All Activity

1000%. This is the absolute most un-American thing that is somehow enshrined in American law. I totally get and would support a similar concept IF it were after appropriate due process and the person found guilty, much like what happens to people's trucks and guns after they get caught AND convicted of poaching. But to put the burden of proof on the citizen is completely upside-down and the fact that it hasn't been struck down only proves how far removed the Supreme Court is from actually reading the Constitution and doing it's job. With the qualified immunity removal in some states, legislators that passed that need pass a law to hold themselves to the same standard. If they pass a law that would would meet a similar threshold of 'obviously illegal' (like Colorado's ban on verbal only counseling to help a teenager wondering if they should actually be the other gender that got struck down 8-1), they need to be tried and convicted of violating their constituents' rights. A good starting point would be an identical punishment to what a law abiding citizen would have gotten under their unconstitutional law.

Exactly this. Haven't we already done this with a few ships from the ghost fleet?

Yeah I get it but the unresolvable loop in the original Iran thread has reached a point where nothing more can really get done, besides there’s enough in the open source world to have discussions worth what it costs to access BO… The articles are starting to ask what this can teach us about a Taiwan scenario, what is China learning, etc…. We should discuss the big elephants in the room.

To the extent things have gone quiet, it's largely due to you libs going on and on about personality issues. Yeah, we get it, he says stuff that's in poor taste. All of us wish, and have stated, our desire for a president with classier chops, but this is where we're at. You all pin that on us. I'm fine with it because I understand the choice that had to be made: elect a jerk, or elect complete ineptitude. The one part about Trump's manner I do appreciate: it drives you guys nuts. I will admit that's a bonus I'll miss when he's gone. The ranting and raving about it on this forum, however, is just tiresome when we should be exchanging ideas about strategic happenings instead. Apparently they did get the memo. And I distinctly remember predicting, right here on this message board, barely three days ago, that there was a lot more at play to "opening" or "closing" the straight than met the eye - you responded with this mess. Now, here we are, and lo and behold, what's happened? We closed the straight. It's almost like I can see a larger play at work. You'd call it 4D chess. I just understand that we're the ones with all the strategic leverage. I promise you I can't predict the future, it was just the obvious play. So yes, while Iran has played their very last card by closing the straight, we played a card I saw in the deck that trumps it: we closed it harder. Others here didn't really get it. They can close it, but we can up the ante and beat them at their own game. Or did you actually think we were just going to let them control that waterway on their own terms? Like seriously? Did you think Iranian and Chinese oil tankers would be doing business as usual all the while the lights went out on our allies and we flounder in the channel? Get real dude. We're a superpower. That's not chest-beating. It's looking objectively at who's who in this conflict. Of course we want it open. But it's going to be open on our terms, not theirs. So give it time. I'll spell out the next part for you again: Iran depends on the straight for 90% of their exports, 85% of their government revenue, and additionally import HALF of the gasoline they use to generate power. They need it open far, far more than we do, as they hemorrhage $3 billion dollars a week and risk massive long-term (self inflicted) damage to their oil infrastructure. As I said before, we can play the waiting game while they waterboard themselves. That's the strategic leverage. Can you see it? Or are you queuing up yet another anti-Trump tirade? This is effectively the sequel to my last post, with the added benefit of hindsight including events which I suggested would take place, actually having taken place. You didn't respond thoughtfully when it was prognostication. You didn't address how Iran is far more dependent on the straight that we are. Maybe now you will since it's actually happening?

Sorry to interrupt the political sword fighting, if only we had a thread for that 🤔, but does anyone have a thought on how Iran will run this blockade? I highly doubt China would put personnel on an Iranian oil tanker bound for China... However, if they told us they were doing so, what's the move? I'm sure we could disable the ship, but then what? Are we going to storm the ship and take those chinamen prisoner? Even if they don't put Chicoms on an oil tanker, what's the worst that can happen from an Iranian perspective? They run the blockade, we disable/commandeer said vessel, and then what, just sell the oil and pocket the cash? I'm not sure that's a great look for us. Thoughts that don't revolve around a monkey shit fight over Trump would be surprising yet welcomed.

Not today ISIS.

Ignore his rhetoric. No one here defended it, and we already know your position. What policy actions has Trump taken that you believe we are selling our souls in supporting? I'm truly curious if this is just another "liberals think conservative positions are evil" or "his rhetoric is too extreme to consider anything else?" You bend over backwards repeating the same thing and never addressing any of the actual counterpoints, so I'm trying to keep the question focused.

Not really, considering it’s an accurate description of your dialogue a majority of the time. I just possess a capability you don’t: I have no problem admitting when I’m wrong.

Literal definition of irony.

This is your guys’ actual problem. It’s legitimate delusion. And you project it on others. You say they’re the delusional ones so you don’t have to embrace the reality you are supporting right now explicitly. But this quote right here describes your and many others “delusional syndrome.” You have to understand we aren’t even that mad at the president. Politicians do politician things. But it is your choice to determine if you have any specific morality in how you interpret those actions. Im disappointed in people like you simplifying complex arguments and everything into us vs them. And the ends justify any means is the antithesis of Christianity.

Yeah i’m shocked that another dumbass statement by POTUS hasn’t caused stable minded conservatives to come unglued on an Internet forum. The actual haters don’t get it, even after we’ve told them a million times, he’s not out savior. And yes, even with his narcissistic self love and abundance of dumbassery at times, he’s still significantly better than kamala would have ever been.

The War ZoneRegent Squire Wing-In-Ground Effect Drone Demonstrator Ma...Squire is designed to take on multiple roles and the Marines say they are monitoring the aircraft's progress.

New thread to discuss results, applicable lessons and armchair general’s opinions on the conflict. Politics for the other thread. My first salvo: UCAVs are needed now, up to full autonomous operations, less expensive persistent surface and air area denial, integrated with manned platforms. Suicide drones, more of them, conventional ones like LUCAS against fixed and large moving targets (ships) and new systems bringing direct anti personnel drones/loitering munitions linked to airborne C2 aircraft or linked to operators thru high altitude network enablers. Morale destruction and surgical targeting of the most odious members of the regime. More surface fleet combatants for naval control, greater presence over large/multiple areas Base defense and expedient shelter hardening capes growth, new decoy systems.

🤦‍♂️ This isn't the full clip. ......it's missing the part immediately preceding this, where she says: "The question was, if Iran was to launch a nuclear attack on Israel, what would our response be?" They clipped it so it just began with: "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the President, we will attack Iran." The full clip is posted below. It's so wild to see how the people always lamenting "fAke NeWs," are actually the one's most easily duped by it. This interview, for anyone interested in the actual context, was a follow-up to an answer she had given the previous day, where she described a nuclear exchange. A legit nuclear war in response to an unprovoked Iranian launch of nukes on Israel. ....Not the train wreck that's unfolding now - an offensive war started by the US and Israel just months after Don the Con said we had already "obliterated their nuclear program."

Aren't two threads entirely dedicated to people either bitching or cheering about Trump enough? Talking overall national security policy and such regarding Iran is one thing, but this thread has gone entirely off the rails.

Interesting how selective the outrage can be.In 2008, Hillary Clinton said, “I want the Iranians.mp4

Does everyone not just use the 'unread content' option? I haven't browsed the forum ever.

Last class The AviationistFinal Class of A-10C Thunderbolt II Pilots Graduates at D...The 357th Fighter Squadron graduated its last A-10C Thunderbolt II student pilots at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, marking the end of an era for the soleAnd interview with the author of Superhornet replacing Warthog

My only recommendation is maybe merge the Bar and General branches. They've become indistinguishable. Any many thanks for getting the layout back to something readable using the phone.

The backstory is probably something like, "The Pope doesn't like me, I don't know why, I'm a great guy. He's a loser, always blessing the wrong side. If I were Jesus, I'd have light coming out of my hands."

Or, MAGA after a Trump Truth Social post. Just ask Mr Noem.

Apparently, it's AI. So not sure if that's better or worse than an actual human painting it.

Nope. That image is ridiculous. I really hope that's a parady of some sort. If not, his narcissism has hit a new high (or low...). There's has to be a backstory to that absurdity. That looks like a painting from a boomer grandmother about her kid.

@Sua Sponte No I did not, thanks for putting that out. I do not support that and think it’s a bad post. Invalid response to Negatory regarding this specific post (my bad).