Jump to content

Negatory

Supreme User
  • Posts

    617
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Posts posted by Negatory

  1. 3 hours ago, Lawman said:

    Half a downtown neighborhood is on fire and looted = “mostly peaceful protests.”

    This is the thing though. It was mostly peaceful, and your sentence intentionally misconstrues in a similar way to the opposite political side. Like >99% of protestors were peaceful. But you’re insinuating that is not accurate based on your political bias.

    For the record, I support the truckers protesting.

  2. 9 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

    Valid points but to discuss the concept the author proposes (light fighters specifically for this role) is that he is cost conscious in the future budget environments. 

    Light fighter fleet with advanced C2 capability for UCAV employment is probably more affordable than large platform C2 fleet, inferring that from his total argument(s) made in his article and I also think it provides a level of redundancy / resilience to the overall mission capability when the shooting starts.  Not to be cold but somebody is likely to get shot down, if you have an inexpensive and many fleet vs an expensive and few fleet that overall capability survives long enough to help the Joint Team achieve the objectives vs being destroyed on Night 1 or 2 and now what? 

    As to our acquisition strategy, we have stumbled but we have to fight over the range of conflicts not just the high end fight.  Not saying you are saying we should only focus on that just stating my belief it is a bitch of a problem to correctly spread resources over constantly changing operational requirements, it's always going to be lagging somewhat.

    I agree with your points. Everything should be somewhat attritable. I guess the biggest issues with little fighter like that are that they won’t the power, cooling, or apertures to make datalinks effective from a long range. And they won’t have the legs to not require tankers everywhere. It’s a tough problem.

  3. If it’s just going to be a stand off datalink enabler, I struggle to see why it should be manned whatsoever, at least for the peer fight. SAMs have made it too threatening to have a 4th Gen or less fighter like platform just chilling outside.

    Why not just go the other way and use a platform like a repurposed B-1/B-21/KC-46. Yes, all of those platforms have issues, but my point is having a larger aircraft that actually doesn’t require 15 air refuelings to get towards the fight could be beneficial. Plus, larger airplane = more cooling, electricity, payload, apertures, and options.

    There are still niches for fighters, I think. The niche is direct platform confrontation with enemy fighters. If you’re just trying to fight a j-20, don’t hand me an unmanned aircraft until AI is ready. But if you’re confident in the abilities of the unmanned platforms, the only thing the mothership needs is fuel and connectivity - not to have afterburners or be single seat.

    What the author proposes would be useful in the N Korea/S America/Iran/etc confrontation. But we really need to get ourselves to focus on what we want to succeed at. Trying to be the service that can simultaneously effectively fight terrorism and 5th Gen fighters is a large contributor to why we feel less ahead than we have in the past. Get a friggin acquisition strategy together and don’t walk the line balancing both priorities!

  4. Light fighters can’t get to the South China Sea. On top of that they aren’t survivable at all. For the peer threat, I see no niche.

    Also, MUMT is the AI of the 2010s. It’s getting funding, but good luck making it economically scalable.

  5. 2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

    I should have been more precise, "MY" gains have been wiped out (too much tech), or were wiped out until the bounce back on Friday.  That being said is your "believe what you want on the other points" a hand waive at the other issues?

    I choose to believe Biden completely screwed the Afghanistan Withdraw, I guess you disagree.

    I choose to believe Biden and his massive government plans have caused inflation, I guess you disagree.

    I choose to believe that Biden stood in front of a camera during the campaign and said "I am going to shutdown the virus."  He also said of the pandemic "I am going to end this.  Finally, during the last Presidential debate he said "anyone who is responsible for that many deaths should not remain as president of the United States of America."  This clown now has MORE deaths during his term than Trump did.  I guess you choose not to believe those facts.

    I don't want a war with Russia and yes it is a very complicated situation that has a long history including a security promise made by the United States if Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons.  I don't know if Trump would have defended Ukraine (from his recent statements saying it is a Europe problem probably not).  Regardless, Biden's diminished mental capacity and continued word scramble makes him and us look weak.  Good look up his "small incursion" comments...to me it sure sounded like a green light to Putin.

    Before taking office Biden announced he would end Trump's tariffs on China, and aide had to walk those comments back.  Yes I know it is a complicated situation but the mixed messages...When Biden took office he immediately suspended a planned arms sale to Taiwan (and other countries as you are aware).  At that point China started ever increasing incursions into Taiwan's airspace.  Those incursions are not weekly with large force presentations of 40-50 aircraft strike groups.  It took Biden until August to "re-approve" the paused sale.  So yes I choose to believe China is doing whatever they want thanks to us looking weak. 

    I choose to believe Biden campaigned on bringing the country back together...he said it multiple times.  Looking beyond the record number of Executive Orders he signed.  He also has supported ending the filibuster, he opened the borders and has secret flights dumping ILLEGALS into our cities every night, and has supported a lot of far left proposals.  Sorry but I choose to believe that is NOT bringing us back together and governing from the middle.

    I choose to believe he has NOT re-established America on the world stage as he promised.  Also, when he calls a reporter a "stupid son of a bitch" I don't think that is restoring dignity to the office of the President.

    Again, Trump is an ass, a horrible person, but I don't see how the haters simply hand waive the lies, mental decline and failure that is Biden the meat puppet.

     

    Embrace the us vs them; You are trying way too hard to make everything Biden’s fault. A potentially coherent argument started falling off the tracks as soon as you tried to pin inflation purely on the Biden admin.

    Last time I checked, the highest amount of quantitative easing ever along with the highest unemployment rate in recent history occurred in 2020. Oh, and the first President to give out economic stimulus checks…

    And supporting the filibuster is inane. There are actually no coherent reasons for it - it entirely “cheats” the planned way government legislation is supposed to work and forces supermajorities when they never were supposed to be required. The only argument is “hurr, durr, it’s been this way for a while.” Oh, and it typically helps conservatives more than liberals.

    • Upvote 3
    • Downvote 1
  6. Whether you like it or not, ROE lims will exist. Bet we aren’t gonna be allowed to use tactical nukes unless very specific circumstances are met. And I bet most of us are fine with that.

    If anything, those wars you listed should have taught us that military action alone is incapable of solving complex geopolitical disagreements effectively. We have basically lost, from a national objectives standpoint, nearly every single kinetic war since WWII. Our greatest success was likely the Cold War, which ironically effectively used diplomacy, information, and economic warfare successfully, but almost no direct military response.

     

  7. Selection bias is rife. Yesterday’s  conspiracy theories have often been actually conspiracy theories. See how COVID was over in Apr 2020, then Aug 2020, then Apr 2021, then… or how hydroxychloriquine was a miracle drug… etc.

    Im just posting data. You guys can get offended at data if you like, but we’re at the point of no more rational discourse if that’s the case.

    • Upvote 1
  8. If you think the fact that we have multiple orders of magnitude more people on ventilators for respiratory distress than previous years is due largely to hospitals forcing otherwise healthy people to be intubated, then I’ve got nothing for you.

    We can discuss data at face value, or we can be skeptical of literally everything. I’m not gonna engage with super conspiracy theories with almost no evidence.

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 2
    • Downvote 2
  9. 5 minutes ago, Buddy Spike said:

    Has Omnicron actually caused that (verified?)

    I had it a week ago.  Everyone I know that's had it has had the same symptoms.  Two weeks earlier I had an upper respiratory infection that was exponentially worse.  

    Yeah, it’s generally less severe than the already non-severe for our demographic delta. But it’s significantly more transmissible.

    John’s Hopkins, the CDC, and the NYT are tracking hospitalizations in that ballpark. But maybe that’s not confirmed enough.

  10. 9 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

    The study does, but the article doesn't, that was the point.  We distill everything into small bytes because people won't take the time to read. 

    Ah. Do you see something in the article that is not corroborated by the study? Or is there something in the study that is intentionally left out of the article.

    I guess I don’t see the issue if it generally accurately portrays the main points of the study.

  11. 28 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

    This article is maddening and illustrates why there is so much confusion.  Not a dig on you but peel the onion back a bit and watch Facui hijack the result

    .….

    Now the rub - the numbers you show above are great but are not cross-correlated to vaccinated versus unvaccinated, boosted versus non-boosted.  All we have is the comment from our dear leader who says - NIAID director Anthony Fauci added that those who are vaccinated and boosted are much less likely to get severe illness from Omicron.

    Yes they are, don’t where you’re basing your opinion from. The study is at the top of the article, I’ll assume you didn’t read it. Check it out:

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.11.22269045v1.full-text
     

    They clearly control and account for vaccination status, previous infection, age, sex, and comorbidities. The data shows BOTH that omicron is likely less severe AND vaccines are effective at reducing hospitalization/death.

  12. https://www.axios.com/cdc-omicron-death-delta-variant-covid-959f1e3a-b09c-4d31-820c-90071f8e7a4f.html
     

    Keeping up with the data. Current studies are showing Omicron has a ~90% reduction in mortality, ~75% reduction in ICU admission, and ~50% reduction in hospitalization compared to previous variants. Would be nice if it was 90% across the board, because this will still overrun the hospital systems based on having 5-10x the cases. Oh well.

    • Upvote 1
  13. You say zero evidence? Like when Rudy called for “trial by combat?”

    I know how this conversation will go, but your attempt to feign ignorance by taking things literally when it suits you and saying it’s a metaphor when it works in your favor is par for the course.

    News flash: You don’t have to support an insurrection just because the last one was instigated by conservatives. Just like how those conservatives don’t have to define conservatives as a whole.

  14. I agree with you, but I do find it funny. You know the Spanish flu barely killed anyone in the beginning, then killed the vast majority after a major mutation?

    The truth is, we don’t know how this will go. For all we know, this could go the way of the bubonic plague and be endemic for decades and have a similar mortality rate throughout. Hope not, though.

    • Downvote 1
  15. 2 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

    masking is not a small nuisance...it is very harmful to peoples psyche

    Agreed. Arguing it’s no big deal is a real cop out argument. A potential 10-20% reduction in transmission traded for an inability to accurately portray or determine emotions is not worth it from a human social connection standpoint.

    • Like 3
×
×
  • Create New...