the residents took their muskets and rifles and formed groups of militia. When our Constitution was first written, we were in the middle of that war. It was seen as a Brit against Brit by both sides, as a civil war. The reason why the Colonists fought was for freedom from the King and his abusive laws and rule. So the fear was of a totalitarian, abusive ruler. It was recognized that democracy was not that likely to succeed, as there were a lot of competing interests among the Colonists, they had no money, no power and no trade partners. An amendment to the Constitution (one of many) was passed to make sure the new government doesn’t take away guns from citizens, so they can have another revolution, if that one doesn’t work out. They were afraid that the new government would be as oppressive as the king, and wanted to preserve the ability to fight for themselves. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your beliefs), the amendment was seen as a justification of gun ownership in general, with no limitations, as it was vague. Because the United States had continued to be very rural, owning a gun was seen as normal, historically, at least for people in the rural areas. They had little police protection, lived on giant properties often miles from the closest neighbor and needed to hunt and protect themselves. Slowly, through urbanization, that is changing, but culture is slow to change and the Constitution is rather difficult to change.
Sorry for the long paragraph. It’s a long and complex historical topic. I’m a European immigrant myself and until college history and law classes, could not understand it either. Most governments on Earth are more authoritative. The US government is based on the power being built from the ground, up. It has many positives and negatives. Both systems do.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Preston, I think you are giving WAY too much credit to Rusi here. This is a British think tank that’s using the British current military system and the British current way of thinking. The UK military is absolutely unprepared to fight almost anything other than an invasion of the UK at this point in time. They’ve been suffering decades of attrition, underfunding and misappropriation.
This model doesn’t understand the force that NATO is able to field rapidly, using solely its active duty personnel. It doesn’t comprehend the strength that the reserve systems of its members bring to the fight, and it doesn’t comprehend that all of its member states do have systems of call-ups/drafts in place, if needed. It doesn’t understand that NATO fights on land, in the air, at sea, in space and in cyberspace, ALL AT THE SAME TIME. It doesn’t comprehend how nuclear weapons play into a war.
In very short, it simply doesn’t comprehend.
The US alone has over two million military service members. This doesn’t even include the US Coast Guard (but should) or inactive reserve.
So this isn’t just about the high technologies. It’s also simply a large number of personnel.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Hybrids, by their technological nature, improve city driving above all else. If most of your driving is in the city, a hybrid is going to translate into lots of fuel economy. Right now, this is just one of two (the other is the Toyota Rav4) compact CUV hybrids on the market, even though it's the biggest selling passenger vehicle class in North America. The Rav4 is, arguably, a much better hybrid because it provides better driving characteristics and better fuel economy than the Nissan, but... the Nissan feels more refined, is probably more comfortable for most people and larger than the Rav4. If your driving isn't mostly city, don't bother with this one. The CR-V would serve you much better in most circumstances, offers better performance, better handling, better fuel economy and more utility than the Rogue or Rav4. If your driving is mostly highway, the GMC Terrain Diesel should also be a consideration, but the $3,000 premium over the gas engines means that if you're leasing, you won't earn the money back in fuel economy (Diesel is also almost 30% more expensive than 87 octane gasoline). The 2019 Rav4 is something to consider and the CRV (if you live in warmer climates due to the 1.5 engine issue). If you're performance-minded, you should look at the Escape 2.0 EcoBoost (Titanium only now) and the Mazda CX-5. The Hyundai Tucson Sport seems to be a very acceptable compact CUV for budget-minded people and the Cherokee Trailhawk is for those looking for off-road capability. However, the ultimate compromise (a car that's good at all, but not great at any) is probably the 2019 Subaru Forester, which does above average in all categories, despite not being the champion in any one category.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Preston, I can see why it would be difficult for a US Army officer to understand what constitutes success in an existential war, a war where you are invaded. The US has never been invaded and doesn’t consider an invasion as a real threat.
In an invasion like Ukraine there is only one strategic goal: recapture (liberation) of ALL occupied territories. Period.
As such, objectives for offensive operations all rest on one goal: taking territory back and giving up none.
Any day when you are capturing back any land at all, even an inch, is a success, as long as you’re doing it in a sustainable way. Slow and steady wins the race.
I also see that you’re not understanding why the US is vague about its plans. Its plans depend on Ukraine’s needs and our partners abilities to deliver. We don’t just give what we want, when we want it. NATO has to do its joint assessments, intelligence agencies have to assess the political and military ramifications and logistics have to be worked out. It’s a dynamic war and with 50 partners, we are constantly hoping someone else will volunteer to take up a task to save us money (so is everyone else.) We have no strategic goal. We are flying by the seat of our pants, as is everyone else in war. The goal is to end the war with Ukraine being satisfied.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Great work, Ryan! All of this is VERY similar to the Coast Guard, although you should try and get underway with them at some point too. They even have the hamsters.
Officers are traditionally separated from the enlisted by a long-standing tradition. Naval officers were educated, upper class men, employed full-time by a royal commission (at least in Europe), and often held royal titles. Enlisted were usually very poor and often simply contracted for the voyage. By “contracted” I mean they were often grabbed on the docks, tricked into enlisting or even plucked from prisons. Only long-term enlisted sailors (Chiefs) were actual career men. Back in those days the enlisted got the scraps while the officers ate luxurious meals.
Today, despite eating in separate rooms, allowing for each group to discuss the other, they actually eat the same exact meals prepared in the same galley. The wardroom does, however, get proper cutlery and china, sometimes.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@lebron3505 Tanks like the M1 aren’t a “reactionary force” because they have massive logistical requirements to be sent in. They are not maneuverable enough to tackle unimproved beach heads, need a secure landing site with engineers already having shored it up, and massive use of landing craft just to get a few over to land. The alternative is needing a runway to accept C-17s or C-5s, and each aircraft can take just one M1 Abrams at a time.
Considering the amount of people, support (fuel, maintenance, parts, and wreckers) you will need to battle with them, they are simply too large for any quick operation. The Marines have been using them only in long-term, large scale deployments, which they have now walked away from in favor of operating solely as MEUs.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+TheMattd546
Merriam-Webster defines it as, "a lack of knowledge, understanding, or education; the state of being ignorant."
The Oxford Dictionary defines it as, "Lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated"
As you can see, you got the definition of "ignorance" wrong. There's no "willfully stupid" in it. It just means you don't know.
When it comes to the litigation issues, you didn't know that it was the case. You could have spent 10 minutes Googling it and you would have known. However, you decided out of ignorance to still provide advice on things you clearly don't know. That's the problem. If you don't know, don't chime in. No one asked you for legal advice.
Furthermore, "usually every business model" is very wrong. It is a saying. It's not a business model. In fact, it's primarily just a saying in the retail sales industry. As a manager, you're always responsible for doing the right thing for the customer. It is what you think is right, not what the customer is right. That's why you were hired as a manager. You are trusted and hopefully trained to make that decision to do the right thing for the customer, given the situation. It's a very subjective concept, I know. However, the customer isn't paying your salary, so the right thing must also be right for the company as well. As a manager, you balance those two all day long because they usually aren't the same thing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ProfsrXav8r My background is driving C-17s for 16 years (15,000 hours+) and driving A320’s for 8. I started flying Cessnas when I was 16 (thanks Civil Air Patrol!).
There are delays on the ground for all types of reasons. We’re not discussing them. We’re discussing delays that occur on the runway, after you have clearance and a slot to depart, after you’ve already been directed to “line up an hold/wait.” People are asking why, after all that, an aircraft still can’t depart for minutes.
When you call to file an IFR plan, you need to stay parked until you are released and given a departure plan, which has NOTHING to do with your actual departure. You can still depart VFR, if you want, and many do, choosing to file later, in-flight, as you’ve done.
That said, the delay we’re all discussing, has NOTHING to do with IFR plans.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
D.A. Risse Last stage critical patients? WTF is that?
They were brought in to handle primary triage, emergent care, acute trauma, stroke/cardiac emergencies, natal deliveries and emergency surgeries. They were brought in to alleviate some of NYC hospitals from doing those things, so that those hospitals would take in Covid patients ONLY.
However, the logistics of that don’t work in NYC. I would have placed it in the Red Hook Cruise terminal. The facility has the needed depth and perimeter security in place, electrical, fresh water and sanitation connections, proximity to the Gowanus/BQE to serve everything from Elmhurst to Coney Island hospitals and be in an area where many hospitals had closed in the last decade, leaving residents under-served. It would be within a few minutes’ drive from about 13 major hospitals that are currently overrun.
As for one hour trips... you clearly have ZERO medical knowledge. Look up what the “golden hour” rule is.
Stop spreading ignorance and false information!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sabinereynaudsf No. This is because Ukraine can use its entire male (and female) population to defend itself, versus Russia, which can only use its actual military and will never, can never, would never conscript all males to invade. Ukraine’s population is over 40 million. About half of that are male - 20 mil. About 60% are able to fight/military age and condition. That’s about 12 million. Right now, Ukraine has about 1.5 million soldiers between active, reserve and police, who are all doing military work. Russia’s 300,000 won’t change a thing. Even a million won’t.
Russia has to continue to protect its own territory while attacking Ukraine. Otherwise it will be invaded and defeated by someone else.
This is why any invasion is doomed. Look at the French and Americans in Vietnam as a great example. WW2 as well. Unless you can extremely quickly overrun the nation, before it is able to mobilize its reserves and civilians, you will fail at an invasion. The Germans understood this in Blitzkrieg, but underestimated their ability to navigate the Russian steppe environment, causing them to slow down. That gave Russia a chance to mobilize and rout.
The US/UK quickly invaded both, Afghanistan and Iraq, successfully because they knew this.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ianworley8169 There are specific reasons why those countries get the participle, and use of participles differs by language, so since we’re talking about English, it’s France, not La France.
The Netherlands adopted its name after the medieval description of it as being the region of Europe because it was literally low. The word “netherlands” means low country. The Netherlands are at or below sea level and very flat. They were also considered “down stream” by the Romans. In most Romance languages, the name for the Netherlands still translates to “low countries”.
Prior to its independence it was called the Spanish Netherlands.
The use of the particle is required to denote a specific netherlands versus all others in Europe, making country “THE Netherlands” instead of just random netherlands.
When it comes to the Democratic Republic of Congo, much like in the United States of America, the participle refers to the subject. The subject noun in the former is “Republic”, with Democratic being the adjective. There are many republics in the world, and even in Africa. We use “the” to denote a specific one, just as the United States (of America), not some other united states of say… Mexico, which is officially the United Mexican States (many people don’t know this).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I appreciate your opinion, but it’s absolute, mindless horse shit, sorry. Whether you want to call it in Japanese (kaizen) or English (evolution), continuous improvement isn’t a uniquely Toyota concept. In fact, ALL vehicle manufacturers, and all manufacturers in general, use it. Every engineer and developer bases designs on past lessons. Kaizen is a term for “lean manufacturing.”
When someone says “I’ve been working exclusively for one employer”, please understand that that person has only one single perspective and may be exhibiting what’s known as the Stockholm Syndrome.
Look, I drive a Toyota. In fact, both my new cars have been Toyotas. I believe Toyotas are a good value and fit my driving style well. That said, their FACTUAL (statistical) reliability is just above average and they have been getting worse with complexity and cost cutting over the years (as have most other manufacturers).
There are things they do very well and always have (electricals, hybrid drivetrain, metallurgy). There are things they’ve really improved on in the last decade (engines, suspensions and AWD) and there are things they’ve really crapped out on lately (steering, technology, infotainment, paint and transmissions).
Despite all that, having an employee tell us corporate tales of culture is honestly gross. It feels like listening to a cult member. Believe me, Toyota isn’t that special. They make good cars, overall, but they are not industry leaders in anything at all and they’re not incredibly concerned about their customers.
Case in point: although I own a 2021 Rav4 Hybrid and live in NYC where I do frequent short trips (mostly) and have cold winters (relatively), and Toyota’s own recommendation to change the oil every 5,000 miles, Toyota has REFUSED to pay for it via Toyota Care. They simply said they would, if the technician would determine an oil change is needed. 😂 Which is of course impossible without a chemical test or absolute self-destruction of the engine. I had two very long conversations with supervisors on the phone and caught BOTH flat out lying and back pedaling. When I had the service manager listen on the speaker, he just shook his head and gave me a free oil change because Toyota basically said, “Yes, the contract says you’re entitled. No, we won’t pay.” That is today’s Toyota. Three people at Customer Care said this, including two supervisors.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@st-ex8506 The Crimean canal supplied 85% of Crimea’s water prior to the war. Of that, 72% went to agriculture, 10% to industry and 18% for drinking, bathing, etc. So yes, that would be considered a war crime.
The peace time system of ferries is only a tiny percentage of all the vessels being used to ferry during war. You’re basing everything on pure assumptions instead of facts. For example, you say, “The Russian could not satisfactorily supply their 20-30’000 on the right bank of Dnieoro”, but that’s not the case. What they could not do was supply them successfully, across the entire Kherson Oblast, so far from their supply centres and on a front line of a river. What you’re doing is called a “straw man argument”. It has NOTHING to do with their logistics in Crimea. You just lack basic info on Crimea and have no other basis to form an opinion.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@HAL-bo5lr No. Go look at a map and explain it. You can’t. The official reports are saying it will go to Hartford and then Providence, not Springfield. Springfield is in the opposite direction of Boston (Northwest instead of Northeast).
The fact that this train will miss the two most populated cities in Connecticut will be a non-starter alone. The project assumes this service will be created IN ADDITION to the current Acela service, which will NOT happen. They assume the federal government will end up paying for the entire cost, which will not happen. That also assumes that all of this track will be Amtrak-owned, but that’s not going to happen either because they want to run their trains on the Waterbury branch of the MetroNorth, which is owned by the CT DoT and isn’t at all capable of high speed travel, as it meanders with the Naugatuck River.
You can’t comprehend a basic thing about trains. They have to be filled and being in money. Without the additional cities along the way, no high-speed train can exist. They need the ridership. Are you a child that you can’t comprehend this?
First of all, I quoted you, you moron. Second, none of those “feats” have ANYTHING to do with this. The TGV? Those are train tracks, the same as we have already! I’m talking about a tunnel under an 18-mile inlet that’s 300 feet deep! For reference, the English channel is 23 miles wide at the Chunnel crossing. Even the Seikan tunnel’s underwater section is shorter at 14.5 miles! Like I said, this tunnel alone would be a project the size of the Chunnel construction.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ I don’t know it he knows it or not, but the reason that German manufacturers make so many cars all around the world and re-import many is money savings, primarily labor costs. What you think of as German products of Ford and GM were often actually American or joint in design. There were even American cars sold under European brands like Renault back in the 1980s. All through the 80s, 90s and 2000s, there were American small cars sold in Europe. The EU killed it with tariffs and since they’re small priced and have small margins, the exports to the EU stopped. You saw joint models like Ford’s Mondeo/Fusion, Kuga/Escape, Focus and Fiesta. Chrysler sold Neons, Voyagers, Jeeps, etc. GM sold a high of 500,000 cars in Europe in 2005. Since then, US automakers have stopped marketing and designing cars that could work in Europe, but ironically, European cars have grown in size to match much of the American market. The finances simply don’t work. If Americans only drive small cars then European cars wouldn’t sell in North America, would they?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Jon-d6h 1. They WERE occupying. They did not occupy them in the 70’s. In fact, their occupation started to be eased in the late 70’s.
2. Introspective in the USSR means people caring about the USSR and its dealings, not the West. Back then most Russians still couldn’t leave the country and the few that could, couldn’t leave the Communist areas (China, Vietnam, Warsaw Pact, North Korea, Cuba, etc.). You can disagree all you want. Out of the two of us, only one grew up in the USSR. Also, no, Russia didn’t fight in Africa first 70 years. Man you’re misinformed.
1
-
1
-
@Jon-d6h No, the language was NEVER Russian! Where are you getting that from??? The Warsaw Pact had no official language. It was a treaty, just like NATO. It had multiple languages in writing. As per the countries, the ONLY official languages were their own, so German in GDR, Polish in Poland, Bulgarian in Bulgaria, Hungarian in Hungary, Czech and Slovak in Czechoslovakia, Romanian in Romania, etc.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hitens4573 As well India SHOULD pay for its own infrastructure. Every nation should. The point was that the UK was the reason India ever got that infrastructure. When it was built, India had no means, resources, technology nor know-how to make these projects happen. You don’t get development out of a vacuum. Colonization has terrible repercussions, but ignoring the benefits is equally bad. Afghanistan was never colonized. India would have been equal to that today if it wasn’t for its history under Britain. Look at Macau/Hong Kong versus (real) China. Look at the Americas. They were all colonies.
Also, you have a very skewed perception of history. India DID NOT import much of anything it could make on its own from the UK. It only imported goods that wealthy Indians still wanted. India was also NOT a wealthy country right before colonization. That’s an absolute lie. India was a purely agrarian economy. Its exports were mostly via Europe, which is why the British colonized it so easily. Different factions within were constantly warring. In the early 1800s India was falling behind other nations because it was failing to industrialize. It had very vast natural resources, but failed to make use of them (a legacy it continues today).
You’re confusing the Indian wealth during the height of the Mughal Empire in the 16-17th centuries, which was vast, with its condition at the end of the Mughal empire in the early 19th century. By then, the Mughals lost control of most regions to the Sikhs, Marathas, Mysoreans, Nizams, Rajputs, Afghans, Jats, etc. and India lost most of its wealth through internal conflicts and a deterioration in trade. The Jats and Persians easily plundered all wealth from India. It was hundreds of years of foreign Islamic rule that actually destroyed India, not the British.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@automation7295 What exactly is your psychiatric diagnosis?
First off, ALL of North America is like that, from Mexico to Canada. Second, Europe isn’t superior. It’s just different, and if you knew the history of why, you wouldn’t talk at all. Europe is the way it is because it was developed under feudalism (compact, central towns where all live, and the fields they tended to outside of town). America was developed by Europeans wanting more space and freedom and built their homes on their fields, which was more convenient to farmers, with huge distances from house to house, and this no centralization.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@HingerlAlois Except Germany is nowhere near the limits of their allowed military strength, are they? Germany is also a heavily populated and wealthy nation, isn’t it? That’s why look at spending as a comparison to the GDP, don’t we? Germany’s defense spending by GDP is 1.3%.
The worldwide average spending is 2.2%. France, UK, Australia, Brazil, Canada (not to mention Saudi Arabia, USA, China, Israel, South Korea, Russia and India) all spend more.
1
-
1
-
@Aviation88 A KC-10 will routinely refuel other KC-10s, C-17s, B-1s, B-2s, B-52s, C-5s, VC-25/E-4s, etc. More importantly, a KC-135, which is significantly smaller than the KC-10 will does the same. Since the boom extends pretty far down, it’s usually not a big issue for most aircraft, except… the A-10. The Hogs always have issues refueling as they simply can’t fly fast enough and the vortices increase at lower speeds. As cool a weapon as they are, they’re always a PITA.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamessanders8895 No, YOU are incorrect. I spent 18 years in the Reserves and the National Guard. Learn not to speak when you’re ignorant.
National Guard units are activated for active duty, never part-time duty, by either the state (SAD) of federal (Title 10) governments. They DO NOT turn into Army or Air Force reserves. EVER! There is no process for it and all of our laws on the military expressly prohibit the federal government from taking away Guard units. They can only federalize them in time of need, and only on defined, limited basis.
Once under federal orders for active duty, the soldier or airman remain members of the National Guard and still belong to their home Guard unit, but are temporarily attached to other units or deploy as an entire Guard unit. They stay administratively and financially separate, ALWAYS. Even in basic and follow-on training, Guard units pay for their members’ training to the actual branches. The money comes out of their unit budgets. In return, the departments of the Army and Air Force transfer funds and equipment to State Divisions of Military and Naval Affairs or Military and Veterans Affairs, whatever each state decides to call them.
Again, Guard NEVER become federal reserves. Reserves are ENTIRELY separate things under separate commands and separate budgets. Reserves are covered by different policies and laws. For example, Army Reserves are not combat arms specialties, while Army National Guard can be. Reserves cannot enforce laws, but Guard members can. They receive different points and benefits too.
You are incorrect about the ownership of Guard units. They always have been and always will he owned by the states, but in return for some funding and equipment, may be appropriated by the federal government, TEMPORARILY. This is CLEARLY outlined in the National Defense Act of 1916. The Act expanded the President’s authority to mobilize the Guard during war or national emergencies here or for service in different parts of the world for the duration of the event that caused the mobilization. Previously, the 1908 Militia Act authorized the Guard’s use overseas and the 1903 Militia Act established the first National Guard. No law has ever stipulated that National Guards are owned by the federal government. In fact, that goes against the very mature of our Constitution and federal law!
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Paladin1873 You’re wrong on three points.
First, the National Guard, by the law that created it, IS a militia.
Second, the National Guard is PARTIALLY funded by the federal government. Its day-to-day operations, routine training and state missions are funded by the states.
Third, the National Guards are not a part of the DoD. They are represented at the DoD by National Guard Bureaus, but each state’s National Guards are part of their states, so not the DoD, the same way as State Guards are not part of the DoD. National Guard units and personnel come under the command of the DoD once federally activated, but they are not owned by them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gyver8448 Summary executions aren’t exclusive to Nazis, sorry. They have been happening for thousands of years before the Nazis ever existed, all around the globe. The issue with wars, especially such widespread wars, was that they were far too widespread to be able to have a proper justice system implemented for all involved. The strategy, following the Geneva Conventions is to hold the highest officers responsible, and not others. However, that simply didn’t hold water in the middle of the war, as often the lower officers and even low ranked enlisted committed atrocities out of their own will. The summary executions of military personnel happened all over. They were considered no different than being killed in combat, by all sides. The torture of prisoners and the imprisonment/execution of civilians was something else. Those things were never tolerated to any degree. As such, anyone who tortured those prisoners by keeping them without water, food and executing them, warranted summary executions, without a trial.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jongordon7914 Except you seem to lack basic IQ. Just because people before you are mispronouncing a word, doesn’t mean the followers of them are all of a sudden pronouncing it properly. Also, just because I watch YT videos doesn’t mean I get educated by them or reference them in collegiate discussions (I do not.) Your ad-hominem attacks when you run out of subject matter are noted, and sadly aren’t surprising.
The English language word “Dutch” comes from a mispronunciation of the German word “Deutsche”. FULL STOP. PERIOD.
The English dictionaries of the 1700s refer to “Dutch” as to “of the Netherlands”, after they became an independent state in 1648. It is only in the Americas that “Dutch” is used in references to Germans past that point, and even to today.
You should look up this thing called “etymology.” It’s a real science, not a YT video.
So to recap: Germans spoke Deutsche long before the unification of Germany and the English language word “Dutch” had already been used to refer to the Netherlands exclusively, except in the Americas, where people kept confusing “Deutsch” for “Dutch.” So while even in England “Dutch” stood for Netherlandish or German back up until the 1600s, after that it discerned between the Netherlands and German regions you “politely” call fiefdoms, even though the 1700s is FAR from feudalism.
Those are historical FACTS, contrary to your opinion.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
In think you, and most other people are a bit too… limited in knowledge to understand.
You think that Ukraine can either be a part of Russia proper, be a vassal state (partner/ally) or be completely independent. In reality, Russia didn’t want any of that.
What Russia was looking to do was to resurrect a USSR-type of arrangement, where Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, and others become a union, under the general leadership of Moscow and under the military protection of Moscow. The inly way to get there was for Belarus and Ukraine to voluntarily request such a state. It was already started between Putin and Lukashenko - The Union State. For this, Putin needed a leader in Ukraine who would play ball. That plan went to shit in February 2014 with the Maidan Revolution, so Putin put his Plan B into play - dissent of Donbas. That plan was a longer-term, strategic one. He hoped the dissent against Zelensky would spread, but instead, the country prospered financially, and people actually turned away from Russia. So what you see now is really Plan C. If this succeeds, Kazakhstan and others will fall in line, quietly. If it fails, Putin and his party are done for, likely to be replaced by even more hardline nationalists.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@CanalTremocos Again, EVs don’t impact the industry all that much. Their sales are still low, comparatively. To understand that, one must understand the statistics.
Global EV sales have reached about 18% of all cars (huge!), accounting for about 70% of cars in stock, but… about 60% of them were sold in China, 25% in Europe and 10% in the US. The rest of the world accounts for about 5% of EV sales. So lesson 1: there are only 3 markets.
While (by manufacturer) Tesla is the largest producer, it produces in the US, Europe, and China. Volkswagen produces in Europe, China and the US. Geely/Volvo/Polestar produced in… Europe, China and the US. I think you get lesson 2: EVs are being manufactured in their domestic markets.
By nation, China produces more EVs than the rest of the world, combined, but again, mostly for domestic use, so it doesn’t require any shipping use. That’s lesson 3: most EVs never get shipped.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FirstNameLastName-wt5to The warrant shows you that the search was lawful, PERIOD. Whether you like it or not, if a judge issues a warrant, it’s lawful. It’s not your decision, it’s the judge’s.
Also, if there is ever a trial, the affidavit WILL be released as a part of court documents. It’s not like it can stay sealed.
If you release the affidavit, you get the public seeing evidence before a trial, which isn’t fair to the accused, you get a tainted jury, which isn’t fair to anyone, and you give criminals a chance to suppress and tamper with witnesses.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What a great question! Absolutely, if you aren’t abusing the car/engine, use a good oil (synthetic) and filter then yes, extend those changes (after break-in).
Countless laboratory tests have shown no significant oil degradation even at 15k miles (full synth). In the end, oil cools and lubricates and if those chemical properties are still in tact, and the particulates are low (effect of a good filter), you don’t need to change it. That said, for the first 2 years/25k miles, I’d still do 5k in city or 10k hwy changes, full synthetic, because particulates shed off new engines like crazy during break-in. After that, bump them up. I’d go to 10k city/towing, 15k hwy changes.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@youreterriblemuriel5903 Trump had policies and agendas. That’s not the point. They clearly created agendas too big to push through and they’re themselves using criticism of individuals, not policies to win. The fact is that Biden has kept many policies instituted by Trump and when he fails to push ideas through Congress, he will blame it on McCarthy, McConnell, etc. He won’t blame it on the extremist liberal wing or his own party, nor on himself. He won’t say his proposal was too big. It’s typical politics. Lets face it, Biden’s sole election point was “I’m not Trump.”
As far as policies… I just looked up the DNC site and it has none either. Why? Committees don’t set policies. You’re being dishonest in this discourse. GOP policies are pretty clear. They want to eliminate illegal immigration, reduce federal government spending, increase states’ rights, decrease unemployment, strengthen the 2nd amendment, protect their religious views (abortion, LGBTQ+, etc.) and improve the trade conditions. The funny part is that the Democrats want to achieve some of the same goals. It’s how they want to do it that differs.
By the way, I belong to neither party and I’m certainly not a leader in either.
1
-
1
-
@Nomad22280 There have been many infrastructure bills presented, even during Trump’s time. This final build includes excessive spending (in my opinion) on purely political projects, like some Amtrak routes that no one will ever use, too much on startups and not enough on things like actual utilities, bridge repairs or mass transit. This is especially considering how much unrelated pork barrel was stuffed into the bill, stuff that has NOTHING to do with infrastructure. Of course we shouldn’t be surprised by this as both sides have been sneaking in a ton of things into large bills, but it is getting worse and worse. Also, if you want any real election reform you will need to amend the Constitution. not pass federal legislation, especially in a SCOTUS minority situation.
And yes, my stance on ignorance is very clear. I don’t tolerate, especially from trolls like you, which is why you’re now on MUTE.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The A-10 is not unique in being solely a subsonic air to ground attack aircraft. The AV-8 had always filled that role for the Maritime services. The Russian equivalent us the SU-25 Grach. All three were developed for the Cold War, traditional European plains war.
What’s lost on most people is called Air War College. What does that mean? They’re missing all of the strategic pieces. The A-10 is absolutely an efficient destroyer of enemy vehicles. That’s what it was designed to do. However, for it to operate you must first gain FULL air superiority. And by that I mean FULL. No enemy SAMs, no MANPADS, no AAA, no attack helicopters, and certainly no foreign fighters. That’s because the A-10 was designed with little protection against these things. It was literally designed as, but a tiny piece of a much larger puzzle that includes JTACs, fighter aircraft, AWACS, air refueling, etc. You remove even one piece of that puzzle and it becomes useless. Oh and by the way, its attack capabilities are greatly reduced by poor weather as it heavily relies on visual contact with the enemy.
The modern MQ-9, Bayraktar TB-2 or Wing Loong Prerodactyl II are more than capable of delivering precision payloads for CAS and with FAR longer loiter times and much better visual observation to boot.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@7aramkeda334 Yeah... you were LIED to. Service managers’ primary job is to sell you services. They’re not engineers or mechanics. They’re literally sales people.
Car manufacturers, decades ago, used to add heavy mineralized oil to speed up the break-in process by having light corrosives in the system. They would basically file down all the imperfections on surfaces. They were supposed to be left in the system, up to 3,000 miles, which is what recommended oil change intervals used to be. During that time, specific break-in protocols had to followed.
That stopped in the 80s and 90s. Today, machined parts are coated in a special lubricant upon assembly, and regular motor oil is added to the system. The machining of the parts is FAR better and the quantity and size of contaminating particulates far smaller. Manufacturers no longer ask for a break-in process because it’s no longer necessary. Just do the oil changes on time and use high quality oil and filters. Don’t skimp on them. Your first oil change at 10k miles will be perfectly good. If you want piece of mind, take an oil sample early and send it out for a test. It’s cheap and enlightening. https://www.blackstone-labs.com/?session-id=wtjb5y55hxmmh3mp3qbd2z45&timeout=20&bslauth&urlbase=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blackstone-labs.net%2FBstone%2F%28S%28wtjb5y55hxmmh3mp3qbd2z45%29%29%2F
Then do a test at 10k miles, right before an oil change. You’ll see how it really is. Don’t trust mechanics or sales reps. Trust science!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
So first off, FiatChrysler Automobiles or FCA (as the company is known) owns ZERO shares of Ford Motor Company. Second, Ford Motor Company owns ZERO shares of Mazda. Ford divested itself of any Mazda shares in 2015. FCA doesn't invest much into brands they don't own outright (such as Fiat, Iveco, Maserati, Lancia, Jeep, Chrysler, Dodge, and Alfa Romeo.) They do have some local agreements, partnerships and joint ventures, but nothing with the competition. Lastly, there is NOTHING that's even remotely similar in the Taurus and Mazda 3. Unless you consider that having steering wheels, pedals, stalks and screens makes them the same.
Please don't talk about things you clearly know nothing about.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rodneybooth4069 Dana makes frames to the manufacturers’ designs, not their own. Also, if it had been, it would have been a party to the class action suit “Brian Warner et al. v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc”, which it wasn’t. Toyota settled it and paid for the replacements. http://www.toyotaframesettlement.com/
The worst part is that Toyota denied all claims of this frame issue for about 15 years and then fought in court for two more until settling. That’s the real Toyota way.
My biggest issues aren’t design or manufacturing mistakes. Those happen to everyone. My issue is how the company deals with them. My other issue is that if you maintain your Toyota the way the company tells you to, it won’t see 100k on the odometer. My Rav4 Hybrid, according to the company, needs 10k oil changes, no transmission or differential fluid changes and its hybrid battery filter needs no checking or cleaning, though the cabin air filter certainly does. This all while the dealership techs say 5,000 oil changes, 50k diff and tranny fluid changes and constant hybrid battery filter cleaning. All are systems that are CRITICAL. That’s what Toyota is. They even gave their Tundras a sealed transmission. Tundras! They are 4x4 and tow! Did you know that Toyota cheated on EPA fuel economy tests and was caught back in the 1990’s and fined $180 million for not reporting emissions failures from 2005 to 2015? Apparently the Japanese employees knew, but ignored the issue.
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/amp35226937/toyota-fine-clean-air-act-violation/
I’m not implying others haven’t. Not at all. I’m saying Toyota’s just as bad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@marcoparada6652 you disagree with my "perception"? What exactly are you disagreeing with? I pointed out facts and your whole comment is about your feelings. I won't argue someone's feelings of what's fast enough or not fast enough, but I will argue that some things simply are or aren't fast enough for certain outcomes to happen. Physics are physics. When you accelerate, you either can do it fast enough to achieve the speeds of the traffic flow without getting into an accident or you cannot. Your feelings are irrelevant there. You also have to keep in mind that a 1/4 mile on-ramp may be perfectly sufficient to come to 70mph within the needed time, but an on-ramp of 100 feet may not be, and before you start saying those don't exist... they do. While I'm happy that your flat, open ND driving area and your personal driving preferences accommodate the Forester's 2.5 engine acceleration, you need to understand that my Hudson Valley, New York up/down hill driving with 50 foot on-ramps with stop signs at their beginnings require more power than that. You also have to understand that some people live on mountains, like in New Hampshire or Utah or Colorado, and they require MUCH more power for everyday driving because of oxygen depletion. Those are just facts, powered by physics.
Furthermore, you state, "I'll never consider a 4x4 or all time 4 wheel drive for my own car", but mention the "'12 Forester" you've driven for the "better part of 6 years." Umm... The Subaru Forester has a full-time AWD system. It NEVER sends power to just one axle. Both are ALWAYS engaged. Handling is a function of the suspension, steering system and tires. It is NOT a function of the AWD system. AWD simply gives you initial traction to get going and not get stuck in snow. It seems you don't know much about cars.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tamoroso The idea wasn’t Trump’s, but he has been, in the last 50 years, the only President to really push it, and it actually did work. This was before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but Russia’s invasion of 2014 was what brought that. There were other successes too. Actually, I hate to say it, but the wall on the Southern border did reduce the number if illegal migrants crossing in.
The issue of bigotry of all kinds only got “flushed out” for the very privileged few white men who enjoyed living in Eden’s Garden. Everyone else has been on the receiving end for centuries. Regardless, Biden has also kept many “America First” policies, immigration (including Title 42), the pullout from Afghanistan, etc. Biden even expanded the “remain in Mexico” program and the China trade policy was kept too.
Anyway, the real point was that Americans aren’t all that clueless, but rather cognizant of the fact that the US has fingers in every part of the world and the often conflicting interests make it impossible to satisfy everyone every day. That’s with the international policy anyway. With the domestic policy, Europe are the last ones who should concern themselves. The craziness going on in Italy, France, the UK, and in the EU in general is something they should be minding, not other nations’ drama laid out in tabloids.
I was in London last week and Trump, who isn’t the President or an official candidate, was talked about more than Johnson, which is typical distraction.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@quintrankid8045 Only 13 states have criminal libel laws that are actually enforced: Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, Montana, New Hampshire, and North Dakota. Yes, they’re all rural, Republican states and that’s no coincidence. The ACLU is working hard to have these laws repealed. Look up “Frese v. MacDonald” (2018). The argument of the ACLU in New Hampshire is the vagueness of the statute, not its intent or enforcement. As a whole, the intent isn’t considered to be unconstitutional.
However, many states have VERY specific statutes that would very rarely be used. For example, in Illinois someone can be prosecuted for publishing false and derogatory statements about a bank’s financial well-being. In Kentucky, their libel/slander statute protects only judges.
Apparently 10-20 cases a year are prosecuted for criminal defamation around the country. The general concept is that the defamation must be contrary to facts known to the offender and malicious in nature in order to be prosecuted.
1
-
1
-
@quintrankid8045 Actually, if you dig deeper, you’ll see that case wasn’t Mr Frese’s first offense under the statute, and he had a prior conviction from pleading guilty for same. The issue in New Hampshire, and they’re being sued by the ACLU, is that their statute isn’t specific enough. Nothing in the Constitution allows unfettered free speech. In fact, there are many types of restricted expression: fraud, obscenity, child pornography, incitement of lawless action, perjury, violation of intellectual property law, true threats, and commercial advertising. Defamation is also still a tort, which has to withstand the test of Constitutionality (and has). So the issue is not of it as a general legal matter, but rather of overly broad application through statute wording. That application and wording may be viewed as an overall encroachment onto protected free speech.
In Gertz v Robert Welch, Inc. (1974) the Supreme Court has said that “there is no Constitutional value in false statements of fact.” The SCOTUS has established four specific areas where free speech is not protected:
First, when false statements of fact are said with a “sufficiently culpable mental state”. This can be persecuted by civil or criminal means. Second, knowingly making a false statement can be punished (this is where defamation falls). Third, negligent false statements of fact may be torts. And lastly, some implicit statements of fact, with a false factual connotation, can also fall under the torts category.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The term, “reasonable” is actually an amazing term, in law. It infers that reason must be used to convict someone, and by multiple people and stages of the legal process. Law enforcement must first consider what is reasonable, given the specific conditions, and be able to express that reasoning to a judge or jury, while the judge and/or jury also have to apply their own judgement to see if it was reasonable.
Standard measures are simply too inapplicable and capricious for most situations. Was that 200 feet in the fog? Are you even able to do it in 200 feet? Ridiculous.
You sewing doubt in the US judicial system is a pure act of anarchism, which is ultimately your goal anyway. It is predicated on an assumption that most cops out there are just in it to nail every motorist. Of course that’s how you make money, off conspiracy theorists and fear-mongering, so I get it.
Folks, the reality of law is that it is a judgement… of a person or a group of people. It is not some arbitrary, black/white thing that little children need. It is open to conjecture, debate and unique circumstances. That is why laws are written vaguely and why law enforcement officials have broad latitude. You cannot write a law for every single possible situation that can or could ever happen in the world. So you need laws that are adaptable and that can use reasoning to be applied. Laws don’t exist so you would comply. Laws exist so that you are protected from others. If a reasonable person concludes your actions were unsafe, they likely were. Do better next time.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@romancewiththepast7979 Without knowing what was actually happening, said or known, you’re simply making wild assumptions. What we know is that investigations were actually conducted and those officers weren’t charged with anything, or even fired. That means that there was a legitimate reason to do that, even if that reason is unknown to you. You can concede that you don’t know everything, can’t you? They did charge one cop for aiding the rioters afterwards, so that shows the investigations were done, and that the DOJ is willing to charge officers fir even the lightest assistance, as the one who was charged was charged for making social media comments, and not even physical help. Stop assuming or conjuring up conspiracies. You have NO clue of what goes on in the background. You don’t know who the people were, where they went, why, what happened to them, what the reasons for her opening the gate was or what her supervisors ordered. Stop the Qanon bullshit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
asatrv You’re wrong. First, under German law, there would be no charges (as under any nation’s) for leaving the scene, as long as the ambulance was on an emergency. Second, assault charges would indeed stick, under Notwehr, because: 1. There was no attack to defend from and 2. You would be doing the damage to another human by your assault. Notwehr allows any reasonable defense against an *unlawful attack*, if there was no other possibility of defense. Neither condition was met in this instance.
While S. Korea’s law allows for self defense (or defense of another), the law stipulates that if your defense causes injuries that take longer than three weeks to heal, your actions were excessive. The law also states that you should not exert a greater force than the one inflicted on you. In this case, there is none.
Sorry, but it’s clear you’re not a lawyer in any country.
http://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.amp.asp?newsIdx=242213
http://m.koreaherald.com/amp/view.php?ud=20121203000521
By the way, common law and statutory laws exist side-by-side. Precedent does not replace written statutes. Modern common law is not what Germany once had (Gemeines Recht). The real difference is whether or not prior precedent is taken into account. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that.
1
-
1
-
asatrv “There is no self-defense for self-defense”. Please understand that concept yourself. The ambulance hit the car, then tried to take off. The driver was blocking it from leaving in defense of his own property, which was subject to a possibly criminal act and he certainly had the right to stop them to collect information, in the least.
2. My best friend is a prosecutor. They bring up all kinds of charges, hoping something will stick. That doesn’t mean they meet the legal standard of the court. That’s the point of having a trial, isn’t it?
3. You are allowed to use force, but only reasonable force as long as there is force being applied to you, and no, fear of future attack does not constitute a reason. Considering that there are many things you can do short of knocking a man out, possibly causing death yourself, it would not be considered a legal defense in THIS case, even in Germany. As a defense attorney I would expect you to attempt it as a defense, but any reasonable judge would not honor that.
Perhaps trying to move the person first? Calling the police? Calling another ambulance? Try to drive around the man? All mitigate the harm upon the patient. All prevent the so called “attack” you allude to.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jjww30 When something is unequivocally proven it is called a FACT, not a theory. You need to grasp that concept.
A theory doesn’t need to be proven to be a theory. Most aren’t. What makes something a theory versus a hypothesis is supporting evidence. Hypotheses are ideas, thoughts. Hypotheses are not supported by any evidence. Once some evidentiary support for a hypothesis exists, it becomes a theory. Once you have enough evidence for it to be evident (through the scientific method), it becomes a scientific fact.
You think you’re the best-educated person here… I assure you, given your arguments and suppositions, that you are far from that, especially in physical sciences.
The scientific method dictates this:
Hypothesis -> Theory -> Fact/Fallacy
There is, at this time, more than sufficient evidence for the hypothesis of this mass extinction event for it to be a theory. It is actually the leading theory among many, and for quite a while. Evidence from multiple disciplines supports this (geology, biology, paleontology, oceanography, physics and chemistry to start).
In fact, once the data from this latest finding is verified by peers and published, it will likely make this a scientific fact.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It factually isn’t a problem. All nations capable of spying on others, do so. “Spying” is a misunderstood word. This is actually intelligence gathering. A nation is required to gather as much information on what goes on as they can, for the benefit of their country and citizens. This goes for info on all nations, not just adversaries. Governments keep info from each other, even when in an alliance. Leaders don’t always tell the full truth to each other (shocker, I know). Finding out intent of foreign leaders on foreign and economic policies allows you to prepare your own country in advance.
All that said, the UK, France, Israel, Canada, etc. all spy on the US as well.
All of this hyperbolic guessing does no one any good except it makes money for Youtube and the poster.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is just an advertisement for this rail company.
The fact is that there is already an existing, robust commuter rail system in South Florida that connects Miami, Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach. It’s called Tri-Rail and it runs parallel to Brightline, makes mores useful stops including airports and costs far less than Brightline. Because of this, Brightline has been discounting their tickets to meet the investors’ estimates for ridership. In fact, regular coach tickets are sold as “buy one, get three free”. That artificially elevates ridership numbers as numbers of tickets sold far exceed actual bodies on the train, and obviously exceeds revenue collected. This line is trying to he a commuter train AND an intercity train, but it’s going to fail at both. To be a commuter train you need many stops, which cost time. You need to be inexpensive and sell weekly/monthly passes. You need yo serve commuter hubs. This train does none of those things. To be a good intercity train it needs few stops at key cities, and serve large population points without a fast and convenient connection. However, South Florida residents are already well connected by car, bus and air and Miami, Orlando, Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach are just too small and too spread out. There’s a reason why these metro centers are called by County and not city names. Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties are large in population, but those cities aren’t. Orlando is more of a tourist destination than somewhere Floridians go to. It also has the busiest airport in Florida (yes, busier than MIA or FLL). Tourists that go to the theme parks in Orlando and tourists who go to Miami Beach are different tourists and those two vacations are very different.
Brightline is just an exercise in spending the billions of dollars the federal government made available to railroad developers under the Obama administration. They’re actually funding real estate purchases with money intended for infrastructure projects. That’s what Brightline is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamietung8233 That’s a bit off. The revolution happened in February of 1917 in St Petersburg. It was led by Lenin, a Russian man, and fought by Russians. Eastern Ukraine was a part of Russia at the time. Bolsheviks (Communists) had been rising all over the region for decades. The Western part was under the Austro-Hungarian empire. You probably know that in WW1, those two forces were opposing. After a successful offensive by the Russians in Eastern Ukraine, Volhynia and eastern Galicia were ceded to Russia. When the revolution (the first one) happened, the socialists of Ukraine decided to demand autonomy from Russia and a Ukranian republic was created, with very close ties to the new Russian provisional government that replaced the Czar, but wasn’t Communist. Then Russia suffered major losses in the war and lost a lot of soldiers and territory, fast. This led to hunger among the people and a total dissolution of the armed forces. This led to the October revolution (Communism). In Kiev, an uprising took place against the Communists and the Central Council took control from the Russians. This led to the Bolsheviks to declare a separate country, loyal to Russia and Communism called the Ukranian People’s Republic (vs Ukraine) and its capital in Kharkov. This is similar to Korea today.
A war between them broke out immediately. The Central Rada (Council) declared independence of Ukraine on January 22, 1918, but the new USSR government refused to recognize it. A month later, the Bolsheviks took most of Ukraine, forcing the Central Rada government to turn to Germans and Austrians (opposing side of WW2) for help. The Axis powers were able to clear the Russians out of Kiev quickly and Russia withdrew from WW1 on March 1st. The Central Rada’s Army was then able to clear the Bolsheviks (Red Army of the USSR) out of Crimea and Kharkov.
When the Central Powers were defeated in 1918, the pro-Western government left with the Germans and the local socialists easily overthrew the rest of the government. Moscow immediately annulled their treaty and by 1919, the Red Army overran most of Ukraine, even the far Western section in Lviv which was about half Polish ethnically. There were many counter movements in Ukraine and it wasn’t until 2021 that the USSR Red Army finally defeated all opposing forces in all of Ukraine, up to the Polish border, and made it a Soviet Republic.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KalifUmestoKalifa Your “logic” makes ZERO sense?
1. No, my dates aren’t off, mostly because they’re not my dates, they’re history’s dates. If you have something to the contrary, other dates, you should have posted them.
1. What difference does where a language was established makes? It only matters where it’s actually used. You say it was established “far away”, but without stating where or how far (very convenient.)
3. Southern Slavic languages come from the modern day Serbian/North Macedonian region, not Greece. You’re confusing a very rarely used Old Church Slavonic, which originally came from a tiny Byzantine Slavic population to whom Cyril belonged. This was the written language that was spread by the Orthodox church. It has NOTHING to do with spoken Russian. “As the oldest attested Slavic language, OCS provides important evidence for the features of Proto-Slavic, the reconstructed common ancestor of all Slavic languages.” - Wiki article on Old Church Slavonic.
So again, everything you’re posting is either ignorant or supports my claim, not yours. So please, keep posting!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ZipplyZane Again, it is NOT in the Constitution and courts’ interpretations in US Supreme Court rulings extend certain very specific protections that they believe may apply, but as the overturning of the Roe v Wade decision has proved, those rulings don’t actually provide any concrete protections.
The Fourteenth Amendment abolished slavery and grants equal protection under the law, but it does not require laws to be written to give equal rights. This is how, for example, despite the 14th Amendment having been ratified in 1868, women could not vote until the 19th Amendment was passed in 1920, legal race segregation existed until 1968, and marriage wasn’t available to gay people until 2015. In fact, MOST civil rights protections that exist in the US today came into existence since 1968, and by codification, not the Constitution. That’s literally over 100 years after the 14th. Amendment was passed.
Stop yapping. You have NO clue of what you’re talking about. You didn’t learn ANYTHING in high school.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Keegan [GoatLord] Why? Because Estonia is an independent country and NATO won’t come to its defense for just any reason. Furthermore, it wouldn’t be able to do it quickly enough for the Estonian military to hold. Lets face it, if Russia invaded, Estonia would have to surrender in hours to avoid massive loss of life. They might get rescued by NATO later, but first they’d have to surrender. It’s the only sensible action. Their military would be a simple speed bump.
You clearly didn’t serve, don’t know actual invasion scenarios, and don’t know the political reality of NATO either. Turkey is a NATO country and it actually fights against Greece (another NATO country) constantly, and attacks other NATO interests constantly.
Most of NATO alliance countries are solely there as a political entity. They have no capability to defend themselves, right along others. They are in the alliance to allow US, German, and British troops to protect them, to a degree, in return for financial help, training and give up locations for those countries to build strategic air/space defense stations. It’s also there to put political pressure on Russia.
Example: Northern Macedonia has just 8,000 active military with 5,000 reservists. They couldn’t protect their borders with that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@r.gronkowski856 You’re spreading NOTHING, but conspiracies. The Federal Reserve controls the supply of our currency. If a country does dump it, which is incredibly improbable, if not impossible, it wouldn’t literally dump cash notes on a street. It would SELL debt notes. That could, short-term, reduce the value of the dollar, but all the Fed would do then is just reduce the circulating cash notes and that would drive the price of the dollar back up. Go study economic policy, please.,
Also, inflation is crazy LITERALLY everywhere, in EVERY country on the planet and it’d because manufacturing is down everywhere, creating a lack of supply of products, which drives speculators.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I read a lot of these comments and NONE are coming from knowledgeable Air Force maintainers or logisticians.
The reality is that no, the F-16 doesn’t require all those man hours to generate sorties. That’s just what the US uses because we have the personnel and it increases safety and long-term reliability. We have different airmen specifically trained to arm/disarm aircraft, fuel/de-fuel, crew chiefs, avionics, structures, hydraulics, etc. and they all do major maintenance as well as mission generation. The tale of a Gripen needing just one crew chief and a few untrained airmen is absolutely misleading. They still need to do proper maintenance every few flights and untrained people have NO idea of what they’re doing. That’s all just a sales pitch to developing nations - the primary users of the Gripen. Also, not a single Gripen has ever been used in any combat. They’re completely unproven.
I’ll be honest, a C Gripen may be better than a Block 15 Viper, but a Block 52 will annihilate it all day, every day, in both, air-to-air and air-to-ground missions. I don’t even want to go into the Wild Weasel capabilities, which the Gripen simply doesn’t have and Ukraine desperately needs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamesreisenauer1778 First off, it doesn’t keep its members from integrating in the local community. Most airmen and other personnel assigned to Ramstein live in the towns around it. The products sold at the Base Exchange at Ramstein are very often local. The fuel and supplies are local. There are actually whole cities that have grown just on US service members being there. The mist famous one is Kaiserslautern in Rhineland-Palatinate. It’s a city if 100,000 native residents and about 45,000 NATO personnel, which contribute about $1 billion USD a year to the German economy.
As per Afghanistan… I don’t even know where to start with you. You’re INCREDIBLY ignorant on the subject. The North of Afghanistan is the MOST friendly area to the US and the West in general out of the whole country. The North is held by Pashtun and Uzbek tribes that paired with the US to topple the Taliban. The Northern AOR (RC-N) was divided between Germany, Hungary, Norway, and Sweden to patrol because it had very friendly populations. The toughest areas were the East and Southeast, which were almost completely American responsibility, with assistance from France, Denmark, Australia and Georgia. Why do I know this? I spent an entire deployment in working C-17 operations out of Bagram AB and three years working out of Ramstein AB. Why was Germany there? That’s simple. The US invoked the NATO Article 5 after 9/11. This created the ISAF mission to eradicate Al Qaeda and Taliban that supported it. All of NATO was involved. The fact thar you don’t know this demonstrates just how ignorant you are about events of just 22 years ago (or thar you are a simple internet troll).
The events at Chernobyl and Fukushima were great examples of mismanagement at power stations, but the safety record of the world’s nuclear power stations is incredible. There are 440 nuclear power reactors in the world, in 32 countries, plus Taiwan. They provide about 10% of the world’s electricity. If German plants were old, the solution to that is to build modern ones. Modern plants are small, clean, and incredibly safe. Instead, Germany chose the easy way out - buy fossil fuels from Russia.
Germany wants to LOOK like they’re using clean energy, but in reality simply increased their fossil fuel expenditures.
Fossil fuel pollution has NOT increased in Russia or in the US. In fact, it has decreased, as both have switched to cleaner coal, natural gas and renewable energy production, including wind and solar. Russia was never a large CO2 producer. It relies mostly on hydro power for electricity. Most of its coal and oil were, and are, for export.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ramadamming8498 I think your confusion comes from not understanding how DNA relates to history. DNA is sampled today, not 1000 years ago. DNA from people in Ulster would have been different 1000 years ago than it is today.
Southern Irish DNA does not have Czech, Swiss or Austrian DNA. It has more bits of Belgian, Dutch, Welsh, and French DNA than Northern Irish DNA does, which has more bits of Norwegian, Scottish, English and Danish ancestry. But that’s today, not 1000 years ago. Back then the DNA samples would have been much more specific to local populations due to their remoteness and frankly, a lack of DNA variety. There are generally 7 broad groups of Irish DNA ancestry. Central Ireland (Connacht and Leinster) have lots of commonality with Wales and Western England. Ulster shows strong DNA commonality with Scottish lowlands, but again, this is because of the last 900 years.
The TRUE Irish DNA, the Gaels, was established around 3500 years ago and then changed by migrating Vikings, Normans, and the Plantations. But if you know the island’s history you’ll know that those groups settled mostly along the coasts and mostly in the East. That’s why you see less and less Western European haplogroups as you test farther West and specifically North-West. So the Ulster and Leinster populations were affected the most by this diversity, while Munster and Connacht, the least (especially the latter).
1
-
1
-
@ramadamming8498 The Norse impact was large at the time, but has been watered down by the impact of the British. The same is true of Normans. There are still many Irish surnames of Norse origin like Arthur, Bligh, Harold, Toner, Reynolds, O’Hever, Sugrue, Godfrey, Jennings, and many others. Most of the largest Irish cities were established by the Norse: Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Wexford and Waterford. In fact, the Norse really controlled the Uí Néill until Brian Boru. In fact, he was killed by the Norse-Dublin and Leinstermen in the Battle of Clontarf.
The Vikings had their impact on Eastern Britain as well, especially Scotland.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
People are asking why this was done. You should ask why this was done in Miami, in a public housing complex, to minority voters.
Florida has closed primary elections, which means that only members of the party can vote for their candidate: Democrats choose their democratic candidate for the general election, Republicans choose theirs. You cannot vote for anyone outside your party.
What this accomplishes for the GOP is disqualification of established, Democrat minority voters from the Democratic primaries. When they show up, they will not be able to select their candidate, who is likely to be a minority. This is a voter suppression tactic. It IS racist. The LatinX vote in Florida is a huge battle, with most Cuban-Americans and Venezuelan-Americans siding with the GOP, but others with the Democrats. With a large influx of Central and South Americans, the GOP is seeing that balance starting to flip Blue, so they are desperate.,
The idea is to get these people not to vote in the Democratic primaries, so not push through a hispanic Democratic candidate that can take on Marco Rubio.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
He’s not wrong. In large, unionized department things are done in a pretty consistent way, barring mistakes. In a case like this, the CO of the arresting department calls his CO in the morning and the CO of the arrested officer starts “paper”work. I use quotation marks because it’s computerized, of course. That triggers a paid suspension pending departmental review. The CO calls the cop to come in, takes his badge and gun, provides union rep info and that’s it. The internal affairs and higher ups at HQ take over. The officer may be told to stay home or be placed on modified duty (paperwork or watching CCTV all day”, while IA looks over charging paperwork and eventually the case disposition. If the crime is serious (a felony or violent), the officer may be moved to unpaid suspension. Once a conviction comes in, he is automatically placed on unpaid suspension either way, and pending any departmental hearings and appeals he/she stays there until they are processed out/terminated.
Those are all processes required by the contract. However, the reality is that there is irrefutable proof of misuse of a department vehicle, reckless driving (in FL) and at least an initial refusal for a breathalyzer. Each of those is an offense for which you can be terminated. Together, even without a conviction, they’re more than enough to terminate. Even if his blood test came back .000 BAC, he’ll still be fired. This isn’t the 1980’s anymore.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
EcSight Games I say “IF” precisely because that happens quite a often. Many startups build the infrastructure and release a ton of press to attract further needed investments and drive evaluations up, but when they don’t get enough, they fold. Yes, BMWs engines are horrific. Land Rover owners know this all too well. If JLR cars are your benchmark for reliability, then this manufacturer will hit the mark well.
As far as the pricing goes... Here, read this article, and pay special attention to the very bottom of it: https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/amp/car-news/first-official-pictures/ineos-projekt-grenadier-an-old-school-4x4-off-roader-for-2020/
The old 110 sold for mid-upper 30s, so this thing... My guess is that the starting price will be around £43k and a well-equipped one will be around £50k.
And then there’s another possible snag... while the final assembly will be in Wales, for PR’s sake, the ENTIRE car will actually be manufactured, and even painted in the EU. I don’t know if you’ve heard of the whole Brexit thing, but that may be a big issue as well.
1
-
EcSight Games While that’s true, they’ve also said that a long wheel base 4-door model will be the first one, followed by a 4-door pickup, so 110 and 130 competitors, so lets use those prices for fairness. I can’t find any of your claimed quotes, but I linked a quote relating to pricing from one of their executives. He said they can’t sell them as cheaply, and it makes lots of sense. It’s a small production factory of a brand with ZERO recognition, so very limited. It will need to be profitable right off the start to continue to produce and since it’s a modern vehicle with modern emissions and safety requirements, it will be significantly more expensive to produce. Then there’s a whole issue of a non-existent dealer network that will want to make back their investments into infrastructure. My guess is that the first model will actually sell for closer to £80k and will never see any dirt. Footballers and their wives will be collecting them in their Cheshire mansions.
As far as the main company having money... that’s not how businesses work. The books are kept separately. Investors frown upon mixing revenues and expenses between different industries. The main company is a chemicals manufacturer and has nothing in common with automobile manufacturing. They will not move the funds around.
Ineos is comprised of over 20 separate businesses, each with its own board, budget and Ineos Automotive, Ltd id just one of them. These are basically independent businesses under one umbrella.
Meanwhile Ratcliffe and the other two owners are moving to Monaco, they’re shutting down a plant in England, with hundreds of jobs lost, and the car is even supposed to be designed in Germany. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/09/britains-richest-man-to-leave-uk-for-tax-free-monaco
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hughgrection3052 The central core in a TBX is a high explosive and the external secondary charge is the outside, which is a fuel-rich formulation. There is first an anaerobic explosion of the inner core, then a delayed outer charge aerobic detonation of the dispersed fuel mixture.
The resulting explosive effect is considerably weaker than a conventional explosive like RDX, but it diffuses and delivers an extreme high heat blast. So, the percussive wave blast is a lot smaller, but the fireball superheats the surrounding area, and if you are in a confined space, even a large one, the intense fire eats up all of the oxygen in the space within a second and you die not from the blast, but from the abrupt atmospheric pressure (superheating gasses), followed by abrupt gas expansion due to rapid oxidation and loss of atmospheric pressure. If you are very far from the explosion and in a sealed space you could theoretically die from suffocation as well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sher's Fords and Others So lets not bullshit here.
The Civic Base/LX Sedan (2.0L) is rated 30mpg city/33 combined/38 hwy. The Jetta is rated 30mpg city/35mpg combined/40mpg hwy. However, Car and Driver tested it and got 43mpg highway on the Jetta with auto, 48mpg on the Jetta manual. https://www.caranddriver.com/volkswagen/jetta
The Civic LX sedan has 158hp and 138 lb-ft of torque and its 0-60 time is 8.2 seconds (Car and Driver test). The Jetta’s 1.4T produces 147hp and 184 lb-ft of torque with a 0-60 time of 7.6 seconds (0.6 seconds FASTER than the Civic).
So to recap, the Civic LX sedan has a little more horsepower, a LOT less torque, is .6 seconds slower and gets worse fuel economy than the Jetta. To get the better (still not better than the Jetta) fuel economy you have to pony up to the EX or higher, which gets the 1.5T. That 1.5T is also more powerful, at 174hp/162 lb-ft of torque (still less than the Jetta) and clocks in at 6.8 seconds.That trim starts at $23,800. The Jetta starts at $18,895. That’s an almost $5,000 difference.
The important part of the acceleration curve is that the Jetta will actually be faster at 0-30 than the Civic as the Civic 1.5T’s torque is lower and that peak horsepower comes in at the crazy 6,000rpms that no one will drive at. The Jetta’s torque peaks at around 1,300rpm and stays there until 4,000rpm. https://www.motorbiscuit.com/a-new-engine-shows-that-vws-turbo-power-is-better-than-ever/
The Civic’s peak torque starts at 1,900rpms and stays until 5,000rpms. So to utilize the most of it, you’d have to rev that engine high, destroying the fuel economy.
So unless you’re full on racing, the Jetta is the winner.
#factsmatter
1
-
1
-
1
-
@vyli1 I think you’re missing the internal political climate of Russia. If Ukraine manages to push Russia back to its original border, especially if it manages to re-take Crimea, Putin will not only be embarrassed, but will lose ALL support within his party, the Duma as a whole, his governors and the people. It will be the biggest national embarrassment in Russia’s history. Putin will not remain in power in that case. He may choose to off himself, to flee into exile or he may be arrested as a national traitor, but he will not remain President. When Putin call things “existential” for Russia what he really means is they are existential for him personally, and Medvedev, Shoigu, Peskov, etc.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MU-rx1tc The conversation is about legal process, not degrees, am I wrong? Please give me some time stamps of observed improper behavior on the judge and why it was improper. Please use concepts of legal practice in your arguments. From my experience in court rooms, the practice of a judge instructing jurors on hearsay is not just appropriate, but necessary to a fair trial. It’s not something a layman would necessarily know and we know that hearsay evidence is complex, even for those in the legal profession, being that it’s generally inadmissible in court. A jury has to understand that what someone thinks another person has said, felt or heard is not admissible as a statement of fact. Not in a courtroom.
In this instance, a third party video was being submitted as evidence. The video included brief remarks by the defendant, which are, of course, admissible and not hearsay, but the rest of the video was an editorial montage by a third party, containing a monologue and opinions of the video editor. The judge admonished the jury on the concepts of hearsay and what is and isn’t admissible, and yes, used a well-known example of a trial in ancient Rome, where the legal concept of hearsay comes from.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sybrand Botes First off, Canadian laws allow this type of searches and seizures (it’s in the video). Second, a lawyer, knowing that law, should not have kept that information on his devices, if he knew it was sensitive. There are ways to email, transfer or carry files on a zip drive or the like, without having them on a laptop or smart phone. Furthermore, the specific files could have been encrypted, allowing him to open his devices for the customs, while keeping specific sensitive files secure.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
First off, GM used to own Opel and sold it to PSA just a couple of years ago. The reason why some Opels are sold under the Buick brand in the United States is because that as an agreement as part of the sale. GM invested into those models' developments. Once they are updated, they won't be sold under a GM brand anymore. So, no, there's no PSA brand to sell them under in the United States as no other PSA brands are sold here. Furthermore, each model would need to comply with US safety standards, which are different than anywhere else. They'd also have to meet US emissions standards, which are also different. All of that would require special development and investment with a belief that the car would sell enough to make a profit. Considering the lack of brand awareness, trust in French reliability (when that trust isn't even there in Europe), an already loaded market and the difficulties of establishing dealership and distribution networks all mean that there's almost no chance that PSA will bring anything here anytime soon. If anything, Fiat is proving just how hard that is and Fiat actually has lots of support from the Chrysler side. PSA's brands are all very European and its focus is on that market.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ryan… you’re wrong on the Iran pronunciation thing, buddy. It has NOTHING to do with your accent either. You just learned to pronounce it wrong. In every word in English that starts with an I, the letter is pronounced as “ee”. Example: information, indigo, irrelevant, input, etc.
Iran is a proper name. It should be pronounced as intended. We don’t call you Reeean, even after you correct us, and blame it on an accent. It’s a simple matter of proper reading and respect. Passaic Co here, btw.
After all, there’s no “Eyendia” or “Eyesrael”, right?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jonaswladimir6889 No one was talking about democracy. Are you developmentally challenged? I claimed that EU nations aren’t really neutral because if one EU state is attacked, all other EU countries would have to defend it as it’s an attack on the EU itself, not just one member. It would fall apart if it didn’t. That means Sweden, Finland and Ireland, despite being non-NATO, despite being “neutral”, would still have to defend a country like Estonia, Poland or Romania, if they’re attacked.
The issue is that EU nations would stand to lose far more without the US, Canada, Norway and Turkey (non-EU NATO members) involvement.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MeBallerman NONE of that was true. While the US did send trucks and jeeps, the Katyushas were originally mounted on GAZ chassis. Also, the US sent massive amounts of fighter planes until the USSR started building them by license, and a crazy amount of food. All Russians grew up knowing what canned corned beef, pork and condensed milk were because of the US.
As far as mobility is concerned, all armies at the time used horses extensively, but Germany was almost entirely motorized, compared to the USSR. Between bicycles, motorcycles, cars, vans, trucks, half-tracks and heavy, tracked vehicles, this was how Germany waged Blitzkrieg - fast, large maneuvers. Most Soviet Union infantry units still used horses and carts to get around.
1
-
@MeBallerman Again, you’re completely misinformed. Where did you get all that from?
You’re confusing infantry elements for the entire army and not understanding how the German logistics system worked. In early WW2, Germans indeed used horses heavily. Horses were plentiful, traditional and cheap. It was also central Europe. During blitzkrieg, Germany lost almost all of its horses in infantry battalions and gave up on cavalry recon. They instead used captured Soviet, Polish and Romanian trucks. Germany also employed horses as a “last mile” supply system between the rail lines and active units, something that could not be done in Russia. As I’ve said, all players in WW2 used horses extensively, not just the Germans. The USSR lost 11 million horses in the German advance in 1941-1942 alone. The Red Army employed FAR more combat cavalry than the Germans. A standard Russian rifle division had about 14-15 thousand men and 3-4 thousand horses. Now, that’s about half of a German infantry division’s hose count, but… the German army was far more dependent on their elite mechanized and panzer divisions during the initial months of the Soviet invasion.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rocketman1058 To be fair, what started WW2 for the West was Britain and France declaring war on Germany in response to its invasion of Poland. They did not declare war on the USSR for its involvement in invading Eastern Poland or Estonia, Latvia and Romania (today’s Moldova). One could also remind everyone that Poland was occupying Western Ukraine, Lithuania, part of Romania and Belarus until that point, as a remnant of the Austro-Hungarian empire (the Hapsburgs). i don’t know if I’d call that revisionism. Is a non-invasion pact the same as starting a war? Finland, Sweden and Norway had non-invasion pacts in place too. Every neutral nation does.
While the invasion of Finland was a real “war machine” act for sure, it really isn’t considered to be a part of WW2 at all. As for the others, there really was no military invasion because those areas were already aiming at communism, and many saw it as a liberation from Poland, not realizing that the USSR wouldn’t give them independence.
Every nation on earth calls itself the “good guy”.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RubenDReyna FACT: in 2020 only 10 states sent out ballots automatically and only to registered voters.
States that allow elections by mail: Florida, Alaska, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico… are you getting the pattern? Idaho, Minnesota, Utah, and others. You’re not getting the pattern? They’re hardcore RED states! They all allow voting by mail and for many, many years!
Voting by mail isn’t fraudulent, you moron! As ling as it’s a US citizen voting only once in their precinct there us NOTHING wrong or unlawful about ANY of it! Sure, you don’t like it. You’re old and can’t deal with anything. It’s been going on for DECADES! No issues!
YOU are the problem with elections and democracy! Not processes… YOU!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Deano TheSaxman I comment in things I know, not things I wish I knew, unlike you. You’re making a hefty (and stupid) claim. Do you have concrete evidence of the FAA’s lack of expertise? No, you do not.
The reason why the FAA (and Canadian, European, British, Chinese, UAE and many other authorities) allow Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, and Aerospatiale and others to self-certify in SOME aspects of development and certification is not because of a lack of expertise, but because it’s simply impossible to check, verify and certify every single tiny component, down to each wire and screw. It’s IMPOSSIBLE. So major systems, as they get developed, are scrutinized, but basic and carry-over items are not. It’s understood that all sides are building for safety. Why? Every time there is a crash, it becomes clear why: bad PR = bad sales. Now stop running your stupid mouth.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@obinator9065 That’s FALSE.
From DefenseNews on September 12 of this year (look it up): “WASHINGTON — The German government will work to ease its restrictive export policy when pursuing joint weapon programs with European partners, German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht said on Monday.
The pledge follows a provision in the governing coalition’s charter, approved last year, that envisions a complete revamp of Berlin’s bureaucracy, famous for its secrecy and, as critics would argue, the appearance of political doublespeak on sales to problematic regimes like Saudi Arabia.
Speaking at the German Council on Foreign Relations in Berlin, Lambrecht argued Germany “owes” to its European partners a guarantee it will refrain from derailing exports of jointly developed weapons those countries need to offset their initial investments. “We make cooperation hard because we insist on special provisions and veto power,” Lambrecht said.
If countries like France, Italy or Spain see no problem with giving arms to a given country, Germany won’t invoke its “values caveats” and hold up sales, she added. “We’re not talking about delivering to rogue states,” Lambrecht clarified.
Arms exports have been an evergreen topic in Berlin policy circles, as the issue combines thorny questions on military and morality for which no muscle memory exists in modern Germany.
The country’s cabinet agency devoted to economic affairs has the lead for arms exports, combining input from the Defense and Foreign Affairs departments.
The trinational Future Combat Air System of Germany, France and Spain — now hindered by work-share disagreements among key industry players Dassault and Airbus Defence and Space — almost died some years ago because of export disagreements. French officials were pushing against a German veto caveat for eventual exports of the aerial weapon, going so far as to threaten abandoning the project over the disagreement.
In the end, officials decided to table the issue, as Germany instituted a policy of approving exports by default if components included few Teutonic contributions.
It remains to be seen how Lambrecht and Chancellor Olaf Scholz can wrangle their party, the Social Democrats, as well as the Greens into a compromise. Both parties have vocal opponents to loosening arms export controls.
According to Lambrecht, finding a more permissive policy could give a needed push to European Union defense-related development programs.”
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Despite Trump’s language and ridiculousness, I don’t know what you’re trying to accomplish with your own ridiculousness.
1. He is trying to portray a general condition (in his mind), not relay data. That’s his role in this (again, in his kind). He gets the experts to relay the data and he tries to relay his views. You can cling onto it how you want, but that’s politics, not facts.
2. The US having 1/3 of the positive cases in the world isn’t a function of us testing less. We have done more testing, actual and per capita. New York State alone is doing 40k tests per day. In fact, you can say that with more tests you will record more positive (and negative) results than you will with less tests.
3. Both South Korea and China started testing very quickly and are both in a condition of actual war, with little concept of democracy or civil rights. Vietnam too. When it comes to a pandemic, democracy is an enemy. That’s why the UK, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, etc. all democratic countries, have high rates and Cuba, S. Korea, China and Vietnam do not.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ericfitzpatrick5319 First off, no one ran into a station. The guy called. Also, he had little to no information to go on. It’s not that they didn’t take him seriously, but rather that he didn’t stay on scene, didn’t go to a police station and had no good info to provide over the phone. The police had nothing to go on. It wasn’t until the van renter - FedEx went in with photos of the damage to the van that they had more to go on. Then they could canvass the area and get video from third parties, which you need subpoenas for often. They could then get access to the van from FedEx to get ballistics involved, etc. 911 likely dispatched a unit to where he said it happened, which found nothing there, and that was that. A 911 call isn’t a police report. It’s just a call for help. The report comes later, when the police contact you back, IF you left contact information. That contact was made the following day when they walked into the station.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@heretoforeunknown Which mental illness do you suffer from exactly??
This is a tunnel owned and operated by Amtrak and despite your obvious lack of education, and an abundance of hate (one stems from the other), Penn Station serves over 500,000 riders PER DAY, many of whom aren’t New Yorkers and aren’t even going to New York. Since Amtrak owns and operates that tunnel, it is the Federal government that pays for it. In turn, NJ Transit pays Amtrak for using it.
Like it or not, this city is currently THRIVING, and it’s continuing to be the hub of business, politics, arts, entertainment, tourism and frankly, civilized life in this country. From your comments I can CLEARLY see you hate all those things along with you know… human rights, people of color, non-Christians and women, but that’s not a part of this debate. You’ll deal with God on that one.
New York and New Jersey are running large tax surpluses and pay more to the Feds than they get back (donor states), so in a way we’re actually paying for YOUR stuff. You actually owe us a “thank you”.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@alwaysgreatusa223 Mockery… I doubt you have a grasp on what the word means, yet without the understanding, one cannot explain it to you. This person isn’t being mocked. They’re being ostracized, judged and vilified. Why? Simple: because of their deeds. Do evil onto others and you will be ostracized, judged and vilified. Why? Because societies have norms and moors. We live by societal rules that protect us. When a person intentionally goes on a crusade to destroy us as a community, as families and individuals we publicly shake them to send a message to others: DO NOT DO THAT. That’s how it works.
You want to put yourself in danger when it only endangers yourself? Knock yourself out… literally. But if you want to endanger others, we will push back, as a society. And yes, you will be mocked, in life and in death, among other things, if you attempt to do that. Choose wisely!
1
-
1
-
@ssunii7891 No… deaths are not inevitable. The world isn’t a binary code. Take a statistics class! Vaccines… ALL of them, REDUCE the severity of an infection, by teaching your cells the best ways to attack specific pathogens. That severity reduction can range from almost complete ~99% to just slight ~5%. Where you fall on that spectrum depends on many factors, including your own body’s immune strength, previous infection with the virus or vaccine, viral efficiency (infectiousness, replication, severity, etc.) and even external factors like the environment. Their effects are also reduced with time. MANY require periodic boosters. This is basic, high level biology. If you don’t know what viruses are of how they work, if you don’t know how cells work, if you don’t know how immunity works or what mRNA is, then you have NO business trying to tell others ANYTHING about them.
1
-
@CursedLemon That’s partially true. To be an anti-vaxxer one needs a willful hate of science and humanity in general and we all recognize that someone who is against very basic truths is most likely suffering from a serious mental illness, rather than basic ignorance. Making fun of them won’t magically change their nature. What can do, however, is highlight the insanity to those who are simply unaware of these people’s pathology and might be thinking that there’s enough truth in what they say to not trust the facts.
There is a huge set of people who claim that science needs to be questioned. Science doesn’t need to be questioned. Science is a STUDY, a PROCESS OF QUESTIONING. The results of any scientific study are what may be questioned. One may, and should do that, if they have at least the basic understanding of the study, the methods and the subject. After all, how can you question if something is correct if you don’t even know what it is? These people aren’t calling for an objective review of data… they’re simply calling for a general mistrust of people who know more. It comes from personal insecurities of their own knowledge - it’s fear of the unknown. To them, viruses, vaccines, mRNA, DNA, cellular structures… they’re all things as wild and unknown as quarks, black holes, demon magic. It’s the same principle the church applied to Copernicus and Galileo and countless of other scientists before. These people are a symptom of failed secondary school systems in this country, that don’t demand a basic comprehension of physical sciences in order to graduate.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
DrScopeify I’m a major rental car fleet manager.
1. The smallest car in our fleet is the Mitsubishi Mirage, Chevy Spark, Ford Fiesta, etc.
2. The Camry, Altima, etc are full-size sedans, which are 4 classes larger than those I just mentioned in point 1. In fact, only 2 classes of larger sedans exist (premium and luxury).
3. The CH-R and HR-V are sub-compact crossovers and are 2-3 classes smaller than the crossover equivalent of the Altima or Camry, which would be something like a Grand Cherokee, Edge, Santa Fe or Blazer.
4. Uber drivers need more rear leg room and trunk space. A Corolla/Civic would be more economical, cheaper and roomier for Uber use. A hybrid is ultimately what is best for that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@midnattsol6207 The issue is not whether or not drones can spot SAM sites… (they’re just cameras, of course they can), but rather if they would be spotted, and if a SAM site would allow itself to be seen. SAM sites exist to be mobile, secretive, and literally scan for aircraft. Even though drones fly below radar altitude, their operators constantly scan for them, visually and electronically. The chances that a Russian drone would be filming a SAM station at the time of a strike are zero to none, not just because the SAM site crew wouldn’t allow it, not just because they wouldn’t leave the site up in the open like that, but mostly because there’s no point. If it’s a high tech, military drone, it’s expensive and would be able to take the site out itself, but would also be seen by the site’s radar and intercepted. If it’s a small, tactical military drone then it get blown away with the strike. If it’s one of those tiny, commercial ones then there is a control unit within close range (couple of kms) of the site and they’d strike the site easier than sending in a ballistic missile. In short, this situation makes NO sense unless you’re using it as an exercise and evaluation, in which case you film to do BDA (battle damage assessment) to see how effective the targeting was.
Also, quit pretending someone accused you of things that no one did. I never said you assumed anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mborok It’s not entirely wrong, but also not really right either. While in the ancient city of Rome the official language was Latin, the Holy Roman Empire had many official languages like Greek, Etruscan, Oscan, Aramaic, Syrian, etc., with both, Greek and Latin being the major languages. That’s why the term “Roman language” is ambiguous. There were many Roman languages, but only one Latin.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The pay/benefits in the armed forces are actually pretty good and job stability is a big factor too. A large part of those who enlist come from the poorer parts of the country and it’s either the military or coal mines/farms or similar.
E-1 pay is $1,733.10/month, plus $369.39/month allowance for food (tax exempt) for the soldier. If you don’t live in base housing, you get a tax-free allowance for housing (BAH), which grows with your family size and time in service/rank. You may get special pay for hazard duty, combat duty, flight duty, submarine duty, foreign language proficiency, or diver duty. Free medical for entire family. 30 days leave. You get to shop at the commissary for food, which is very cheap, the Exchange store system for everything else, which is cheap, and various commercial discounts like mobile phone service, car purchases, loans, even home improvement stores. Unlimited sick days. You also get good retirement benefits, including pay and benefits.
A typical soldier does 4 years in the service and leaves as an E-4. The base pay for an E-4 with over 3 years service is $2,507.10/month. That’s $30,000 per year in base pay only, plus $4,400 tax-free in food allowance. Not bad for someone with no college education.
If you make it a career, an E-7 at 20 years of service (typical) earns $4,946 per month, plus the food allowance, which is about $65,000 per year.
You also get free university tuition after your first contract, so that’s a big attraction too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@beberivera7011 Of course not. You need to gather sufficient evidence to indict. With a high profile person that would likely mean a Grand Jury. Property searches are a way to gather some of that evidence. They may lead to further witnesses or even more searches to get even more evidence. They may also lead to nothing. You never know. A search is an investigational tool. It is not a prosecutorial tool. Often searches uncover evidence that completely vindicates the suspect.
People act like searches are a punishment or are only done on guilty people. That stems from their ignorance of law and the judicial process. Searches are simply fact-finding tools.
The fact that Trump’s home was searched for confidential documents doesn’t mean a law was broken. It means there’s a chance it was. Considering he was already given a chance to turn the material over before and didn’t, suggests there was possibly a crime. That’s why a search warrant was issued.
The FBI has to go over each document, meticulously, and then start work on finding out the case with each one. Was it allowed off premises of the WH? Was it confidential? Was it supposed to have been turned over to the archives? Then, if they determine that laws were, in fact, broken, they will then go forward and work to determine who broke them. Only once they identify who, how, when, what and where, will they turn it over to the federal prosecutors to evaluate if it’s something they want to move to indictment with.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pierresaelen3097 First, to answer your main question, of course I think they’re wasting MLRS munitions. 100% they are. When they’re hitting high value, strategic targets like supply depots and C4I buildings then they’re doing it right. Targeting Gvozdikas and Grads? No.
Now I didn’t say Russia has an infinite amount of that equipment, but it likely outnumbers Ukraine’s MLRS rockets by well over 1000 to 1 and that’s not counting what Russia has in reserve, which unlike modern tanks, Russia has tons of.
Also, none of the commenters on the weather have ever even been close to Ukraine. I’m half Ukrainian, half Russian, and born and raised there. They have NO CLUE of what they’re talking about.
I know Ukraine won’t rush. They’ve chosen to grind along the entire front line instead of picking one or two spots to spearhead, which is exactly what Russian/Soviet doctrine dictates. NATO would never fight that way. This is why Ukraine risks losing support by underutilizing the equipment given.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@iowaviking An employer absolutely CAN fire you for it, and courts have upheld that on state and federal levels, including the SCOTUS very recently. The disability act has NOTHING to do with it. What is a protected disability has NOTHING to do with your medical record and firing someone based on a protected disability, without attempt at accommodation may be unlawful in any situation, whether you have access to their medical history or not.
Both, employees and employers have SOME rights and not others. Knowing what rights each side has is important in arguing it.
If you cannot read, don’t comment. If you don’t know the subject (and you clearly do not), don’t comment. Go to your HR manager and find out, or simply research the subject. The legal info is easy to find. You don’t need to be a lawyer, but you do need to read, carefully.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The Soviet and Russian military doctrine had always been very different than the modern US system or even the older US system that included the draft.
The bulk of the armed forces’ enlisted personnel are draftees. The conscripts are drafted for a one-year term in order to provide them basic and specialty (equivalent to US AIT) training. They are then released and listed as reservists. Russia has no active reserve or guard system. It relies on the active duty and inactive reserve only.
As such, conscription serves to give basic military skills to all men, leaving them in reserves if needed, and to make up the bulk of the active forces at any time.
During the Soviet times, there were very few professional, contracted personnel. Conscripts in all services except the Navy did 2 year conscriptions. The Navy did 3 years. That allowed them to train and then retain members to actually do their work after training.
In 2007 that all ended with a professional force being instituted, though it is still less than 1/3 of the total force.
Officers have always been commissioned from military schools (colleges) and served careers much like their Western counterparts. Military Academies, in Russia, are considered to be graduate level schools, similar to War Colleges in the US. Generally, you’d attend an Academy when you are a Captain/Captain-Lieutenant.
So why did I just write all that? The training, given the goals, is quite limited for conscripts since they’re unlikely to ever be mobilized once they are reservists and the training for reservists is limited because they’ve already had one year of service. The entire system is predicated on having very large amounts of very basically trained men to defend the country if attacked. A competent force to invade simply doesn’t exist in large enough numbers to deal with a peer nation. Yes, they could fight a developing nation, but not a large force.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NateTrynaMakeMoney What do you want to see? Reliability figures? Here, READ!
https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2020-us-vehicle-dependability-study
https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2020-us-vehicle-dependability-study
https://repairpal.com/reliability
The reality is that for the first three years of ownership, the reliability percentage (how many cars present some failure) varies from 92% for the worst and 98% for the best brand sold, with the bulk of cars being in the 94-96 percentile. That means they’re all basically the same as it all falls into the statistical margin of error.
The other reality is that because there are countless variables that impact cars, how they’re used and their owners, there are no very long-term reliability studies on cars, as it’s impossible to do AND… you can’t do a 10 year study on a current year car, can you?
So we go by the studies we have, and if you follow them, long-term, you can extrapolate some conclusions - that the car manufacturing world is dynamic and each model varies from another, that if you generalize you’re being stupid and that things change, not every century, but every year.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@moose354 I think YOU missed the point. He says to do it EARLIER than on time during break-in, but then defaults to Toyota recommendations, which makes zero sense. He was trained by Toyota to pitch their logic instead of relying on engineering and science. My driving is 90% city. I mean REAL city, stop and go. I live in NYC. Every single car I’ve owned before said 3,000 miles (defaulting to organic oil) in city, mountains, towing or dirty environment. My 2005 Camry just said “5,000”. My 2021 Rav4 hybrid says “10,000”. Meanwhile those same cars with those same engines have other distances listed in other countries. Urban driving isn’t even listed as a reason to do more frequent changes in the Toyota manuals. Why?
Toyota capriciously placed arbitrary figures that have NOTHING to do with real world maintenance. Then they said, organic or synthetic oils are the same. That’s a lie too.
The truth is that whatever your oil is, you need to clean the system out soon after getting the car, but you need time to first let the engine shed the extra metal debris. Ideally, 2500 miles, then 5000 miles. Factory oil is organic. I would stick to Toyota organic at those changes. Then, I would do a change at 10,000, but now full synthetic and high grade filter. At that point, I would switch to 10k intervals with top end oil/filter. That’s with city driving.
I ran my Camry ran on Mobil 1 oil and filters for 15 years (after 1 year of 3,000 mile organic changes) and I changed those every 6,000 miles. I had the oil lab tested twice. Once at 6,000 miles, with 50k on the odometer. It was well within tolerances, with low contaminants. Then I ran 7500 miles with 90k on the odometer and again, it was well within tolerances, but getting close to needing to be changed. So... in NYC driving, that old 4-cyl Camry could do 8,000 mile intervals, safely.
Given the nature of my hybrid (that the engine runs only about 50% of the time, mostly when I’m driving faster), there is no reason to do 5,000 mile oil changes after initial break in, with synthetic oil. It’s just money down the drain.
Does Toyota want to get into that so technically? No, of course not. Every person’s experience is a bit different, so they just make up a number from the top of their heads, mostly relying on Toyota Care costs, to keep them down, and to create future warranty claim denials. All manufacturers do this.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You keep forgetting that the United States are 253 times larger than Estonia, by population and 217 times larger than Estonia by area.
So... take the number of the Estonian Army, which is about 6,425 and multiply that by 253 and you get 1.625 million. That’s the number of active peace time soldiers the United States should have, adjusted for population (per capita) to be the same as Estonia. The active US Army strength is 476,000, by federal law. Including reserves and national guard (all part-time, like you), there are 1,018,000 soldiers in the US Army. Estonia’s full Army strength is 35,350, including reservists. When adjusted for population, it is 8,943,550 soldiers!!!
Consider those as you talk about how militarized the United States are. Estonia is FAR more militarized than that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gerri577 Palestinians in the West Bank never had problems rebelling before and Hamas isn’t a rebellion. According to Hamas itself, it couldn’t care less about the Palestinians. It is simply an extremist, self-serving organization.
Also, every person arguing with a “trust me” is an uneducated moron.
I’ve been to the West Bank and Gaza. The West Bank looked like Beirut, with major shopping malls, architecture, actual street infrastructure, art, even luxuries, e. Gaza looked like Central Africa, with nothing. Not even regular electricity or running water, and this was because of their government (Hamas), not Israel.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dobsr1184 We factually do, actually. Federal agencies very often assist local law enforcement in all kinds of functions, whether it be administrative, fiscal, investigative, forensic, or technological. You just have no idea. Also, harassment via mail and electronic means is always a federal matter because by its very nature it knows no state boundaries and uses federal government resources.
The point is that if you’re not attacking or threatening people then no one, not local, not state or federal law enforcement will be sent, and if you are then it doesn’t matter which level cops cuff you. I remember the good old days when Republicans appreciated law enforcement and valued Judeo-Christian values like respect and peace. Now they’re just as bad as the Taliban. What happened? You’re an inch from destroying democracy and making women wear hijabs. Why are you all religious extremists nowadays and think the world will allow it? I didn’t fight in Afghanistan for you to make one here.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Doug, like others have mentioned, this is a cargo van that's been adopted for limited passenger use. What they didn't mention (I don't think) and certainly what you didn't mention, is that it is sold not by Mercedes-Benz the normal car company, but rather by the Mercedes-Benz Commercial Vehicles division.
In fact, if you wanted to buy this minivan for your family and you went to the Mercedes-Benz website (www.mbusa), you wouldn't find the Metris or any reference to it. Not in any category. This van is sold alongside the Sprinter vans and trucks through www.mbvans.com, which is their commercial vehicle website. This vehicle isn't meant to be sold to families. This is a FLEET vehicle. It is meant to be a taxi, corporate shuttle or delivery van. It is very similar to the use of Ford Transit Connect and Dodge PromasterCity and not at all comparable to the Honda Oddyseys, Toyota Siennas or Chrysler Pacificas.
You just fail to understand this whole vehicle segment which is common in other countries, but only starting in the United States. These are commercial vehicles and are not there to compete with passenger vehicles just like buses aren't meant to compete with limousines. These are not marketed to families. They are marketed toward corporations and fleet managers. This was the decision of M-B when they evaluated their presence in the minivan segment. They didn't want to enter their V Class as they didn't see people spending that much on a luxury minivan. However, they identified a niche in the commercial market for a people hauler at the 8 person capacity. It is attractive to fleet buyers who simply don't need the 10+ Ford Transit, Ram Promaster (Fiat Doblo) or Mercedes-Benz Sprinter capacity. The van bypasses the chicken tax by being built and shipped to the United States as a cargo version, where it is converted with seats and windows into what you see there. That's why it's so spartan.
1
-
1
-
@BaBaYaga1999-p7u That’s false. Both parties have been absolutely stupid to what Russia, and specifically Putin have been doing. Every single US administration since 2000, when Putin came into power, has been dismissing Russia, thinking it will either turn for help or just fade into the night. Even when Russia invaded Nagorniy Karobakh, Chechnya, Georgia, then Crimea, Syria, and then Donbas… the attention was always on Iraq, Afghanistan and then China. You could clearly see, for 20 years, the re-arming of Russia, the change in the sentiment of Russians, the media, and in the Duma. The problem is that no matter who is in the White House, the CIA and military intelligence senior people are ones who’ve been at it for decades, and people don’t change. They’ve been ignoring Russia and this is what that gets you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
All of Eastern Europe’s munitions manufacturing is being switched over to NATO standards as these countries are running out of Soviet-era guns to fire Soviet-era rounds, and have been for decades. Poland, for example, designed its own 155mm AHS Krab howitzer. They are also taking delivery of South Korean 155mm self-propelled K9A1 howitzers. Danas and Gvozdikas are being donated to Ukraine as well. The BWP-1s are going…
You get the point.
The infantry uses the 5.56 NATO MSBS Grot as the standard rifle, not an AK, NATO chambered sniper rifles, UKM-200 and MG-63 7.62mm NATO machine guns, as well
as 50BMG heavy machine guns firing NATO .50 caliber rounds.
About 2/3 of T-72s in the Polish inventory have already been donated to Ukraine, and as the new South Korean K2PL tanks are arriving, even more T-72s and then PT-91s will be given up. In 2024 the Abrams will start arriving, leaving Poland with just NATO standard caliber tanks.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@erockoutdoors633 You digress.. Indeed. That’s all that you do, as yes, you ARE being a drama queen. Ukraine us repairing bombed tracks within hours, but apparently in your brain, they aren’t and can’t, or… only Russians aren’t and can’t.
Also, an NLAW hasn’t destroyed even a single airborne helicopter to date, and even in direct attack mode, it would not. An NLAW is not a Javelin, which is a “fire and forget” weapon that tracks its target or a Stugna-P remotely controlled missile, all ATGM weapons. An NLAW may be effective against helicopters in terminal operations (taking off or landing), but it’s pretty useless against one in flight, even at low altitudes. More so because the helo will warn the pilot of a lock-on and because using an NLAW that way is an extremely expensive gamble.
All of that shows that you know little to nothing about the realities of either train track repair or employment of ATGMs, but are very opinionated on both subjects.
1
-
1
-
Okay, then treat him as if he’s not misinformed. Treat him as a fully aware and intentional war criminal. Take him into custody as soon as he’s outside the borders and drag him to the Hague, like you did with Milosevic. Do the same with Lavrov, Shoigu, Mishustin, Belousov, Abramchenko, Grigorenko, Shadayev, Shulginov, Kolokoltsev, and Saveliev as well!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@harrybyaqussamprayuga1756 It does explode. It has no explosives in it, but the sabot part explodes into millions of hot, tiny, metal fragments, liquifying everything inside the vehicle, including the crew. I mean it literally turns everyone inside into a red mist. I’ve seen the aftermath in person. In a T-62 or T-72, which keeps its rounds in an unprotected auto-loader, it turns them into what we Americans call a “Jack-In-The-Box”. It cooks those rounds off, popping the turret from the explosive pressure like a champagne cork. In a BTR there are no rounds, so you just get a whole bunch of unidentifiable human parts, mostly tiny, and a whole lot of blood. The heat differential creates a high pressure inside, so the liquid remains spray out the holes made by the round. It’s gruesome to say the least.
If the space where the sabot hits is empty inside, the front of the sabot cooks off and the remainder self-sharpens, penetrating the other side of the armor, all the way through. However, not in the engine. Then it’ll just get stuck there, melting it. If it hits a very think armored vehicle in an empty spot, then it can literally fly through and have no effect at all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ Again, the ICC turned away Palestinian assertions of ICC jurisdiction until 2015 and that motion was made SOLELY by the Palestinian Authority and not by Hamas. In 2015 those two territories were independent of each other, with separate governments. As such, that jurisdiction can ONLY be applied to the West Bank at best, although considering it isn’t a state, it can’t pass that legal test either.
As per Palestine signing, from the ICC website itself: “On 2 January 2015, The State of Palestine acceded to the Rome Statute by depositing its instrument of accession with the UN Secretary-General.” And that brings us back to the UN because it was the UN vote in 2012 to include Palestine as a non-member observer that allowed that motion to proceed. And again, “the State of Palestine” in the UN is reserved to the Palestinian Authority, which was not, and is not the elected government of Gaza.
In July of 2024 Fatah and Hamas signed an agreement (Beijing Declaration) to move toward a unified government for both regions and once that happens, and that government is recognized at the UN, can the ICC have legal jurisdiction over Gaza.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bamascubaman I’m curious as to what they told you? They saw that the car was in their inventory or did they investigate and call you back?
I used to be a manager at Avis/Budget and have had people drop off their cars outside our location, on the street, including a few blocks away, drop them on the lot, but not in return areas and walk away… all kinds of crazy scenarios which would cause us not to know the car was ever dropped off. People have dropped off a car and walked away, without it being returned in. Then the car is taken by a service agent and washed, placed on the ready line to be rented, and when it is rented, the computer prompts that it’s already out on a contract. We then have to go in and investigate. We’ve even had National and Hertz call us to tell us our car is in their return lane, with no renter. And we sometimes find theirs on our lots. People forget where they rented from and are late for their flight, causing them to do crazy things. Airport locations often have over 2000 cars on their lot. Cars are stolen frequently. Cars are misplaced. It’s not so simple as it seems.
As soon as the car is checked in, the customer gets a receipt and the car is in our inventory to be rented again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's the dumbest Land Rover model EVER made and it simply emphasizes the idiocy of Land Rover. It is, indeed, slotted to fight the SUV coupes, which are only popular because they are... get this... SUV COUPES, so of course LR make it non-coupe. It also produces a Jaguar that sits on the exact same platform and is the same size, but is faster AND cheaper, so (shocker!) it's more popular. This car is desperately underpowered with either engine choice available in the US, has approach and departure angles which ensure it will never go off-road and competes ONLY against other JLR products. Well done!
I like technology. No, I LOVE technology, but at some point, the technology needs to improve the driving and utility aspects of the vehicle, not be gimmicks prone to breakage. Now I get that this is a luxury car, but let's face it, its capabilities are still mostly mechanical, not electronic. Oh and by the way, the F-Pace, according to all actual measured reviews is faster, stops faster and provides more grip on the skid pad.
P.S. Considering LR's famous (err... infamous) dependability issues with electronics, those electrical panels that handle EVERY SINGLE FUNCTION will mean the car will literally put on more miles on the bed of a flatbed truck than on its own rolling wheels.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Winroo Wherever they’re modified, they’re modified for the client, or at least the local market preferences. The preferences in S. Korea and China are mostly fake wood and gold plating... everywhere! In Japan they are different. Much more modest and more into quality leather. The Japanese also don’t like light color interiors much.
What it seems you wanted to comment on was the aesthetics of electrical components, not the seats, cabinetry, carpeting or 99% of other stuff you see in that van. Electrical options, like everything else are completely up to the owner. This is CUSTOM work, after all. It’s all specialized to order. These vehicles, in the US are mostly owned by limousine fleet owners, not celebrities. They’re rented out for parties or VIP transportation, along with the driver, just like a limousine. They’re great for a trip to Las Vegas or Atlantic City!
Also, if you don’t know about Korea’s situation, why did you specifically mention Korea?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sadly it’d FAR from everyone, and that’s the big issue. A HUGE percentage of the Russian populous loves that this war was started. Yes, they were misled and brainwashed from… birth, really, but that’s irrelevant because they do, in fact, want this war. It’s not just Putin like so many of us believe. It isn’t certainly all Russians either, but it is a majority of Russians that support the expansion of Russian power through force. Russians are simply a pragmatic bunch, much like Trump, who believe that brute force is what gets the power, and that the ends justify the means.
To be honest, historically they aren’t wrong. It’s how humans have always lived. The physically strong dominated the weak. While much of the Western want to evolve past that, most of the planet is pragmatic about it and believes that’s just not human nature. It’s a dichotomy between the “First World” and others.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@russellmillar7132 Socialism is not exactly what you’re claiming it to be: “a form of government wherein the means of production are under control of the state.” That’s definitively Marxist Communism. This is where most Americans get lost between Communism and Socialism.
First off, socialism can be an economic concept, but also a political concept. After all, control over commerce is in large control over people as well. Furthermore, socialism isn’t a zero sum system. It is not either everything is private or everything is government. Socialism is simply a preference of government ownership of some key industries. The fact is that every single government in the world is socialist to some degree. Governments own and operate transit, ports, airports, rail, police, hospital, fire, schools, and other services that could otherwise be private. There are countries that are extremely capitalist and extremely socialist, but most lay somewhere in the middle: it’s a scale.
Anyone who claims a country is “socialist” or “capitalist” immediately exclaims that they’re morons on the topic and that they’ve never taken an economics class in their lives. All countries have elements of both. Even the Soviet Union, where I grew up as a child, had some free economy (capitalism) and the United States has ALWAYS had some socialist programs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lebron3505 Oh Mr Tactician… What MOS did you have? You’re only “over-qualified” in your own mind, I assure you.
I’ve been commenting on why armor doesn’t work for the Marines. You’re welcome to read those comments instead of mouthing off the way you have with everyone here. By the way, 16 years of Marine logistical aviation here, on the CH-53 and V-22. My job is LITERALLY to get Marines and equipment from the ship to the battle and then support the fight. You think you’re an expert? HA! You don’t even get that armor in general is an outdated concept. A single LCpl can defeat a heavy tank with a single shot, from a stand-off distance. My brothers in attack squadrons eat armor for lunch. Armor is useless in what the Corps are designed for - amphibious warfare. Armor has limited usefulness in maneuver warfare, which is the Army’s job, not ours.
So… drop your credentials here, and the next time when we’re all discussing the Army’s need and use for something, you may have an expert’s opinion (if it’s within your MOS’ wheelhouse) and we’ll all listen, but right now, an INTELLIGENT person in your position would listen to those who know the subject matter better than you, and maybe ask some questions if you’re curious.
1
-
1
-
@ElkaPME Your example is a bit off into WW2 land.
First off, landings are done by amphibious combat groups of ships, including destroyers and cruisers armed with Tomahawks. The island (or a beach, as it more often would be) is first targeted by F-35s and/or F-18s and major C4 and defenses are taken out via missiles.
Second, amphibious assaults are actually not so hard to do with modern tactics and equipment. It’s literally the whole purpose of the Marines. Without giving away too much, it’s a multi-pronged effort that combines air, sea and land (joint arms) assaults.
Third, anti-ship defenses are used against ships, not landing craft. It is the reason why our landing ships are stationed at stand-off distances. Our landing craft can travel 50+ miles to the shore, and it’s a big part of the tactical plan.
Also please understand that beaches are not ports. There is often no more than a few inches of water for hundreds of feet out, meaning that your equipment cannot get to dry land. Wet sand displaces underneath you in seconds, sinking everything on it (ever try standing on the sand in a foot of water?) Once you’re on a beach, you have natural obstacles like marshes and dunes to scale. Then you often have wetlands beyond them. Once past that, you will often face a tree or heavy brush line or even mangroves. This is all terrain a tank cannot deal with. Even a very lightly loaded 13 ton LAV often has trouble getting stuck. This tank, although “light” and tracked is still 40 tons. An Abrams weighs 80 tons. They simply CANNOT roll into a beach and go through it until days after we take it and engineers have a chance to put down planks, blow through dunes, and cut through the forest growth. Ideally, we find the closest port, take it, and then simply offload armor with cranes, onto pavement.
Keep in mind too that those tanks cannot simply fire while being transported or even once on the beach. They will have no visibility or situational awareness, but will be giant targets. That’s not even considering the fact that landing sites are very often full of anti-armor mines that engineers don’t get to clear before assaults.
Which brings us to beach defenses. The enemy has a stable ground and time on their hands. Very basic beach defense hardening makes it impossible to penetrate with large vehicles. Ditches, steel barriers, etc, added to natural ones just make it hard for anything, but infantry. Add enemy RPGs, arty, and ATW systems and you pretty much make armor obsolete in amphib warfare.
Oh and contrary to your personal beliefs, the FACT is that tanks are LESS survivable today than they were 20 years ago. Modern anti-armor weapons are exploiting all the weak sides of tanks, from beyond visual range (distances) and are simply plentiful. Gone are the days when a TOW missile on top
of a humvee was the way to kill an MBT. A practically untrained guy with a Javelin, sitting in a fox hole can kill one at 2+ miles, fire and forget. We’re not talking T-72s either. We’re talking modern reactive armor heavy tanks. Remember, you don’t need to completely destroy a vehicle and its crew for effect. All you need is to disable it. A lighter vehicle can be disabled by even more basic weapons. Light, 105mm direct fired sabot rounds will decimate light tanks.
There is a big question nowadays in the Army armor community, in light of seeing modern weapons’ effectiveness in Ukraine, of whether armor is really going to be a big part of war in the future at all. It’s one of the reasons the Army is looking at a faster, cheaper tank. A heavy tank simply doesn’t provide the protection to infantry that it once did. In fact, it needs infantry to protect it, unlike in WW2 when you had big tank battles like Kursk.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lebron3505 And the experiences of fighting battles the Marines weren’t trained, equipped or missioned to fight taught us that we need to be more specializes at what we do. Ever since the 1990’s the Corps have been fighting an Army fight and a tremendous amount of money and attention was put into traditional Army fighting, which is traditional joint arms, maneuver warfare and asymmetric warfare. Meanwhile, the Corps de-focused from the Marine specialties like amphibious warfare, world-wide QRF, asset security and integrated, organic combined arms. By doing “Army work”, our abilities on those fronts have atrophied by loss of specialized equipment and training. Furthermore, the more you don’t use something, the less the chances of you ever gaining it back because the folks on Capitol Hill start thinking, “eh, they don’t do that anyway.”
The Marines need to be light because the nature of their work demands it, not because it’s more lethal. It’s the reason why the Coast Guard has no big ships. We operate in littoral waters, in wetlands, in sand, mud and the tropics. That dictates what we need, not our egos. What we need is light, easy to transport equipment that can withstand salt water and get into a fight quickly, without a logistical train behind it. Tanks and heavy artillery just aren’t it. Yes, we got rid of 155 howitzers too. We have our own attack planes and helicopters. We have the Navy. Those bring capabilities that the Army typically don’t get to enjoy. That means we don’t need our own field hospitals or large caliber fires.
What the Marines are supposed to do is bring self-sustainable, battalion-sized QRFs anywhere in the world at any moment, and to do it consistently. That is a very different role than the Army’s. What learned that on D-Day in 1944 because despite winning the assault, we took tremendous losses doing it, mostly because our troops were never trained to do it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
These are 100% not mortar hits, but rather MLAW and AT mines. MLAWs hit targets from above, just like mortars do, and penetrate the turret, cooking off the rounds in Russian tanks, causing major fires that ignite one after the other. Everyone inside that tank, when the first round cooks off is dead. The last tank was clearly blown up from below, with a significant charge, so either an IED, or more likely an AT mine, which the Ukranian army has a ton of.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bindingcurve A wise person once said, “you can’t fix stupid.” If you leave your belongings out in the open they will be stolen eventually. Duh!
I’ve had pick-ups my whole life and I live in NYC. I’ve always had retractable covers or caps on them. They’ve always given me flexibility and and fantastic utility. I can drive 4 passengers, each with five large suitcases, to the airport. No SUV aside from a Suburban can do that. I have a Frontier mind you. Nothing huge or fancy. I’ve always had compact/mid-size trucks, from a 1988 Toyota pick-up, to a Ranger, a Mazda B, a Raider and now a Frontier. I’ve also had a number of sedans as my dailies. While the sedans were far more comfortable and economical, their trunks are simply limiting. The Maverick combines the utility I’ve always had and needed with the space, comfort and fuel economy of a sedan, meaning I won’t need two vehicles anymore.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ErickDoe With respect, I’m bilingual (Russian and English) and have degrees in both. No, it does not come from that. Articles aren’t used in Slavic languages at all, and the term used here is strictly in English.
Plain and simple, the country’s name is UKRAINE, and just like you don’t say, “the Russia”, “the Italy”, “the Germany”, “the Japan” or any other singular proper name, it is wrong to use here. Some uneducated dolt started sating it and you’re copying it. Stop.
“The Netherlands” vs. “Holland” is a perfect example: one is a singular proper name. The other is a plurality, which requires an article to distinguish the proper name from some actual netherlands.
1
-
1
-
@ErickDoe You are absolutely exhibiting very clear signs of the personality disorder called psychopathy (and very obviously don’t understand what it is or isn’t.) You’re also very obvious in your lying, very carefully omitting sources (or even a mention of them), omitting source languages, omitting what languages you have degrees in or actually anything on the subject. Furthermore, you’re deflecting from the actual language (English) and its use of articles onto some mysterious “group” of languages. In English, an article “a” or “the” is used to denote or modify definite and indefinite nouns.
Ukraine always has been a PROPER NOUN - a name of a specific, single object. As such, according to the rules of the English language, articles do not apply to it. That has been the linguistic rule of the language since before it was even considered modern English. Even old English had incorporated the use of articles in this manner. In fact, the use of indefinite articles wasn’t even a thing in Old English. The rule in English usage is: “In general, do not use an article with a proper noun unless the noun contains a prepositional phrase.” You’re welcome to do your own research on the use of articles with proper nouns, of course, but it’s very clear that you will not.
You’re also showing your absolute idiocy in references to Norse mythology when the context of “troll” is very obviously of you being an internet troll here - another sign of a personality disorder.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lithuaniangiant2676 She did not say how she was going to rule, but rather that she leaned toward a special master, and yes, she’s allowed to say that specifically because of what a special master is - basically a non-binding, neutral, third party arbitrator of documents. It should have been done even if Trump hadn’t requested it, to avoid appearances of impropriety, and it’s done in Federal Courts quite often.
Remember, she’s not deciding a case here, nor whether any evidence is admissible or not. She’s deciding on case administration. She has the right to decide whatever she wants. She is required to allow both sides to make their arguments, but she is not required to be swayed to any one side. It’s her choice.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@randibgood You’re right that his personal correspondence should not be co-mingled with government documents. However, it’s 2022 and most personal correspondence is digital, so there isn’t much chance of it.
When it comes to passports, the explanation is simple: the agents were given a tasking to collect all US government documents on the property for the DOJ to sift through and keep what belongs to the archives or other agencies and what belongs to DJT. Passports are actually property of the US government, so they were collected, just in case, as told to collect everything. The investigators who started going through immediately said the passports can be returned (both, the expired and the valid ones) and they were. They probably didn’t need to be taken, but they were, as they satisfied the search warrant requirements, just in case.
As far as an explanation why Trump kept them in the same places? I don’t know if he did. That hasn’t been released to the public. They may have been kept with completely unclassified and routine papers for government travel. I don’t know. I wasn’t doing the search. Here’s the thing though… neither were you. Calm down and stop the conspiracy theories. You’re not sounding any more sane than MAGAs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It’s absolutely in a ready state to fly, as you can see in the video. It just isn’t meant to fly at 500 feet in low visibility. It also isn’t an “Air Force One”.
First off, ANY USAF aircraft that has the President on board takes on the call sign “Air Force One”, just as if it’s a US Navy aircraft it becomes “Navy One”, any Coast Guard aircraft becomes “Coast Guard One”, etc.
The US Presidential transport aircraft is the VC-25A. There are two of them and they’re identical. They are NOT “doomsday” planes. USAF has four E-4 aircraft that fill that role. They are also heavily modified 747-200s, and have a similar paint job to the VC-25, but are equipped completely differently, with tons of command & control, communications, and shielding, but without guest/media seating. They typically transport the SECDEF and joint chiefs, but they transport the President as well. They are the Doomsday planes the US has.
The plane in the video is Russia’s version of the E-4.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidf2244 They are in my household, but “nerd” doesn’t mean “cool”. You get that, right? In fact, it means the complete opposite. Nerds are anti-social, excessively studious and technical.
Also, Neumann and Tao aren’t household names either. The VAST majority of physicists and mathematicians are completely unknown, but being famous isn’t a matter of being a nerd or not. Hawking was a gigantic nerd despite being famous.
The whole science of physics and math (they’re basically one field) is anti-social. It rests primarily on individuals, working problems out in their heads and in writing. That’s it.
Not geology. Geology is about teamwork, getting out there, digging, sampling, comparing… Geologists never work by themselves. They simply aren’t that nerdy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ That’s actually ALL false. Categorically.
1. European companies DO participate in arms competitions. BAe, EADS (Airbus) and many others are regular arms manufacturers that compete (and win) in the US. In fact, the new light tank M10 Booker is the GDPS Griffin II, derived from the Austro-Spanish ASCOD. BAE systems had a competing design of the M8 AGS. In fact, both designs in the program were European. The US only requires that it be produced in the US by a US subsidiary, but the parent company and design are perfectly fine being European.
2. Trucks and buses from ANY nation (other than sanctioned ones) are allowed to be sold in the US, as long as they meet US Department of Transportations requirements for safety and size, and EPA requirements for emissions. We actually have European buses all over the place, with Irizar (Spain), Volvo, Mercedes, Setra, Neoplan (in the past), Alexander Dennis, and Van Hool are the most common.
European trucks are not common, but do operate here as well. The two biggest reasons: cabover designs fell out of favor in the 1990s and price. European trucks are significantly more expensive, even without the 25% tariff. Volvo makes a separate design of trucks in the US for North America. Scania is actively trying to market currently.
3. Skanska USA is a MAJOR construction company operating all over the country. However, because of union and legal reasons, yes, the US does require that they be US-registered businesses.
You are confusing me saying that the EU is extremely protectionist with a claim that the US isn’t protectionist. I never made thar claim. EVERY country is protectionist to some degree. It’s just that the EU is EXTREMELY protectionist and most Europeans don’t know or understand that. They are neger self-reflective, always out to down others the way Trump just treated Zelensky.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1