gearhog

“Joe Kent is a crazed egomaniac who was often at the center of national security leaks, while rarely (never?) producing any actual work,” Taylor Budowich, Trump’s former deputy White House chief of staff and a political consultant, said in an X post. “This isn’t some principled resignation — he just wanted to make a splash before getting canned. What a loser,” Budowich said. Here's one of the times where he leaked National Security Secrets on a podcast: And here's another clip where his Trump Derangement Syndrome is extremely apparent: He could've just said "I quit because I hate Jews and I'm a Nazi" and dispensed with all of the below gobbledygook.

This is going to be an economic, social, and military disaster.

One of the unexpected benefits of once again relieving the world of "WMDs and Terror" is that it's also a logistical attack on China.

There is a meeting today between Hegseth and Anthropic. Anthropic's AI, Claude, is integrated within the Palantir Software used in the Maduro raid. Anthropic found out and informed the DoD Claude's terms of service stipulates is should not be used for applications involving violence, weapons development, or mass surveillance. Claude has guardrails in place to impede/prevents its use for such. It appears Claude is the only AI model approved for use on SIPRnet. Hegseth is unhappy. He says all AI models with DoD contracts need to remove any such guardrails so the full capabilities can be used by the DoD for "all lawful purposes." Hegseth is threatening to terminate Antropic's contract and deem them a "supply chain risk". Who is right? Hegeseth or Anthropic?

Uploading Attachment...

It matters insomuch as your ability and willingness to do anything about it. Therefore, it still does not matter. Keep voting.

I'm cancelling my subscription.

The destruction of Democracy is necessary to defeat Russia.

I've used the word "fantasy" multiple times in this thread to describe these completely unrealistic positions/goals. You're explicitly telling me you're fantasizing. You're not going to be king. Nobody who thinks like you is going to be in a position to decide in favor of the things you want to happen. Some of you need to step back and consider the totality of the circumstances. You're focusing on variables that aren't going to change. Allowing oneself to dwell on pipe dreams and delusions is unhealthy.

Because it's a hilariously overly simplified comparison. For starters, we were a stronger power fighting a conflict 6-9 thousand miles from home. Russia/Ukraine are fighting a conflict 0 miles from their border. There are thousands of other variables, (social, language, economic, ideological) that make this situation different, just as in the earlier WWII examples. It's lazy to attempt to frame this conflict as the same as any other just because you can claim there is a strong player and a weak player, one was somewhat more committed, one was somewhat less committed. Nonsense. You could say Israel cannot win against the Palestinians because they're super committed. Your rule of thumb doesn't seem to apply there, does it? You're cherry picking a single argument. That's just one of my points in a post with several others. If you want to talk commitment, I would like for just one of you to explain to me how your individual support for Ukraine goes beyond pecking a few keys to whine about how we (collectively) are not dumping hundreds of billion$ more into this fiasco.

You quoted me and said "I literally answered this the other day", but the only question I had asked was if you were just going to complain every time reality doesn't align with what you wanted to happen. What is it that are you so intent that I reply to? Quote it or repeat it. So you're listing our military failures as justifications as to why we should give military support to Ukraine? Well, I'll give you credit: that's a completely new and unexpected way to look at this. I don't think anyone has ever made that argument. It might be the least intellectual point attempted in this thread, but at least it's original. I got nothing for you. If Ukraine has plenty of international volunteers, why do they have conscription? Why are we seeing countless vids of them abducting their own citizens from the streets? Again, this is just basic logic. Your points are really, really bad. "I'd totally help if it weren't for my ADSC." "I'd totally help if I were allowed to fly airplanes." Funny how all of the ways you say you want to help conveniently have conditions, while all the ways you can actually help have none. Show me one receipt. Let's reel it back in to reality: Your SQ isn't getting called. You're not going to help or make sacrifices. Russia isn't just going to pack it up and put it in reverse. There will be a negotiation. Both sides will make concessions. The killing will stop. Life will go on. We'll look back just as we do on AFG, IRQ, Vietnam and say, "Well...that was f'n stupid".

Never saw it. Russia should just quit? How does that even enter into your mind as a realistic solution let alone as being in the realm of remote possibility? What a mind-numbingly ignorant position. That's something you'd expect to hear from your average TikTok account, not an educated military officer. How does Ukraine attain a position of strength? Their population is being drained of warfighters. The world can supply them unlimited weapons and money, but no one is willing to replace Ukraine's soldiers with their own... including you.

CBS poll regarding President Trump's joint address to Congress. It was shocking to see how many people disapproved. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-speech-joint-address-congress-poll-2025/