gearhog

Are you saying because Weiss was appointed by Trump, that he is incapable of failing to uphold the law? I would assume you have a low opinion of Trump. How is it you're using Trump's appointment to defend Weiss? It doesn't make any sense. I suggest you watch the full whistleblower video: https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1681738640320507904?s=20

How is it you saw a photo of Green holding up these photos, but have no idea of the context? It's a simple search. Hunter Biden paid prostitutes through his law firm, OWASCO PC, and trafficked his victims across state lines in violation of the Mann Act. Not only that, IRS whistleblowers confirm Hunter Biden committed tax fraud by deducting payments to prostitutes from OWASCO’s taxes.

I think you moved on because you were willing to condemn people to death for not taking the shot and don't want to talk about it.

As you know, Department of Justice is headed by the US Attorney General, and reports directly to the POTUS. How likely is it that the US Attorney General (Executive Branch) would pursue charges against Hunter? He documented himself committing crimes and our justice system is not providing justice. What should the Legislative branch do when laws they pass fail to be upheld? What makes you more upset: Crimes being committed and not prosecuted, or evidence of crimes being revealed?

If "Ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas. It didn't happen to Trump's children. It happened to Hunter Biden, the son of the President, a man of low moral character who was committing crimes while conducting untold millions worth of fraudulent business transactions with his father, the President, and using the Office of the President and Vice President to do it.

Sure you do. It was a binary decision. You chose one COA and are defending it.

And to think the people that botched Afghanistan and excoriated here are the very same decision makers in the current conflict. No consequences, no accountability. What could go wrong?

Then why didn’t you post that instead?

This is the craziest shyt I’ve ever read with a DoD letterhead. PDF link at the bottom. Leaked doc: https://www.dossier.today/p/confidential-biden-dod-memo-reveals WAMC - Womack Army Medical Center, Fort Bragg or whatever the woketards have named it.

I was looking at a map today depicting Russian and Ukrainian held territory. I’d like to calculate the number of square miles or kilometers, lost by Russia and recovered by Ukraine, per 1 Billion Dollars. I think it would be an interesting number. Anyone have any ideas? Here’s an article Putin somehow snuck into a notable Western media outlet. It’s worth a scan: Since Putin’s tanks crossed into Ukrainian territory last year, three options have been on the table for how this war would end: victory for one side or the other, a frozen conflict or a negotiated settlement. The public comments made this week by Oleksiy Arestovych, a former advisor to Volodymyr Zelensky’s chief of staff, appear to indicate the last may be more likely than previously thought. Arestovych raised the prospect of Ukraine making territorial concessions in return for the rest of the country receiving the most cast-iron security guarantee there is: Nato membership. These comments have proved highly controversial. Not only would such an outcome be unpalatable to many in Kyiv and other European capitals, raising it as a possibility highlights a growing uncertainty about the long-term sustainability of the war – particularly amongst Ukraine’s western backers. Arestovych’s suggestion comes at a crucial time. The long-planned counter-offensive, now in its second month, has run into several problems – not least that Kyiv is still waiting for approximately half of the western military equipment promised earlier in the year. Meanwhile, its forces are under increasing pressure to commit its reserves as Russian troops – despite reports of low morale across the front – remain dug-in, seemingly committed to defending every inch of Ukrainian ground captured since last year. As Russian minefields take their toll on western-supplied tanks and Ukrainian sappers, their forces have so-far retaken approximately five miles of the sixty miles they need to split the land-bridge connecting Russia to Crimea. The land between Mariupol in the east and Melitopol to the west is seen as the vital ground to achieving this. It is incredibly tough going for the Ukrainians. They lack the air cover and advanced jets to protect their ground forces from Russian attack helicopters and fighters. Their soldiers, meanwhile must negotiate miles of minefields, tank-traps and then ultimately the heavily dug Russian trench networks. This gruelling endeavour was always going to take longer than the occasionally impatient international audience was prepared to wait for. It is a military effort of immense proportions, where mass, manpower, morale, equipment, stocks, logistics, grit and luck all play vital roles. So far, the Ukrainians are displaying all of these military qualities. The variable that isn’t on their side is time. In war, time is perhaps the cruellest factor one cannot change. We saw this in NATO’s operation in Afghanistan, where the Taliban took great delight in the retelling of a famous Afghan proverb; ”you may have the watches, but we have the time”. Summer will soon begin to roll into autumn. Indeed, we are already half-way through the season. The fighting will begin to grind to a cold halt as the freezing winter saps troops’ ability to conduct high-intensity warfare. This will only give Russia more time to further build up its defences, as it did last winter. By this point in the West, meanwhile, all eyes will be on the upcoming US election, with more political attention diverted by the UK’s general election. Kyiv knows it has a shortened window of opportunity to capitalise on its battlefield initiative and take back as much ground as it can. If Kyiv fails in its battlefield endeavours to split that land bridge, and retake much of its own territory by winter, then vocal calls of territorial concessions for marginal political outcomes will likely become far more prevalent – not just in Ukraine but likely from western capitals, as so-called “war-fatigue” begins to bite, international stockpiles of equipment and ammunition wither and politicians begin to worry about domestic budgets ahead of national elections. While much fighting remains to be done across Ukraine’s southern farmlands over the coming months, governments across the west must be prepared for the grim prospect of territorial concessions as one potential political outcome of a failed counter-offensive. Whether a Putinist Kremlin would respect such a deal if Kyiv were to receive security pledges short of full Nato membership is extremely doubtful. Regardless, this would surely be a favoured outcome for China’s ruling “wolf warrior” foreign policy elite. Beijing would be utterly delighted if the war were to end with Ukraine divided, Russian troops permanently in the Donbas harassing Kyiv and Europe, and Nato fractured on political lines. Such an outcome would be a gift to China as Xi Jinping begins to ramp up his own imperialistic and extra-territorial ambitions across the Indo-Pacific – and a devastating defeat for the West.

Bullshit. I’ve was in the Squadron when Rich launched this forum back around 2001. I’ve been moderator and Admin here. It’s always been the same: good threads, some threads, sport bitching and arguing. It’s never been any different. Remember the Rainman days or the CannonCrashPad/RickRynearson days? Same drama, different time. Therr have been literally dozens of people who have proclaimed the forum was dead. It’s still here, they’re gone.

What an awesomely arrogant prick. 😆

If you’re white, you can’t get a job with the Civil Air Patrol. https://twitter.com/realtrmlx/status/1680946402065514496?s=20

Why would Russia decide to unilaterally invade? Just a land grab?

If you have a hard-on for war that lasts longer than 4 years, see a doctor. https://twitter.com/AsTheWorldBurnz/status/1679966772219244544?s=20

Everyone who "loves" flying for the AF just because they get to fly.

Now that the door is opening for involuntary activation, ratcheting up the numbers will be easy. I agree with this, though. If we're cheer leading a proxy war that benefits us, let's put our money where our mouth is and see how willing we, as a population, are to risk our people in direct conflict over Ukraine. It's the right thing to do. Within the last week: This, Increasing amounts of military aid, F-16s, cluster munitions, etc. Take a look at the trends here. We're committed to a path of continuous escalation. If Ukraine was capable of defeating Russia, it'd have happened. We can give them all the help in the world, but they still have a finite amount if fighting men. We will never know the real losses being incurred, but in attrition warfare where rates are more or less the same on both sides, Russia comes out ahead unless NATO member countries send their men. Ukraine is being backstopped by us, but Russia is being backstopped by China. If we're calling up Reservists just to sit on the sidelines for Atlantic Resolve, what does it say about our ability to fight a potential second conflict? Let's say Russia is defeated and pulls back. What's next? Do we redraw the old borders after hundreds of billions of $ and countless lives have been lost? If NATO and Ukraine declare victory, do they continue to allow Russia to exist in a weakened state only to pose a threat later? No, our leadership is going for broke on this one. No one financing this war gives a shit about Ukraine. This is about Western economic dominance against the expanding threat of BRICS Plus. One of the big players has to be completely knocked out and Ukraine is a great excuse.

I've been seeing a lot of articles the last few days with some shocking statistics. Looks like we may have to sub-contract the defense of our nation to foreign countries. https://www.army.mil/article/260969/secretary_of_the_army_christine_wormuths_remarks_to_the_2022_ausa_opening_ceremony_october_10_2022as_prepared https://warontherocks.com/2023/03/addressing-the-u-s-military-recruiting-crisis/ https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/4087630-recruiting-the-all-volunteer-force-requires-a-whole-of-nation-approach/ The one that really caught my attention was a Wall Street Journal article (behind a paywall) that suggests that Veterans are contributing to the crisis by not recommending military service. https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-pentagons-recruitment-woes-army-military-navy-air-force-u-s-defense-11665664019 I've given my kids my thoughts on the issue and thankfully, they've recognized they have better options. If a young person has common sense, intelligence, and a work ethic, you can go out into the real world, name your price, and live freely. As probably most of you have experienced, when someone knows you're a pilot, they'll send a young person your way for advice. A lot. What you experienced is not going to be what they experience. Many of us had great careers, but it doesn't matter. Given the current state, an assessment of the trends, and attempting to forecast what it might be like the next 10-20 years, what do you tell them?

@Best-22 Why do you only downvote posts, yet never contribute to the discussion? No one cares about your downvotes, least of all me. This isn't Reddit. Likes and dislikes mean nothing. If you have an opinion on these issues, posting is super easy. I'm more than happy to hear you out and discuss your concerns. But if you're going to take pot shots with your BB gun from a distance instead of actually engaging with a single original though, it really makes you look like a giant bonus hole. Edit: I'll give @nsplayer and @Prozac a little credit here, at least they have (had) the courage to put an unpopular opinion out there. You never did. Weak.

You have two assumptions here I disagree with. First, financial doom is guaranteed. It is possible to be fiscally responsible in the US. There was a recent article regarding Indiana vs. Illinois. Budget surplus vs incredible budget deficits. So you can have a government that is not spending money they don't have.If "they" are going to spend us into oblivion, it is our duty to use democracy against them. That may sound naive, but we've strayed a long way from the founding principles of the country, and I think it's worth the effort to try and right the ship instead of abandon it. Second, that Russia was ever really a threat that necessitated us to not only exacerbate our financial problems, but also increase the probability of a nuclear exchange. All of this "our intentions are noble and pure and they're pure evil" is just a page out of the propaganda playbook that gets rehashed over and over and over again. "They got yellow cake! They're using chemical and biological weapons! They're using torture!" They can't operate a few miles from their own border, they certainly wouldn't be leaping across Europe. The claim that the cost of our inaction would have been higher than the cost of what we're doing now doesn't pass the smell test. "Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." It's all propaganda. This is another position that bothers me. Earlier it was claimed that Russia was our geopolitical adversary and it is ultimately in OUR best interest that they are weakened/defeated. Why are we not also fighting them ourselves? How can it be claimed that we're doing moral good by sending tens of thousands of Ukrainians to the meat grinder so that we may benefit from it? "It's a bargain! Best money we've ever spent!" If the Ukrainians wish to fight, why do we only hear from Zalensky and rarely from average Ukrainians? Many Ukrainians are being forcibly conscripted to fight. Off the street. Thrown into a van. It's a tough sell to say that we have the moral high ground when all we lose is money while they lose their lives. If Russia is our enemy and we as a nation determine that Russia is actually threatening our precious bodily fluids, then let's declare war and go fuckin fight 'em. Paying someone else to do is kinda shameful. The word "evil" gets tossed around a lot, but is rarely defined outside of some cartoonish image of bond villian. I recently heard someone say that "Evil is someone trying to control someone else in a way that is not their best interest." Sure, Putin probably has evil intentions, but so do the other players. It's as if we're watching bunch of mob families go to war while we try to decide which one to pay protection fees to. I don't think this is true. It's not going to take decades for this to play out. Go check out some of the charts at the FRED website. Lots of indicators are exponential, in a bad way. I think we do have a chance to "flatten the curve", but it's as if our leadership has decided that it's better to loot what's left of the economy before it crashes down than try and save it. You keep saying you'd rather go through the hard times now than later. If it's as bad as you say, there is no later. What comes after will not resemble our current way of life in the slightest. It'll be a fiery hellscape for as long as we and our children live. If the US goes down, so goes the world. Your chief concern won't be geopolitical rivals on the other side of the planet, it'll be fighting a woke transexual feudal warlord from District 9 over a bag of rice. 😄 Our Nation and the world has problems, but online negativity notwithstanding, my first hand experience with our way of life is still pretty fkng decent. I still want to preserve it even if it may seem futile. There are better ways to outcompete China and Russia than risking thermonuclear war so some politicians and elites can line their pockets. Cheers.

First, awesome post. Lots of good points. However, as unnatural as it is for me to challenge anyone's ideas, I'm gonna take a stab at it. If you read the article, it listed very specific expenditures, exactly where the money was going, and exactly how much. I can't help but notice that the basis for your argument is a lot of "But what about this? But what about that?". When someone gets caught speeding, does telling the cop that they speed often and by a larger amount absolve them? Didn't the cop notice all the other people speeding? COVID is a separate issue, and I think there should have been some help from the government to dampen the systemic economic shock, but it was way overdone, and there was some fraud. Was your stimulus check fraud? Among others, didn't you just make that very claim a few sentences later by saying "That's a steal"? And here's where you lose me: You say we are now free of the illusion that Russia is a meaningful threat to the world, but 4 lines later say that they are also a geopolitical adversary. Which is it? Immediately upon the realization that Russia isn't the threat we thought they were, there should have been a negotiated end to hostilities. Again with the whatabout. "We're already $1 million dollars in debt, what's $100,000 more?" Fortunately, that logic doesn't work in my household. I can't believe it seems logical to others. Especially for something you've already said isn't a real threat. It seems you're more of a moral relativist whereas I'm more of a moral absolutist. That's probably where our differences lie an what makes me seem more disagreeable. I'm with you on much of your assessment here, but I'm not with you on how it should be addressed. You seem to be saying the battle against economic doom is lost, so why not exacerbate the problem and speed up the eventual collapse so we can get to what's next. If history is any indication, what comes next in the wake of social instability and political upheaval will be far worse than what we have now and it's worth staving off as long as we possibly can. I hate to quote Sun Tzu, but "An evil man will burn his own nation to the ground to rule over the ashes." That's exactly what our nation's leadership seem hell bent on doing. Russia would be the least of our concerns in the aftemath.

Good question. Yet here you are, quoting me in a post that was not directed at you. "Attention in the terminal, last and final call. Flight @nsplayer to Whogivesashit is now boarding. All remaining passengers make your way to Gate 69 for an immediate departure." How many times are you going to announce your departure? I try very hard not to use name-calling or personal insults and I don't believe I have with you. I simply don't like many of your opinions. If me challenging those opinions causes you to fold up your lawn chair and run off, were those opinions really that strong to begin with? Will they be missed?

Nice. Amazing what you can accomplish with a Sharpie. I was so moved by the judicious use of our tax dollars, I wrote my very first poem: Maxxpro. Easy come. Easy go. Those poor Ukrainians. What a tragedy.

You were asked a simple direct question with an easy answer, and this is how you dodge it? At least your open contempt for humanitarianism conveys how you likely feel about a family failing to legitimize a little girl's inclusion in it.

Fraud is deception that results in financial gain. It's obvious a very large portion of these funds are being redirected away from the advertised purpose of helping Ukraine defeat Russia. I'm against the COVID bailouts as well, but at least average US citizens were direct beneficiaries. I think it's hard to make the case Russia was a dastardly superpower capable and ready to steamroll across Europe while also alleging they were stopped a few dozen miles into Ukraine for a paltry sum. I think one should be careful bragging how cheaply we kill Russians, lest you sound like Lindsey Graham. https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/us-news/lindsey-graham-zelensky-russia-meeting-b2347305.html Your Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are a waste, but paying for war on the other side of the planet is not? You know funny-money-printing is going to doom us, so it's better to try and doom adversaries than try and help ourselves? Does not compute.