561–570 of 769 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The CNBC article's source is "as reported by Reuters", and the Military Times article is just a reprint of the Reuters Article, if you look, immediately under the headline it states "By Reuters". So there is only one news outlet reporting on it, Reuters, and the rest are just reporting on the reporting.
Hey, you did more validation than the guy I was responding to! Kudos.
Now they'll exhaust interceptors and other long range missiles like tomahawks and whatnot. And then China gets frisky with Taiwan and the US will totally not abandon them and tell them to just give up pressured by the lack of firepower to defend them, the risks of China getting back into bidding oil in international markets and the mess the treasury would be in if China raises capital by selling bonds (they just told…
As much as I support Taiwan, there's no realistic timeline where the US goes to war against the PRC over Taiwan. None.
Also, if the US doesn't fight for taiwan, will they fight for the phillipines? Malasia? South korea?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, arguably the war in Ukraine is teaching everyone who is listening that nobody is willing to be the first to use nukes and destroy the planet, which means that nuclear powers can actually fight wars--which is incredibly dangerous, of course.
Nukes don't "destroy the planet", they're just really powerful bombs. Nuclear munitions have been detonated 2058 times already. https://www.atomicarchive.com/almanac/test-sites/testing-chr...
Ecosystem resilience is based in the so called natural buffers. They are a product of the interactions between life beings. Imagine the life bar in a videogame. A natural buffer is like a 4-D life bar, where each character actualize their life bars at the same time. You lose some life and your friends will change their energy automatically to fix your health bar, Is paid with energy but also needs some "time currency".
With healthy buffers, even big impacts in an ecosystem are absorbed and the system returns to the initial situation again and again. But it has a coast in the buffer. The life bar gets shorter.
When the buffer is spent, the system is not 'elastic' anymore. At this moment the danger is extreme, but the warnings are subtle or none. Just further impacts, even tiny impacts, on the ecosystem cause a total, devastating and irrevocable collapse that may extend over several years and can't be stopped.
Is unclear if we had crossed this line yet.
The life has recovered from huge collapses at a planetary level five times yet, but it needed millions of years for that.
Just because we had luck before, does not mean that we will have luck forever.
Not an American but live here. But I don’t understand the fixation of US in middle east theatre. With the abundance of onshore oil through fracking revolution, presumably US doesn’t need to police the Middle East. The president himself said US doesn’t need their oil. So what is this conflict all about? Is there bigger geopolitical price tag attached to victory in Iran? Or US is just besieged by corruption to the exte…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the most correct and probably most discouraging answer is that American healthcare costs about what it should.
Drug prices in the US are >2x the price as compared to other developed countries [1]. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK611301/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As for controlling Hormuz, the US military absolutely could control Hormuz. I'm confident it's quite capable of it. It's that the US public wouldn't support the immense cost in lives and treasure it would take to do it, and maintain that control. This is like saying "I could easily afford a Ferrari. It's just that I wouldn't be able to make the interest payments on the loan". Military conquest is more than just gun…
The reason the US can’t take the strait is that the war is unpopular and the American people don’t want it to happen. The US military could absolutely 100% invade and take the street, but it would be extremely unpopular and very expensive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair. And I agree with nearly everything in your comment. One thing about tRump, is that he is more blatantly obvious about the "bully" side of America. He is not the first bully; just the first un-subtle American bully. What I find disturbing is the others who enable him. I've long despised the Repugnant Party for their anti-worker ideology but under tRump 2.0 they've gone to a new low that I never thought possible.…
What I still struggle with is the huge percentage of people that support the behavior. Seeing what the Tate brothers did and seeing the sheer number of people who cheered on the crimes and exploitation they did was shocking. The fact that Epstein is just a minor talking point now. Did I miss when we became so evil? I actually know a kid who went down the red pill path following Tate -- he seemed like a good kid, but…
I'm always confused by prices of "highly regulated" goods in the United States. When I get a $150,000 bill for a 15-minute hand-reconstruction surgery, how much of that bill is the total margin vs self cost? And how much of that is warranted / acceptable? When a single Tomahawk missile bills the taxpayer $3,600,000, how much of that bill is the total margin? When I say "total margin", I mean not just the margin of th…
The unknowns of defense spending is a feature and not a bug - for defense contractors
Earlier quoted context omitted.
PrSM has been in production for only a short time, and ATACMS stocks were never high. Neither of these are the backbone of US long-range precision strike weapons. Article is misleading.
Never high and a significant number were donated to ukraine specifically because a ground launched pgm has never been a high priority for the US since the USAF exists.
I'm always confused by prices of "highly regulated" goods in the United States. When I get a $150,000 bill for a 15-minute hand-reconstruction surgery, how much of that bill is the total margin vs self cost? And how much of that is warranted / acceptable? When a single Tomahawk missile bills the taxpayer $3,600,000, how much of that bill is the total margin? When I say "total margin", I mean not just the margin of th…
The real problem isn't the price of the missiles. I wouldn't even care about the price of the missiles if they actually worked. But Iran kicked our butts. We don't have air superiority, we cannot guarantee the shipping of oil through the straight of Hormuz, or anywhere else in that hemispheres, our bases and our aircraft carriers are useless. I wanna know what they've been doing with our trillions of dollars, because…