Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 11/18/2024 in all areas

  1. Sure, but the court of public opinion should still have an expectation of evidence. Point me to a single piece of evidence. One. That's all I want to see. This conversation is irrelevant specifically because of the number of times Democrats have outright lied about these exact situations to smear their opponents. If they hadn't pulled this as many times as they have, allegations might have more weight. And so far the only thing I've heard that is remotely substantiated about Gaetz is that he goes/went to sex parties. So yeah if my daughter decides to be a swinger with a soft spot for narcissists, then exactly what would I be objecting to? I'm also not sure what you mean by "let" my daughter date him. Is she a minor in this hypothetical? If so then obviously I'm not letting a minor date someone my age. If she's an adult, I'm not sure what type of backwards old-timey nonsense you're asking. My daughter will no more need my permission to date as an adult as I needed my father in law's permission to marry my wife. Look, I know you've still got wounds here from the number of times you've been wrong, so kudos for sticking around. But your inability to comprehend a simple point is keeping you in this Doom loop of nonsensical posts. Allegations are no longer trustworthy. We simply have to see the evidence that is made against politicians in this era to be able to make a decision. Your example illustrates this perfectly. All of the evidence regarding Trump's 34 felonies have been laid bare, and they are found wanting. I'm not denying that he had sex with a pornstar and then paid her off to keep quiet. That's the most believable thing I've heard in this entire election. I wish our choices were better than this, but they're not. If you can't tell why Americans didn't give a shit about these convictions, you're as out of touch as the Democrats who watched breathlessly as their candidate went down in flames. Trump has been pitched as a rapist, a literal Russian spy, the harbinger of Doom for democracy, a literal Nazi, a racist, a sexist... You get the idea. For nearly a decade we have listened to every shade of "expert" explain the many and incontrovertible ways that Donald Trump was a criminal and villain. And after all of that, to include a multi-year special prosecutor investigation with the full weight and resources of the federal government behind it, we get... "ledger entries for legal expenses." Cognitive dissonance indeed.
    3 points
  2. Here’s something for you—you can be against spending hundreds of billions of dollars in support of Ukraine while also not being supportive of Russia.
    2 points
  3. 2 points
  4. If you like your invasions justified, I have some history you'll enjoy reading.
    2 points
  5. Innocent. Until. Proven. Guilty. If you have some evidence you would like us to consider, share it. Unless *you* know why the DOJ didn't prosecute Gaetz, why waste everyone's time with hypotheticals?
    2 points
  6. Rich isn't it. The double standard is astounding especially when you look at the case of Democrat Congressman Eric Swalwell who actually WAS having an affair with a Chinese agent...no big deal according to Democrats.
    2 points
  7. We’ve decended into Bizarro World when Fetterman and Sanders are the voices of reason!
    2 points
  8. No. It's Pennsylvania.
    1 point
  9. To maybe draw this away from insults and back to rational discussion. For those who are against - do you think we should turn a blind eye to Russian aggression? If no what is your response, diplomacy and sanctions or just ignore it. Do you think he will stop at Ukraine? What do you see as the impact of Ukraine under Putin's control? For those who are in favor - How do you mitigate the potential for the conflict to spill over? What are the downsides of providing munitions and money? What do you say about Ukrainian corruption? I've stated many times I am in favor of the support we have provided, for a relatively low cost we have removed Russia as a near-peer threat for many years to come. That being said I do have concerns about striking deep into Russian territory with American made weapons.
    1 point
  10. glad you're a warmongering cuck who blindly supports the flag officer/politician class...and who will always "jump" when someone says "war". sad to see. korea, vietnam, all the cia coups, GWOT failures...none of that matters to you. You're ALWAYS doing the right thing spreading that american democracy around the globe. WW3? nah. don't be a pussy. it's gonna be FINE shooting american made weapons inside russian territory. putin isn't really serious about any of his red lines. oh you have reservations about that? YOU MUST BE SUPPORTING PUTIN WHAT A SIMP! /s
    1 point
  11. it's a fact. they are not nato and we should not be supporting them. if you read history tell me what the US promised Russia in the early 1990s? you think the US would stand for Canada joining a Chinese military alliance? the level of stupidity that some of you "officers" have is mindblowing.
    1 point
  12. i'm not supporting them you DOLT! there are circumstances that the US/NATO have done since 2014 that have lead to Russia deciding to invade. being blind to historical foreign policy won't magically make the russians go away. don't be manipulated like a fool
    1 point
  13. How bad is FSU this year?
    1 point
  14. Indeed, it was totally unnecessary for Putin to invade a nation unprovoked.
    1 point
  15. Ukraine is a friendly democratic nation with zero expansionist desires that was invaded by an unfriendly, undemocratic nation with expansionist desires. That’s the reason that Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Finland joined NATO. Because none of them could trust Russia. And as long as Putin is in power and attempting to derail our foreign policy on every continent, neither can we. Abandoning Ukraine is giving him a historic come from behind win, and it damages trust in the US for every ally.
    1 point
  16. Saw these from a FB page: Vought MiG. I think this was a real proposal but went nowhere back in the 80s. From what I found, it was to update and outfit as aggressors for the Navy 21’s and maybe 23’s One more: Czech A-159B Sokol attack design from the late 60s Google translation but the backstory: At the end of the 1960s, the Aero Vodochody company started a team around the designer Ing. Jan Vlček to work on two projects of light fighters. One of them was the L-159 (also A-159B) Sokol project. He set himself the goal of producing a supersonic fighter plane that could represent a replacement for the Su-7b fighter jet. Work on it apparently began in 1967. The machine was to be powered by two engines with a thrust of 19.6 kN, located in nacelles on the sides of the rear fuselage. The arrow wing was supposed to have teardrop-shaped additional tanks at the ends. High-wing, mid-wing and low-wing layouts were considered. Priority was given to the last option. An interesting feature was the design of the main landing gear, which was supposed to have two wheels arranged in tandem on each leg, which was supposed to facilitate the required operations from unpaved surfaces. The armament was to be carried on one under-fuselage and six under-wing racks. The machine was supposed to reach a maximum speed of approx. 1500 km/h (Mach 1.4) and its reach was to be around 15,000 m. A model L-159 (A-159B) was built for tests in the VZLÚ wind tunnel, but the project was stopped in early 1970. Only the presented model, which has a length of 605 mm, a width of 335 mm and a height of 175 mm, has been preserved to this day. The model was acquired for the collection of VHÚ Prague by purchase from a private person in 2022.
    1 point
  17. To hear Senator Pocahontas Warren calling Tulsi Gabbard a Russian Asset and Spy pisses me off beyond recognition. Unless she can actually prove it isn't that slanderous and legally actionable (even towards a public figure)? I'd love to see her charged and tried.
    1 point
  18. The AF is healing? https://www.af.mil/Diversity/
    1 point
  19. One can only support a nation in duress if they are obligated by a treaty: the opinion of a simpleton troll. Glad you’re not an officer and just an online Putin simp.
    0 points
  20. If you really think he did that with no reasons you’re a historical retard. Truly.
    0 points
  21. Bashi, you’re a coward and fool for supporting Russia and an embarrassment to have in the US military. It’s bad enough that I have to assume you’re a troll. Good day.
    -3 points
×
×
  • Create New...