Jump to content
Baseops Forums


Supreme User
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


nsplayr last won the day on January 9

nsplayr had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

829 Excellent

1 Follower

About nsplayr

  • Rank
    Gray Beard

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

20,085 profile views
  1. Jeeze, what else did he do that was inappropriate other than cumming behind your wife?
  2. There's a guy in my Guard unit who's on long-term loan from another Guard unit. He's an O5 who just flies the line, met and married a cute doctor here locally, and seems to be living his best life. A true hero for us all to emulate! We also loaned our a young prior-E LT to another unit for I think two years as a drug deal for him to go to full-up UPT rather than URT. YMMV and it's all highly situation-dependent as brabus said. Good luck!
  3. So if, hypothetically, the Houthis carry out an attack that kills a US contractor in Aden, we completely destroy the Iranian economy in a clear act of open war without discussion or hesitation? Count me out. Seems like in a representative form of government there should be some discussion of that kind of move. Then, after declaring war on Iran and destroying its oil economy (civilian targets BTW, great choice, may need to re-hack your LOAC training again soon), we randomly blockade critically important international shipping lanes about 6-9K miles from our shores and tell our allies in NATO and Asia to F-off and we quit, or what? This advice just keeps getting better! I get that negotiating from a position of strength is what you want to do, and chest-beating definitely sounds cool on the internet, but this is all just astonishingly bad foreign policy advice. Even if you support the strike against QS and taking a more aggressive posture toward Iran as a counter to their assorted nefarious activities, you don't always have to turn it up to 11. As a superpower who frequently "gets shit done," we have a lot of options between doing nothing and glassing the entire Middle East.
  4. The fact that a Ukrainian airline, flying a Boeing 737, crashed and/or was shot down in Iran is the unified conspiracy theory we all can get behind right now. The rare triple-crossover conspiracy, almost never seen outside the lab.
  5. Solitude is my favorite skiing near SLC. A lot of my family lives in the area and I've been skiing on most of the resorts in the area. Deer Valley is also really nice but super-expensive...my 8-year-old took a lesson there once. The lodge there is outstanding. Park City is the biggest and very nice but I like the feeling of skiing in nature more than past people's houses. Lots of runs though. Brighton might be a good option since kids ski free with paying adults. I also like Snowbird but it's runs are more advanced so probably not the best option for kids. Kinda hard to go wrong...Utah skiing is the best. Have fun!
  6. I think I've been in that plane before... From what I remember it was nothing special. Honestly this isn't really doing anything beyond what's been in the field for 10+ years so IDK exactly what they're selling here. The software & integration has to be super on-point in order to complement the hardware you select and most vendors don't understand that very well IMHO.
  7. MBS, the Saudi crown prince, should forevermore be known as Mohammad Bone Saw after what he ordered WRT Jamal Khashoggi. Fuck that guy.
  8. Former CSO and current RPA pilot, and I did stay at a Holiday In Express last night... It was always my understanding that you can't go backwards in the hierarchy of wings, with the order of precedence being manned pilot -> RPA pilot -> CSO -> ABM. I've known ABMs who became CSOs and manned pilots, CSOs who became manned pilots and RPA pilots (myself), and RPA pilots who became manned pilots, but I don't know anyone who has moved down the chain. YMMV but I'm not sure what you want to do is possible, let alone advisable.
  9. 😆Yea my financial critique of some long-time political leaders like Bernie and Biden is that they're not wealthier given their job history. 30+ years making 6-figures with tons of perks and all you got is like a mil or maybe two? Y'all gotta save dat $$ haha.
  10. I'm very familiar with how polling works and your first sentence there simply isn't accurate. For example, the most recent Fox News poll (Oct 6-8) where Tulsi had 1% briefly describes how they got their sample,: "Interviews were conducted October 6-8, 2019 among a random national sample of 1,003 registered voters (RV). Landline (229) and cellphone (774) telephone numbers were randomly selected for inclusion in the survey using a probability proportionate to size method, which means phone numbers for each state are proportional to the number of voters in each state." BL: Not just polling Democrats, not just polling likely voters, scientifically random sampling. To get the Dem primary question answered, they asked everyone in the sample a question like (sic), "Which party primary do you think you'll take part in?" and if the person answered Dem, they then asked them who they plan on supporting. History tells us that at this point it'll very likely either be Warren or Biden, possibly Bernie but less likely so. To compare, for the 2016 GOP nomination, Trump led every poll except one from 1 Nov until he became the nominee and was pulling usually around mid-20s against the field (i.e. where both Biden and Warren are today). The 2012 GOP nomination was a bit weird in that Gingrich and Romney were both fairly strong at this point, but Santorum made a historically late surge and went from ~1% around Nov 2012 to being the last man standing other than the eventual nominee Romney. To your second point that Tulsi is a "moderate," I also disagree. She's in favor of the same Medicare For All plan as Bernie, she backs an assault weapons ban, she's for free college, etc. She's in the leftward part of the party for sure apart from her...odd...foreign policy views. She's more left than me personally and I'm fairly progressive/liberal. If y'all are looking for a non-Biden moderate Democrat in the current field, I'd recommend checking out Steve Bullock (governor or Montana), Michael Bennett (senator from Colorado), Amy Klobuchar (senator from Minnesota), or to some degree Pete Butigieg (mayor of South Bend, IN). Bullock and Bennett I actually like but they've gotten so little traction that they haven't even made the last 2 debates and they won't make future debates either at this rate. The field has to narrow at some point and if you can't poll above 1% I'm sorry, thanks for playing. Klobuchar is fine in my book and has been on every debate stage, but again, she hasn't really caught on above 2-3% ever. Pete has caught on more and is polling IVO 13% in Iowa specifically, but he probably doesn't have a realistic path to the nomination IMHO. Interesting that you know some folks who might support Tulsi vs Trump...good to know!
  11. Guys, just to be clear...as one of the few resident Democrats and as someone who follows politicos very closely as a hobby, there is just zero appetite for Tulsi Gabbard. She’s been in all of the debates except one (ie not being “totally ignored”), is an elected member of Congress (ie at least has some traditional qualifications), and she’s polling at less than 2% on average. No one polling that low this late in the primary has ever made even a bit of difference in the race. Her fundraising is basically non-existent for a Presidential-level campaign, and anecdotally of all the Democrats I know, I don’t know of a single person supporting her. I will give you than in an MFK of the Democratic primary, she gets my vote for the “F” category hands down. In all seriousness her oddly pro-Assad views are completely disqualifying in my book and I hope the good people of Hawaii make a difference choice for her seat in Congress in 2020. If y’all wanna like her as Republicans or conservatives because she’s hot and currently shitting on Hillary, go for it.
  12. I mean, we all have our own political views, but I'm not sure your analysis here is sound. Democrats have won 4/5 national popular votes and every one since GWB won it in 2004. President Trump relied on a razor's edge strategy to barely win three key states and thus win the electoral college in 2016, and GWB's original victory in 2000 was decided at the Supreme Court. We're also somewhat overdue for an incumbent to lose a re-election bid, having had 3x two-term Presidents in a row (Clinton, GWB, Obama). The leading Dem candidates are all traditionally well-qualified (former VP, 2x Senators) and have net-positive personal approval ratings (i.e. unlike both Hillary and Trump in 2016). That being said, the Republicans have a great chance at winning too! President Trump is an incumbent and that has is a meaningful advantage. The country is fairly closely divided and Trump could plausibly repeat his previous narrow path to victory. The economy is doing fairly well in broad strokes, which is good for an incumbent President. Almost all indicators point to the 2020 election being close, and every recent election since the turn of the millenium has been close except 2008. Anyone who says the Dems (or Trump) don't have an ice cube's chance in hell are either lying to you, misinformed, or not putting forward an honest analysis IMHO. Finally, very interesting that you choose LBJ as a parallel to Trump since he made the stunning decision to not run for reelection 🧐
  13. I'm a big fan of tightening ethics rules for lawmakers as well as for executive branch officials. The latest example of what you mentioned is here, Rep. Chris Collins (R-NY) pleading guilty to insider trading.
  • Create New...