Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
a sign you're losing the intellectual argument is when you have nothing to offer but "well you're a putin agent" drivel
it isn't adding anything to the conversation and very childish.

That’s rich.
Posted
47 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

A good summary 

By a guy who lost his investments in Russia and now takes money from the Kremlin? That’s rich—even coming from you.

 

  • Downvote 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, chase said:

By a guy who lost his investments in Russia and now takes money from the Kremlin? That’s rich—even coming from you.

 

by a guy with 11 posts and no evidence of said claim? very rich.

again your side throws insults with no historical facts, content, or evidence. might be a clue that you're being deceived.

how about you address the points mr. sachs made? any rebuttals to his claims? or just insults?

Edited by BashiChuni
Posted
On 3/1/2025 at 8:18 AM, 17D_guy said:

So how about that Oval Office meeting?

Possibly one of the most transparent demonstrations of high stakes diplomatic negotiation that’s ever been available to the public. It had the feel of a meeting that should have been behind closed doors.  So why wasn’t it?

We can assume that both sides were blundering fools who allowed their emotions to take over.  Or, they knew exactly what they were doing. 

So, what would be the desired outcomes from such a public display?  What were the realized outcomes.

Putin certainly watched the interchange. He’s probably going to come away from it willing to allow Trump to be an impartial arbitrator. 

Z comes away staying true to his position, and not undermining the faith of his people.  He fought valiantly for the Biden status quo, and lost.  Which sends a clear message to anyone who benefits from the status quo (most of Europe) that they’re not getting any more free chicken from the US. Z gained incredible negotiating power with European leaders. He also gets access to some creative peace solutions if the rare earth minerals deal ever gets realized.

Trump gets to stay true to his campaign promises, and further separate himself from Biden. He also gets to avoid direct provocation of large scale US conflict.    

Vance gets yet another opportunity, as Trump’s successor apparent, to demonstrate a hardline diplomatic posture, putting American outcomes first.  
 

So, they may all be fools.  Or, we might find ourselves looking back on this event as an inflection point in the path to peace. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Posted
1 minute ago, BashiChuni said:

by a guy with 11 posts and no evidence of said claim? very rich.

again your side throws insults with no historical facts, content, or evidence. might be a clue that you're being deceived.

Right into personally attacking me, huh?

I never implied I’m not on your side, whatever that is.

The guy is literally a talking head on Russian-paid state TV.

sachs.png

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, chase said:

Right into personally attacking me, huh?

I never implied I’m not on your side, whatever that is.

The guy is literally a talking head on Russian-paid state TV.

sachs.png

Standing by for ANY facts or discussion about the conflict and way forward…

Posted
13 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

by a guy with 11 posts and no evidence of said claim? very rich.

again your side throws insults with no historical facts, content, or evidence. might be a clue that you're being deceived.

how about you address the points mr. sachs made? any rebuttals to his claims? or just insults?

Internetjerk2.thumb.jpg.c0d4784d6f9654947fb29ed80065a7d2.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
  • Downvote 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

You guys have nothing but an emotional argument. Emotional arguments don’t hold up to logical, reason based facts. Sad. 

Or, arguing with you is like playing chess with a pigeon. You just knock over all the pieces, shit on the board, and strut around like you won the match.

 

There are more interesting people to converse with here. Though you are occasionally amusing. 

  • Like 4
  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)

Please keep us updated, @SurelySerious @Sua Sponte. What a predicament.

On 2/27/2025 at 3:17 PM, Sua Sponte said:

First, the DoD said to hold off responding. Second, federal employees don’t work for Elon. How about you send me five bullet of what you did last week so I can run it through AI and have it determine if you should be fired from your job. 

On 2/27/2025 at 2:54 PM, SurelySerious said:

Bullshit. It’s just utter stupidity phishing to waste millions of people’s time. Like every bad manager in the AF that steals time for total nonsense.

Screenshot2025-03-02at1_29_03PM.thumb.png.32a792de27e7019ac7d1126053ea5140.png

https://x.com/Breaking911/status/1896280128432623774

Edited by gearhog
Posted
40 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Or, arguing with you is like playing chess with a pigeon. You just knock over all the pieces, shit on the board, and strut around like you won the match.

 

There are more interesting people to converse with here. Though you are occasionally amusing. 

Again. You have nothing to refute just insults and emotions. 

Posted
1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:


Still all bullshit busy work. Taking more time away from subordinates reaping no gains. That’s bad business.

How long do you think this would (or should) take the average DoD civilian?  

Posted
1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:


Still all bullshit busy work. Taking more time away from subordinates reaping no gains. That’s bad business.

thoughts and prayers

Posted
How long do you think this would (or should) take the average DoD civilian?  

I simply don’t care how long it would take, it’s still wasted man hours for no gain. Directed from someone (Musk) with no authority, to boot. Fraud, Waste, Abuse.
Posted
3 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:


I simply don’t care how long it would take, it’s still wasted man hours for no gain. Directed from someone (Musk) with no authority, to boot. Fraud, Waste, Abuse.

So it’s “busy work” but you can’t tell me how long you think it will or should take?  And I’m pretty sure the SecDef just directed it, did he not?

Posted
So it’s “busy work” but you can’t tell me how long you think it will or should take?  And I’m pretty sure the SecDef just directed it, did he not?

It is by definition busy work, regardless of the amount of time. Musk even said it himself in a tweet. Just because it only takes X amount of time doesn’t make it right. You want to participate in Elon’s loyalty test (and I must assume you’re a DoD civilian then, because that’s what Hegseth said), by all means. Join the Party.
Posted
2 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:


It is by definition busy work, regardless of the amount of time. Musk even said it himself in a tweet. Just because it only takes X amount of time doesn’t make it right. You want to participate in Elon’s loyalty test (and I must assume you’re a DoD civilian then, because that’s what Hegseth said), by all means. Join the Party.

Why would I have wanted to be a government civilian after doing 20+ years in the military?  I already had to work with them once lol.  To be fair, I supervised a few awesome government civilians. When it came to the others, many were average, and quite a few I would have loved to have had them quit.  I have little doubt this task would take any of the awesome/average civilians more than 15 minutes.  

Again, SecDef is requiring it, so it’s most definitely now being required by the boss.

Side note—the ones who were average at best were always the ones asking about time off awards and the “60 minute rule”.  

Posted
Why would I have wanted to be a government civilian after doing 20+ years in the military?  

Guess I was confused why you were so into an OPM mandate. Have fun with that retirement, then.
Posted
1 hour ago, HeloDude said:

How long do you think this would (or should) take the average DoD civilian?  

That depends. Do they work in a SCIF? Are they the UPC? Are they the SES in TRANSCOM? It’s also not a “pulse check” when they want it every Monday. 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, HeloDude said:

Why would I have wanted to be a government civilian after doing 20+ years in the military?  I already had to work with them once lol.  To be fair, I supervised a few awesome government civilians. When it came to the others, many were average, and quite a few I would have loved to have had them quit.  I have little doubt this task would take any of the awesome/average civilians more than 15 minutes.  

Again, SecDef is requiring it, so it’s most definitely now being required by the boss.

Side note—the ones who were average at best were always the ones asking about time off awards and the “60 minute rule”.  

Most of the helicopters pilots I met while I was in the USAF, especially at Fairchild, were either retarded, deaf, or both. I did meet a few who weren't, but that was a rarity. Thanks for your subjective POV.

Edited by Sua Sponte
Posted

I never worked for an exec, but I did receive taskers like this.  Me saying "I don't work for the exec" and ignoring him would be stupid because clearly the exec was doing something on behalf of his boss, who was my boss's boss.

I also find it more than a little funny that most of the people complaining about this have spent 100X more time complaining about it than just doing it.  This is like listening to my kids complain for an hour about homework that only takes them 5 minutes once they stop fussing and just do it.  This does not violate your oath of office and should not violate your morals, so stop whining, just do it, and move on with your life.

  • Upvote 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...