Lord Ratner
-
Posts
1,922 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
113
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Lord Ratner
-
-
4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:
That being said, I have zero desire to kill babies...if you think that is cool and just part of war, they have free will, good for you, whatever keeps you warm at night. I will always believe we are better than that and can find a way to defeat/destroy HAMAS without starving a bunch of innocent babies.
What the fuck are you talking about? 🤣😂
I'm sure I haven't called you a Muslim extremist. There is only one group involved in this conflict that outright desires the death and starvation of babies. That is Hamas. Not Israel, not the US, not you, not me. Only the Islamic fundamentalists are deranged enough to believe that the death of their own children is a good thing.
You just keep repeating a bunch of points that imply that Israel is somehow intentionally starving people. They have done more in this war to protect the civilians of their enemy population than any organization, the United States included, has ever done in the history of humanity. There is not a single example that comes close.
Considering your background, I surprised at your minimization of the unfathomable difficulty of distributing aid to a population who hates you, under the governance of a terrorist regime that is not only actively engaged in military combat against you, but has and continues to steal the aid in an effort to intentionally exacerbate the humanitarian catastrophe in the hopes, sadly successful it seems, of convincing westerners that somehow Israel is in the wrong here.
The Washington Post article does a remarkable job showing why the aid is so difficult to distribute, though it conveniently starts with Palestinian allegations, easily ignored, glosses over Egypt's regular to accept refugees, then covers the many different Palestinian factions that steal, riot, or refuse to distribute the aid. There are two countries with larger gdps than Israel, and nearly every country with more space and people, yet somehow these Muslim countries aren't responsible for the Muslim humanitarian crisis. It's Israel, the attacked, who are responsible.
It would be nice if Israel wasn't fighting an enemy that used years and years of humanitarian aid repurposed as weaponry and used to construct defensive tunnels.
Even the notion that Israel 's historical stance towards the Palestinians somehow created this mess is laughable. What were they going to do? Integrate the Palestinians into one country, immediately creating a majority voting block that openly calls for the immediate genocide of all Jews? Recognize Hamas in a two-state solution and solidify a militaristic terrorist government next door, with even more undeserved rights given to them by the UN?
Do more is meaningless. Do better is meaningless. Saying this is somehow different, or a different time, without explaining exactly how, is meaningless. More Israeli participation in Gaza means more dead Israelis. Doing more or doing better means more dead Israelis. We incinerated tens of thousands of civilians to protect American lives. And we would do it again in a heartbeat if any country strapped GoPros to their chest and fucked the bleeding corpses of our wives and daughters.
I'm not accusing you of supporting Hamas, or even the Palestinians. But this strange Western tendency to reflexively build moral equivalence between two diametrically opposed populations is being exploited by the real bad guys to continue on to the next rape or murder. And as unfortunate as decades or centuries of human history can be, the Israelis alive today should not have to sacrifice themselves because of what a bunch of dead people did decades ago.
There are poor and hungry populations all over the world, but only certain ones are participants in a religious death cult that glorifies the shedding of blood, be it their own or their enemies, in the pursuit of eternal Paradise. Treating those civilians the same as civilians who believe in fundamental human rights and dignities is an immoral stance.
-
2
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Biff_T said:
NPR is gay.
That's the nicest thing you could have said to them 🤣
-
16 hours ago, ViperMan said:
The episode of that podcast. I guess I can just check myself.
Oh, yeah. Latest one.
-
40 minutes ago, nsplayr said:
Yellen is excellent at Treasury, she never should have been replaced at the Fed, although Powell is also good...their policies & philosophy seem very similar.
Wait what? We had interest rates lower than they've ever been in history, and the Treasury doubled down on short term instruments. If they had issued Bonds at <2% and Notes at <0.5%, our government debt would be a time bomb with a 20 year fuse instead of a 2 year fuse. How is that "excellent?"
She also sat on low interest rates at the Fed, building this mess up when the economy was doing great. And she didn't see inflation till it hit her in the face over and over and over. Exactly what does she have to do in your mind to be less-than-excellent?
-
4 hours ago, gearhog said:
The cycle does repeat, and Strauss and Howe do a great job illustrating that what we're going through today isn't new, but the circumstances and concerns of a vastly different population with vastly different technologies are. Never before have this many people been lifted this far out of poverty. A reversion to the mean would be a disaster unlike any previous cycle. Never before have this many people believed that not only will we suffer at the hands of human governance in the crisis phase, but that we are also now approaching planetary constraints in terms of environment/resources. No one can say how true it is at this moment in time, but unlimited consumption in a finite system isn't sustainable. People are compelled to take extreme actions on that belief now, and I don't think that can be said of any previous saeculum.
Your metric is way off.
4 hours ago, gearhog said:Never before have this many people been lifted this far out of poverty.
4 hours ago, gearhog said:Never before have this many people believed that not only will we suffer at the hands of human governance in the crisis phase, but that we are also now approaching planetary constraints in terms of environment/resources.
4 hours ago, gearhog said:what we're going through today isn't new, but the circumstances and concerns of a vastly different population with vastly different technologies are
5 hours ago, gearhog said:No one can say how true it is at this moment in time, but unlimited consumption in a finite system isn't sustainable
You don't think the airplane was vastly new? The telephone? Radio? Radar? You think Global Warming is different than global cooling, peak oil, the ozone hole, overpopulation, etc? Every decade since the start of the industrial revolution, other than immediately following a war, was the most people lifted from poverty at the time. These are exactly the things people have said each time.
5 hours ago, gearhog said:America no longer exists to provide you, me, our grandkids, friends, and neighbors with the highest levels of safety, security and standard of living in history. It is a means to provide the corporatists you mentioned earlier with those things. Now that we are reaching a sufficient level of advancement where they may not require the productive efforts of many Americans, or even other populations to ensure their security, they must address the issue of "useless eaters". America, Western nations, and their ideologies are being dismantled. Immigration, reduction of freedoms, destruction of culture, civil unrest, inflation, taxation, household and national debts, sustainability efforts, and engagement in conflict are the attempts and methods being used to level the playing field.
If you read the Fourth Turning then you know these same forces were in play each time, including government capture, elite hubris, wealth inequality, and absurd ideologies.
Just look at the small but measurable resurgence in union organizing. What is old is new again.
I admit that the US can fall, but our location, resources, and population make that unlikely. We are simply in a better position based on many things we can't fuck up, no matter how hard we try. And we are trying 😂🤣
-
1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:
The facts and reporting would say otherwise. Fewer crossing points, random rejections, extended inspections. Also, Israel striking an aide convoy doesn't help the situation.
You remember where 1200+ Israelis were literally raped, tortured and murdered? Sorry but the hunger of the supportive population does not trump the security of the attacked population. Anything else would be an abdication of responsibility to the Israeli people. And a friendly fire accident is another regular feature of war. Sucks. We sure had our fair share.
1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:Again, they could do far more. I believe they have gone to great lengths but they can still do better...see aide convoy above.
Unless you are arguing that the WCK convoy was intentional, then just saying "do better" is horseshit. Hamas could do better too. Everyone could do better. Lets make this useful and say how many dead Israeli soldiers are a fair exchange for how many dead Palestinian "civilians." Until then it's just sideline commentary. The Palestinians have a government, that's who should be worried about their hunger and safety. Instead it is up to Israel to move hundreds of thousands of people who cheered the rape and torture of their wives and daughters so the terrorist psychopaths they are protecting can be hunted and killed. But sure. Do better. Funny how the standard is always "do better" up to and past the point that the objective can no longer be accomplished.
1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:However, if you are being intellectually honest you have to look at the situation holistically and over time. Since 1948 Israel has conservatively killed 66,000 Palestinians. Don't get me wrong, I know who the good guys are here but when viewing conflict it helps to view the history and the long game.
And how many of those were sheltered over or around the many varieties of Islamic militants? Subtract those. How many were storming the border fences or checkpoints? Subtract those. How many were civilians killed as the primary target, not collateral damage in response to direct attacks on Israel? That's the more relevant number.
Once again, do you believe we were wrong for Hiroshima? Dresden? Because we did blockade Japanese oil, and most of Europe made Germany into a pariah state after WWI. Holistically is a cop-out. There is a line between geopolitical competition and outright acts of war. Hamas, not Israel, started this war, to the cheering of their poor, hungry population. It is Israel's responsibility to it's people to end the threat. When Israel starts raping Palestinians, bombing apartments, or dumping humanitarian aid into the sea to "make a point," then we will have the beginning of a basic equivalence.
1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:If you believe the Palestinians had a choice when it comes to Hamas you truly don't understand what has happened there. Not saying they are right, but they are a complete pawn and victim of other interests and players
They are humans with free will. Yes, pawns. Yes exploited. So too was every population in history that eventually found their way to peace and freedom. And they elected Hamas in 2006. Hamas has since taken total control, but since when did Americans decide that populations are no longer responsible for their destiny?
Once again, how many Israelis should die to save the lives of people who want Jewish blood in the streets more than they want their children to eat or survive?
Americans and Westerners have a really tough time understanding religious fanaticism. When death is a reward for killing your enemies, you can't freedom and compassion your way to changing hearts and minds. How we haven't learned this after the last 20 years is mystifying.
-
2
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:
Incorrect: Guessing you didn't watch the entire segment - He said "Inflation today is about 40% of what it was when Joe Biden took office"
His statement is categorically a lie. The US Monthly inflation rate the day Biden took office was 1.4%, one year later it was 7.5%. Inflation is in fact up 39% since Biden took office.
Also:
1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:Incorrect: Guessing you didn't watch the entire segment - He said "Inflation today is about 40% of what it was when Joe Biden took office"
His statement is categorically a lie. The US Monthly inflation rate the day Biden took office was 1.4%, one year later it was 7.5%. Inflation is in fact up 39% since Biden took office.
Also:
The Average YOY Inflation Rate under Trump was: 1.9%
The Average YOY Inflation Rate under Biden is: 5.7%
The Average YOY Inflation Rate under Trump was: 1.9%
The Average YOY Inflation Rate under Biden is: 5.7%
Ok I see what you're saying, I missed the "took office" part. However the inflation that took place in 2021 was not from Joe Biden. It was from Trump and the pandemic supply shocks. The inflation we have today, and that we will have for the next decade in all likelihood, is from Biden. And Bush, and definitely Obama. Lot's of chickens coming home to roost. And when Trump wins, and the economy slows down, the trillions in Fed stimulus that Trump will call for will make inflation even worse.
Not that it matters. Every economic statistic is a disaster under Biden, yet that are plenty of stats to twist to make it seem like he's doing great. Remember when he was bragging about reducing unemployment... after a pandemic?
-
I'll go in pieces:
23 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:To defeat Hamas you likely don't have to starve a bunch of kids to death.
Israel is not starving anyone. Hamas is. It's not Israel stopping the aid, it's the complete absence of anyone to receive and distribute it. Because Hamas wants more dead Palestinians. They have stolen aid for years, and continue to do so. Those deaths are irrelevant because they have nothing to do with Israel.
23 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:Using your logic why we just green flag Israel to drop a nuke on Rafah and get it over nice, clean and quick. We were pretty upset after 9/11 but I didn't see us firebombing cities in Afghanistan.
Because as you are pointing out, what matters is how you wage the war. What does not matter is how many innocent civilians die as a result. You wage the war ethically, and that's all you can do. Especially in this situation where civilian deaths are specifically being used as a countermeasure to Israeli attempts to destroy Hamas, arguing that the arbitrary number of deaths is somehow relevant is literally playing into their strategy.
23 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:but we at least tried to be measured in our response and we most certainly did not purposely starve a population that was supporting the Taliban.
You seem to have bought the Hamas narrative that Israel is starving the Palestinians. Nonsense.
23 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:Hamas started the current fight but I hope you are not so Naive as to think Israel has no dirt on their hands.
Sure, but that's global policy anywhere and anytime. It's not like the Allies didn't have culpability for isolating Germany and turning it into a pariah state. That ended up with World war II, but we still killed a fuck ton of Nazis. The dirt on their hands arguments is always used to draw a moral equivalence between the two belligerents in a war. But there is no moral equivalence here. Israel has never done what Hamas did, and by any rational account would never do what Hamas did. Hamas not only did it, but the vast majority of their population celebrated it. Anyone who has even the slightest difficulty understanding who the good guys and who the bad guys are in this war, and I'm not saying that's you, has no place in the discussion. Ultimately you have to base your judgment of a society on what they do, and what they proclaim. Based on this, I choose 100,000 dead Palestinians today over 100,000 dead Jews over time. I would rather neither, but not all civilians are equal, because not all countries are equal, and not all cultures are equal.
23 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:An actively supportive population is a very shallow argument given the living conditions, most have not choice. Not an excuse, but certainly a consideration.
Hamas was chosen by and supported by the Palestinians. At a certain point the population has to be responsible for the type of country they create. Again, that doesn't mean you have a green light to intentionally Target civilians. But that's not what's happening, and that's not what I questioned from your first post. The number of dead civilians does not serve as the measure for whether a war is fought ethically. There would be a whole hell of a lot fewer deaths if Hamas didn't purposefully put their military targets under and around civilians. And our long-standing rules of engagement allow for killing those civilians. Doesn't make it fun, but it doesn't make it unethical either.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Your Air Force dreams are dead statistically. You have three priorities now:
- Rack up hours for your airline application (fill the app out now and keep it updated every month). Start learning about the airline application process.
- Make damn sure you don't get promoted on the second look. You are forever a second class officer now. Some escape the gravity of a late promotion, most do not. Going to PIT should be a great way to not get promoted. Failing a PT test will guarantee it 😅
- Prepare yourself mentally, financially, and logistically for a life outside of the AF. Where do you want to live? Do you know how civilian investing works? Are you ready to live lean for a while until your next career starts paying well?
If you don't want to be an airline pilot, then you need to start networking aggressively. Spend the next year finding people who work in the field you're interested in and learn everything you can from them. We have people here who can speak to that world, I only know the airlines.
As for airline hiring, I think we are possibly in a phase where the people hired today will be furloughed in a year or two. Maybe. Doesn't matter. Being furloughed means no airline apps to maintain and most importantly, no flying currency to worry about while you work outside of the industry. When hiring restarts, you get called back, no questions asked. Your airline will pay for your training and re-currency, which will put you in a spot to change airlines if you desire. This is part of the reason why you always take the first airline job you're offered.
Good luck, and feel free to ask questions.
-
4
-
2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:
Terrible situation, Hamas can not be allowed to survive, but you can't kill hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in the process.
More please!
Why not? A supportive population, in fact an actively supportive population, is a part of the war machine.
If we start down this road then we have to retroactively denounce Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Tokyo, Dresden, etc... Easy to do when it's not our own brothers and kids being killed on the frontlines. If I have to choose between their civilians and our soldiers in a war they started, it's a pretty easy calculation for me. No country in the history of combat has spent as much energy, money, and blood protecting the civilians of their enemies, not even the US.
War is ugly specifically because if requires the mass death of civilians.-
1
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:
Epic karma slap to a clown penis. While calling inflation stories misinformation he is interrupted by a live report that says inflation is up again. Also, this "Disinformation Czar" claims prices are DOWN 40% since Biden took over when in fact they are up 39%.
He claimed the inflation rate is down. He's right. He's also abusing the public confusion regarding inflation rates to bullshit about the economy and protect his party.
-
2 hours ago, gearhog said:
However, I will say there will never be a "reinvigoration" of American desire for competent leadership because there won't be an America as we have always thought of it. American ideals and values are diverging and there is no way it's going back to the way any of us here think of it. There is no putting this back together. Something new may emerge and it may be called America, but it won't bear any resemblance to the country that was established according to our founding documents.
This has been argued at the end of each and every saeculum. You think our differences are more polarized than say, the build up to the civil war? You think the abuses of wealth and power exceed the 1920's? I don't. I think it requires enough of a time gap that the people we could be asking about the differences, if there are any, are dead. They could give us, as a population, the perspective needed to keep from repeating the cycle. But that's exactly why it's a cycle. Because those who lived through it are no longer around, no longer in charge, so we now *have* to experience it for ourselves.
2 hours ago, gearhog said:I will say there will never be a "reinvigoration" of American desire for competent leadership because there won't be an America as we have always thought of it.
Because we have not gone through what the previous generation went through that created the America we long for today. But we will, and if we win the war, again, then we will have another 80ish years of American unity and strength, at which point our great-grandkids will have holodeck arguments about how America is collapsing and it will never be the same again.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, ViperMan said:
Is that new?
Is what new?
-
The Bari Weiss podcast interviewing him is more interesting than the article. But to anyone who's been following this for the last few years it's just going to be more of the same. Still, it is interesting to hear "from the horse's mouth."
-
The left has more retards. Full stop.
However the right has been in the process of catching up probably since around 2008. As best I can tell that is when the corporatist take over of the government was successfully completed. Starting with the tea party and probably peaking with Donald Trump, the populist movement within the conservative right means that the historical metric of success for Republicans, money making, is being replaced.
Sure there are retards who succeed in the business world, but by and large you're going to see more intelligent people if you start filtering by income. But now that the Republican party is more interested in bravado than income as a result of the decimation of the middle class, I suspect we will see Republicans reach retard-parity in fairly short order.
Once that is complete and there are no longer intelligent mature people to run the government, we should get ourselves into a nasty shooting war in pretty short order. That will once again reinvigorate the American desire for competent leadership, but only after much blood has been shed.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, gearhog said:
Wait a sec. WTF?
Kurt Campbell, US Deputy Secretary of State says Russia has completely reconstituted its military.
We spend over a hundred billion dollars to weaken the Russian military, and this dude says it has had no effect.
Starts at 29:50
If something is too sensational to be true, it's probably not true.
-
9 hours ago, disgruntledemployee said:
Neat. So he might have a problem getting briefs as a candidate.
Plus the room elephant that he probably made a deal for the money. I wonder what it was... pardons? table seats? Ambassadorships? Favorable judges in the right spot? Blagojevich did jail time for that kinda shit.
When 30ish legitimate money institutions say no, and fuck no, then some dude that thrived off shady shit steps in, I can draw some thoughts off that.
What's next, companies and billionaires are going to just *give* money to candidates in the hope they will get special consideration should the candidate win? Wait no, it's different because it's a PAC or campaign donation, right?
You guys are trying too hard.
-
3
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, Pooter said:
I don't think it's too much or too late to ask for accountability across the board.
You're missing the point.
It's always time to ask for accountability as long as the open shot is at a conservative. Then Democrats somehow go right back to ignoring the law.
The law doesn't matter nearly as much as the equal application of said law. So:
3 hours ago, Pooter said:Selective prosecution is absolutely a problem, but you don't solve it by not prosecuting anyone for anything, because 'it'll be bad for the country.'
Incorrect. That's exactly how you solve it. If a law can't be or isn't equally applied, your best option is to ignore it completely or, even better, abolish the law. There is a reason Lady Justice wears a blindfold.
Also, aggregating different arguments from a different people to falsely depict a shifting narrative is not a particularly strong debate strategy. There also not just a single reason why this is a problem.
2 hours ago, Pooter said:I don't think it's too much or too late to ask for accountability across the board.
But it's not being asked for, is it? There's not just one investigator and one court in the land. No reason they couldn't have gone after a prominent Democrat at the same time. But they didn't. I didn't see a single prominent Democrat calling for the disqualification or imprisonment of Biden for his mishandling of classified, as proven by the investigation.
- But he turned it all over!
- He was honest in his deposition
- Mike Pence had classified at home too
- His house has security
And hilariously, this all started with the non-prosecution of Hillary, who 100% attempted to cover up her crime, just like Trump. They *all* mishandle classified.
Our enemies aren't getting an upper hand because of classified being kept in a garage by a Corvette or a basement at Mar a Lago. So let's just stop, and focus on policy. Trump is no more a criminal than national-level politicians have been for decades.
And none of this "if you or I did that..." Nonsense. There has *always* been a different standard for the elites, regardless of party. So we suddenly care about class-based discrimination after literally thousands of years of human history, and we are going to start caring *only* when Trump runs for president?
And we wonder why conservatives are distrustful now.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Pooter said:
New York has a specific statute 63/12 which grants the AG broad power to go after fraud without having to show standing. The judges have knocked the 'no standing' argument down multiple times because it's completely erroneous.
It's been used before and the statute has been on the books since the 1950's when it was originally created by a Republican.Created by a Republican doesn't make it right. It's a foundational principal of our legal system, though I'm sure no one is shocked to see New York go a different way.
I don't even care that they are doing it from a political perspective. Trump is going to win and his ability to do whatever he wants will be reinforced by these clearly political prosecutions. Democrats always think they're so clever, like when they gave Trump a bunch of free publicity in 2016 because they were sure Hilary could demolish Trump. Oops. This too will backfire.
But from a societal perspective, give me a fucking break. How many executives went to jail after the 2008 Financial Collapse? Did New York forget about that law at the time? Remarkable they couldn't find any fraud back then.
Selective application of the law is the single best way to undermine it. Democrats are completely shocked that Republicans have finally embraced their situational-faith in the rule of law. Buckle up, because the more the Republicans embrace the tactics of the left, the uglier this election season will get.
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, tac airlifter said:
The banks in question stated for the record they were not defrauded and wanted to continue business with the Trump organization.
This is all you need to know. That's it. Everything else is just noise.
In every other Court in America you have to have standing to bring forward a case. Even if someone beats the shit out of you, you have to tell the authorities that you want to press charges, or nothing can be done.
New York decided to press charges on behalf of a "victim" that did not feel victimized.
-
3
-
3
-
-
5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:
Both sides are terrible but it was the left that started using government agencies (IRS/FBI) and now the courts to go after political opponents.
Well, in this era. They were doing it in the 40s-60s with the communism hunting, right?
-
5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:
It will be interesting to see if this issue is strong enough to overpower abortion as the deciding factor in the next election. Right now the polls would indicate it is...I simply don't understand why our liberal friends think this situation is acceptable.
I think if it was a year ago, abortion would have a lot more weight. But fortunately the process is going the way I had hoped, and each state is coming up with their own rules, which will never shut up the activists, but will absolutely shut up the voters, who do not make huge distinctions between state and federal law, as long as they agree with it. More voters will be satisfied with abortion law as a result of the Supreme Court's action. And whatever damage it did in the election in 2022 I think was overridden by the absolute dog shit slate of candidates that Trump got on the ballots.
Of course, if Republicans try to make abortion a federal issue again, which some of them are, they'll get exactly what they deserve.
(Sidebar, if anyone is interested we can start a new thread on my theory that in our lifetime contraceptives and abortion will be outright outlawed as more countries grapple with the painful results of population decline.)
As to immigration, I honestly don't know. While I do believe there is an element of society, especially in academia, who are trying to covertly flip over the system in order to rebuild it in a postmodernist, pseudo Marxist fashion, I generally don't give those conspiracies the credit of wide scale participation at the political level.
But the continued insistence of many Democrats to support this absolute dumpster fire at the border is truly mystifying. I know they see the same polls that show how unpopular open borders are, and I know they see the polls that show Donald Trump taking the lead in a matchup with Biden, so whatever reason they are refusing to adapt is not because of political expediency. That only leaves a true desire for an immigration disaster, one that would support the eventual "reset" of our Democratic capitalist society into a communist Utopia, or they simply cannot fathom the idea of supporting anything that the opposition supported before them. The fact that Republicans have been anti-illegal immigration simply excludes the possibility of Democrats ever changing their mind?
Either way, immigration coupled with Joe biden's obvious and continued decline is going to cost them the election. Unfortunately that means Donald Trump is going to win, which while the 4 years of his presidency will probably be marked by great policy and less chaos, it is very likely he triggers the same response that leads to another idiotic Democrat winning the following election and undoing whatever good things he accomplishes. Or maybe not since he can't run again.
Until the war kicks off at least. Then we restart the cycle.
-
1
-
-
Absolutely hilarious. Greg Abbott should be remembered for the single most effective political stunt in American history
-
40 minutes ago, HuggyU2 said:
It's more than likely an FAA restriction. I say that because new United FOs can't land at certain "special" airfields until they have 75 hours. SFO is one of those (I don't know why).
After 30 months of flying the Guppy as an SFO-based FO, I moved to the 757. And guess what? I could not land at my home domicile until I had 75 hours in the 757.
I wrote a PDR report to the company saying how ridiculous that was.
I actually got a reply from someone way up the food chain in Flt Ops who said he totally agreed... but the FAA were the ones that imposed the rule and would not rescind it.You've either been extraordinarily lucky, where you weren't paying much attention to the people you were flying with.
The 75-hour rule is not for everyone. It's for the weakest links in the chain. That's pretty much the case for all of those types of restrictions. I've only been in the airlines for 6 years and I've already seen people who could have probably used another 75, but definitely were not ready right out of the chute.
World War III Updates
in General Discussion
Posted
This is where we actually started. Nothing about starvation. You then jumped to this strawman:
Also:
Emphasis mine. Exactly how is this not implying that Israel *is* purposely starving the Palestinians. This was a comparison between something the US dealt with and what Israel is dealing with, yes?
I don't have to twist your words, dude. I'm just quoting what you literally wrote yesterday.