tac airlifter

I don't think this will change how you feel, but for the record you were completely wrong. if I were you, I would be asking myself: what other strongly held opinions do I have based on things I assume to be true but are in fact, not true? How else am I the victim of a propaganda machine?

I'd be happy to engage with you if you could answer one question: who blew up the Nordstream pipeline?

So from your perspective coordinated MSM reporting based on anonymous sources is more credible than a sitting member of Congress fully read into the subject matter and speaking on the record? We disagree. Given your use of POG as a pejorative can I assume you yourself have a combat infantry background? your assertion that everyone is an unqualified white male in this administration is false, rendering your DEI question moot. "Qualified" is subjective but gender/ethnicity is not:

Is there any chance you’ve been misled by the MSM regarding the precise nature of SECDEF cyber order? I personally don’t know what going on, but the MSM lies constantly and here we have someone in the know disputing your assertion. 🤷🏽‍♂️ Also curious if you can explain the “POG” characterization since the dude literally deployed as an infantry officer in combat?

This is a great point, once we established air superiority against the Taliban, the Houthis, & HTS we've dominated. That's why Afghanistan, Yemen and Syria are solid victories for the US 🇺🇸 Honorable mention to Libya, Somalia, Mali. And the "all air power no-fly zones" from Iraq in the 90s definitely prevented a decades long ground war. You seem like someone who spent the last 20 years fighting all over the world gaining a wealth of practical combat experience, not at all a new guy.

I quoted that person because after responding myself multiple times I felt perhaps their words would make the point I was attempting in a way which resonated better and added details. If you feel my own points were inarticulate I welcome that feedback. I did watch the video. In fact I posted a 10 minute clip of the video. If you have feedback on something I said, I’m ready to listen. If you have additional inputs on the quote I added to assist my point, I’m not interested, it’s boring. Didn’t know you were waiting? Here’s my standard: if the quote is cogent and concisely articulates a concept I find true, I will use it. I have a whole list of quotes, and many of them from people with moral failings including Ghandi (who beat his wife), Socrates (who was found guilty of corrupting the youth) and Sun Tzu (who was a racist mercenary). I try to judge ideas based on the ideas, rather than dismiss them because the speaker has other failings.

“The only people you can find?” Bro the thing just happened today and I linked a post which made articulate points. If that poster has posted offensive stuff about a different topic at a different time, I do not care or find any relevancy. So your standard for quoting someone is you agree with them on every topic they’ve ever articulated? Noted.

So a "known racist" has a POV on a topic unrelated to race, and it's "not ideal" that a similar POV aligns with this? What? hope you don't like vegetables, because Hitler liked vegetables and we know how that turned out.

Yea, again I agree with that assessment. However, if Zelensky had the tiniest modicum of common sense he would've sat there calmly or made a short polite rebuttal: "we have different perspectives and are still talking this through" and all is well. Perhaps it's because English isn't his first language or he's dumb but whatever weird lecture/tirade he began was poor form from a practical standpoint given the power dynamics in that room. Simply put: he's dead without our support. Now he has a very valid question: diplomacy didn't work earlier with Putin why would it work now? And if we stop here, what's to prevent Putin from assessing he has won and continuing the aggression? Dude, these are the real questions of the conflict and the attempt at peace. And I don't have good answers myself, and maybe neither does Trump. But how a world leader like Zelensky does not understand Trump is thin skinned and that tactic will not work on him is beyond me. edit to add: this X post articulates my sense of this event

Bro, I agree with all of that, but Zelensky made a gamble by going outside of those norms. Once he picked a fight, what was Trump supposed to do in your opinion?

So for clarity, how would you achieve this humiliating defeat Putin deserves? I don't disagree he deserves it, but it's not happening. Would you just continue more of the same? I understand your emotion, i'm hoping for a practical answer.

Good question (and fair reply in 1st paragraph). No that was an embarrassing display on all sides. But honest question back: what should Trump have done when Zelensky went out of his way to pick a fight in a public setting? It was very rude and inappropriate, how would you have played it?

I see you lack the ability to convince others or defend your thoughts, that's unfortunate. I'm sure relationships are difficult. For the record I don't, he is an evil dictator. But as a thought experiment, how do you think the war will end? You'd advocate for more UKR funding and close yourself off even further to discussion. Ok, we've tried that for many years and UKR is slowly bleeding to death. Do you have any ideas on how to solve this conflict?

I don't mean this disrespectfully, but that line of logic is not intelligent. For starters, Russian talking points are how Russians feel. If you want to negotiate an end to conflict, you must take into account how the Russians feel. Secondly does labeling something "talking points" mean the perspective is invalid and not worthy of discussion? That's what's implied whenever I hear that phrase: a complete dismissal of the argument. I'm sure it makes you feel immune to propaganda, and it's fine if you hold all the winning cards and you're in a winning position. But if you're losing, like Ukraine is, then you kinda have to engage in diplomacy with other people, and that means an outright dismissal of their perspective is infeasible. Finally imagine if that conversational technique was used against you, would you appreciate somebody dismissing your opinion and refusing to answer the concerns you raise because they categorize your thoughts as illegitimate and talking points from the other side? No, you would not appreciate that, in fact that would be a very dumb way to engage with you or anybody. Because it's dumb.

I noticed the veiled threat by Zelenskyy. Wow fuck that guy.

I heard a passenger interview from an intercept once (not this one) & she was talking about how safe she felt once the fighter showed up. I don't think she understood what that presence indicates, but it's not passenger safety.

If the MAJCOM/CC did a BNR to said Deputy ordering this task: yes or course, wouldn’t you? and let’s not pretend all fed workers are equivalent to a line captain training for war, lol. The reason this effort is happening (acknowledging execution is a mess) is the massive amount of worthless workers discovered who were getting paid for not working or otherwise gaming the system and adding no value. Not to mention the subtle threat of inside resistance to our duly elected new administration.

False comparison. People voted for this bro, just say you hate democracy (joking🙂). Edited to add: I also wouldn't accept a brain dead Alzheimer's patient in command, but don't forget you were pleased with your vote there.

I’m sorry for the turmoil you’re experiencing. It sucks. My comment was meant to compare the state of our nation under this admin vs what would have been under another, not kick you while you’re going through something. My apologies if it came off personally unkind, although I do believe what I said. FWIW, I think your job & retirement is fine. The Trump admin MO is big talk, scare people, then negotiate. There’s so much indefensible fat to cut that I think they’ll remain locked on politically palatable targets (NGOs, charity fraud schemes, USAID type BS) instead of government contractors. AI or a lonely teenager pounding Mountain Dew.

Yup, a shit show for sure. But 100 times better than Harris; I remain pleased with my Trump vote.

Treaty violation is another fascinatingly inconsistent aspect of the pro-UKR war folks. And I’m not referencing you Viper or any other posters here, we’re all just nobody’s chatting and I trust your opinions are honest and nuanced. I’m talking the senior IR crowd. Jake Sullivan talked a lot about that to justify Biden’s stalwart commitment to UKR funding, but he conveniently had a different rationale which allowed for ignoring international norms and treaties to invade Libya. And Syria. Traditional republicans are no better: Cheney is all about UKR support because we just can’t have countries invade each other without provocation! Except Iraq 😂 I’m distrustful of inconsistencies and hypocrisy.

🤣

Justice. B3 next.

Yea I don't bat an eye about Russian elections, I know they're BS since Russia is a dictatorship and we aren't their ally. Standard is higher for someone who wants my money to purportedly fight for my values. And the Afghans managed to hold elections, at our insistence, despite actual wartime conditions and an enemy who was actively conquering provinces. It's strange to hear from guys like nsplayr (who I personally like) about how UKR can't hold elections due to martial law and their constitution allows for that... and the constitution must always be followed of course. But that standard of strict adherence to the constitution doesn't apply to our 2nd amendment. Then I hear from other folks how elections would be so hard now, but we needed them in IZ/AFG because otherwise government is illegitimate. And of course UKR must be given cluster bombs and allowed to strike deep into Moscow but God forbid we strike structures in Yemen that might have terrorist kids inside. There's no logic to these inconsistencies. My sense is the pro-UKR war crowd lacks consistent application of principals they espouse. Which means they aren't principals, they're just feelings. And I get it, an unjust thing happened to Ukraine and Putin sucks. But damn dude, they have no path to victory. Zelenskyy outlaws opposition parties and has indefinitely suspended elections. He's asking for nukes. His military is posting hundreds of videos of them killing unarmed surrendering Russian soldiers (which is a war crime if I do it).... oh and we're broke. Time to negotiate peace and accept some territory lost. Table it for future reacquisition, it can't be defended anymore.

It's tough to reply to anything in this thread. You and others make good points & maybe we can have a good chat over whiskey sometime. Regarding the elections thing I'll just add I don't agree with your take above mainly because it's the opposite position our nation has had historically and no one explained why the change. The Afghans & iraqis both held elections during the height of their wars for survival. And we insisted because we knew the legitimacy of government directly correlates to the consent of the governed. We preached it loud for years, and I still agree with it.