wolfriverjoe

The US is sending Bradley IFVs. Far better than M113s. While a bunch have been destroyed, and even more damaged (mostly repaired and put back into service), few of the troops in them, or in the modern tanks have been killed. That's the huge advantage of western equipment over Soviet (Russian). Crew survivability. Ukraine is 'fighting smart', and is seeing kill ratios that are very favorable. While its true they can't afford to lose as many soldiers as the Russians, first off they aren't. Second off the Russians do not have an 'endless supply' of troops. They've scoured the prisons. Last I heard, they're going after migrant workers. Both immigrants from the former 'Soviet Republics' and Russians from the far east. The Russians are also seeing soldiers refuse to fight. Those 'refusniks' suffer some pretty severe punishments, but they know full well that they're just going to die on the front lines anyway, so what's the difference? With Wagner mostly out of the picture, the Russians are really in trouble. They had a fair amount of time to create and construct really good defensive positions, but Ukraine is still making slow progress just about everywhere they try. The Russians are pretty much out of reserve troops. If (and it is a pretty big 'if') Ukraine can make a serious breakthrough somewhere, they're going to run rampant behind the Russian lines. There's very little to stop them. Rather prophetic of you. The bridge was badly damaged last night. It's going to be a couple months before one side is useable again. The 'how' is pretty speculative (as it has been). Current speculation is that they used a 'remote controlled explosive laden boat'. Apparently blowing it up from below is better than missiles from above. People who know more about these things than I do can make educated guesses from the damage. Pure speculation is that the Ukrainians 'MacGuyvered' a jet ski into a self propelled marine bomb. And as far as timing goes, the Ukrainians have a HUGE network of informants in occupied Ukraine. They know a lot about who is going where and when.

Honestly, I don't know. How far I'd be in favor of restrictions going isn't a question I have an answer to. 15 or 20 years ago, I'd be totally against them. Today? I don't know. I have seriously mixed feelings on it. It's abundantly clear from other places around the world that serious gun restrictions have not produced the authoritarian governments that many (including me) expected. We are getting some seriously fucked up and fascist shit going on here in the US, even with way too many guns. I DO know that I am no longer a 'single issue' voter, and that gun rights have gone way down on my 'selection criteria' for a candidate to get my vote. Again, 15 or 20 years ago that was not the case. The other thing is... Reality. There's more guns than people in this country right now. The money needed to compensate the owners, even at a fraction of the market value, is insane. It simply isn't there. Someone suggested 10% of the defense budget, but even that wouldn't get all the guns. And there's no way the military, the defense industry or the congress-creatures would go for that. This doesn't even get into the questions of how many gun owners would refuse to surrender their guns. How many would try to fight back (and lose). How many cops would refuse to take the guns away and how much of the military would refuse to participate if ordered (which would be an even bigger issue). I simply can't believe it would happen, unless a whole lot of the US changes. And changes a lot. We're definitely stuck.

I'm not Bill, but when I point out how useless and pointless most of the proposed 'solutions' are, I get asked the same question. To answer your questions directly: Trigger locks aren't as good as many like to think. As with any lock, it can be defeated. It's just a matter of how determined the person is to get through it. Trigger locks are ok for keeping kids away from guns. But that's about it. Biometrics have some promise, but it's got a lot of flaws. Keep in mind that ALL of the laws that mention biometric devices specifically exclude police from them. Despite the fact that a significant number of cops are shot with their own gun (can't find the number with a quick search), the cops refuse to use this technology. What does that say about it? Or maybe about the cops? "Secure your gun" laws have some merit. But how much of a difference will that make? How many of the high profile shootings happened with stolen guns? Versus how many happened with guns that were legally purchased? I keep repeating that "I don't know" how to fix it. I don't disagree that it's 'broken', but I don't see any real solutions. Bigun proposed making ALL transactions (or maybe just 'all military style semi-autos, not certain I remember correctly) subject to NFA rules. I never did respond to that, but my response could (should?) have been that it won't work. #1 - Miller vs US Supreme Court ruling basically said that NFA was unconstitutional. It was never carried through because Miller was never re-tried. So the ruling ended up in a sort of 'legal limbo'. Given that previous ruling and the current composition of the court, I can see a challenge to the NFA making it all the way through and watching the NFA disappear in the not-too-distant future. #2 - NFA rules have either the local sheriff or chief of police having final say on whether or not the purchase happens. Under current laws, a sheriff or chief of police who doesn't think 'those sorts of guns belong in our community' can veto any and all transfers. That's not speculation. That's real. #3 - Again, the sheriff or chief of police has to sign off on all transfers. How many of them are going to be willing to take on that much extra work (and responsibility). How many sheriffs didn't want to do the "Brady background checks"? Remember the lawsuits from them? How many have said flat out that they'd not bother investigating, let alone prosecuting violations of 'universal background checks'? The way that Australia & the UK dealt with 'gun violence' was 'confiscation & compensation'. They took most of the guns away from the public (and paid a fraction of the value to the former owners). That will NEVER happen in the US. Given the current Supreme Court (and the average age), it won't pass legal challenges for a long time (likely not in my lifetime). Given the strength of the conservative base here in the US (they're a minority, but Trump still got 75 MILLION votes in 2020), I honestly don't see any real changes happening any time soon.

I don't doubt that there ARE Abrams tanks in that picture... Somewhere. But the 3 in the front are M60s (I think). And the rows and rows look like m113s and some derivatives (the ones in the 2nd & 4th row are M577 command vehicles). One problem with giving Abrams to Ukraine is that US versions have Depleted Uranium armor. That's an item that cannot beexported. Export versions of the tanks have different armor. So the US tanks destined for Ukraine need to have the DU armor removed and replaced. There's only one place that can do that right now. Various other companies were solicited to do it, but none were able to meet the requirements. So it's going to take some time to make that happen. Also, don't forget that Germany 'dragged their feet' pretty good on the Leopard tanks. So it's not just the US. Plus, the "Freedom Caucus" (Freedom from decency? From Intelligence?) is dead set against helping Ukraine out. Those dipshits keep introducing legislation to halt aid.

My Pillow is auctioning off a lot of their stuff. The reasons for this are very clearly SC material. But there are a bunch (17 if I counted correctly) Juki DDL 9000B SH digitial readout machines, with table being sold. Current bids on them runs from $525 to $750. I don't know enough about commercial machines to know if these would be good for our sort of use. But I thought there would be a few people interested. Auction ends 7/18 (tomorrow from when I posted it).

Well, I would think that the victim should have the same ability to 'grope' as the attacker. You know, with their foot. Into his crotch. I know a woman who started taking Karate when her kids started. She's well along the belt progression. She showed me a video of a snap kick exercise. Just simple forward kicks, mostly with the lower leg. If not blocked, she could kick a dude in the nuts maybe 15 times in that 10 seconds. With the element of surprise for the 1st one (she doesn't look threatening in any way) and shock and pain after that, I'd bet she'd get a whole bunch in. Not joking in any way, shape or form.

So, as usual, you are completely ignoring the actual question. One more time, WHAT EVIL DID OBAMA OR BIDEN DO?? You can ask a "God fearing Christian a question, but don't expect an answer that is anything other than evasion". You are at least sort of close to the problem here. "Principalities and powers" doing evil. You know, the people that want to ban books, hurt people who are different, lie about the past, subjugate women, that sort of thing. Funny how those are almost exclusively 'conservatives' these days. Funny how few of them actually follow the principles set down by Jesus.

Since when is the GOP the 'entire right'? Check out the Lincoln Project. There are a LOT of conservatives that want to see the GOP go away. OTOH, there are a lot of conservatives that want ANYONE THAT DISAGREES WITH THEM to 'disappear'. To be 'eliminated'.

Not just promotions. Appointments too. One significant example is that the Marine Corps has no Commandant. For the first time ever, the former Commandant stepped down (as required) with no successor confirmed. Tuberville's idiotic obstinance is seriously degrading the military's effectiveness. A growing number of important leadership positions (important enough to require Senate confirmation of nominees) are unfilled. They have 'acting' heads. Who are constrained in a variety of ways from properly performing the duties of the position. So much for the Rs 'supporting the military'.

It's also a hell of a useful tool for scammers. In a very wide variety of ways.

It also depends on which translation you use.

The biggest issue with cluster bombs is the duds. For those who aren't familiar with them, a cluster bomb is basically a big box holding a bunch of 'bomblets' (yes, little 'baby bombs'). It unloads the bomblets and they fall to the ground and explode. Because of all the overlapping explosions, some don't explode. They aren't 'broken', they just didn't go off when they were supposed to. They can go off when disturbed. So someone can be walking through an area that was hit by a cluster bomb and accidentally detonate one of these duds. The Russians also include bomblets intentionally fused for delayed explosion. 10 to 30 minutes. This is intended to kill or injure people responding to the initial attack. Russia has been using cluster munitions on civilian targets. That's a war crime. The intentionally delayed munitions on a civilian target is a further war crime. OTOH, Ukraine has NOT been targeting civilian areas. The dud rate is also significantly lower for newer cluster munitions used by Ukraine than the much older ones used by Russia (roughly 2% vs 8% from what I can find). While many countries have banned their use, that use alone is not a war crime.

The "Q leader" known as 'Negative 48' has died as a result of injuries from a motorcycle crash (dirt bike at an off-road park). This is the guy who conned a LOT of people into giving him money to hold rallies celebrating the 'return' of JFK & JFK Jr in Dallas. Of course the 'true believers' (the gullible fools) don't think he's really dead. This is all 'part of the plan'. Really. Link to story: https://www.vice.com/en/article/88x8b4/michael-protzman-negative48-jfk-qanon-dead Barnum was right.

Minus the sarcasm, hydrogen and nuclear fission are both equally 'prime examples'.

I could be wrong, but I've heard that he's not going to get the opportunity to 'turn on Trump'. He was given multiple chances to be honest, to simply tell the FBI the truth and he chose to lie. His credibility is shit. The prosecution doesn't need his testimony to convict Trump. They have tons of evidence. I think they want a 'little guy' to show they aren't just going after Trump. They want to show the whole world that there are consequences for aiding and abetting crimes of this magnitude. Of course, it will also be a clear demonstration of how well Trump treats his 'loyal followers'. The money he's conned out of his cult members could easily be given to Nauta to help cover his defense expenses. Think that's going to happen? HA!!!!

Ummm... You do realize that this is the "Fuck Your Feelings" crowd, right? THEIR feelings are all important and must be recognized and respected. YOUR feelings are trivial, pointless and stupid. Fuck them. How about this one? https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=597233499186522&set=pcb.597234235853115

Well yeah. One benefits conservatives and one benefits those people.

Are you trying to pretend that the 'government intervention' requiring businesses to provide access to disabled people through the ADA is different than the 'government intervention' where Affirmative Action' provides access to minorities? Or that the ADA wasn't opposed by the EXACT SAME PEOPLE who opposed Affirmative Action? This is what my edited/deleted post was supposed to be. I accidentally quoted Joe instead if Airdvr.

No. There are other schools However, a Harvard degree will open doors that a degree from elsewhere would not. To pretend that it's not important for ALL PEOPLE to have equal access to that degree is as stupid as pretending that they do have that access, or that they would without 'government intervention '.

What happens when the 'individuals' ARE THE PROBLEM? Look at the numbers above. How is that not "white privilege"?

I am reminded of the scene in Blazing Saddles where Hedley Lamar (Harvey Korman) is fondling the 'Lady Liberty' statue while planning the 'Land Snatch' of Rock Ridge. This was supposed to be comedy. Not super funny when it's real.

But... But... But... MINORITIES get in based on merit. "OUR PEOPLE' are 'different'. And there's no such thing as 'white privilege. Riiiiiiiight.

His 'cause' is trolling. Anything that generates a response is considered a success. No need to actually 'support his argument'. Post 28 - Asked a direct question by a 'known to be reasonable' person, responds by asking a question on a completely different subject.

Yeah, funny how those two lists tend to coincide.

Interesting. I can see how that would be helpful in understanding why 'certain people' aren't currently posting. A bit on the 'gossipy' side, but useful.