sherpa

Top Gun Opening scene The opening scene of the original Top Gun. They absolutely nailed the sounds and environment of launch and recovery, because they actually filmed real operations. Flight deck guys leaning into the wind and connecting launch bars to the catapults and hold back bars behind the nose gear, hauling fuel lines and air start hoses around, with the real steam drifting around. Guys giving the engine run up signs prior to launch. Jet blast deflectors going up and down. Real footage of actual launces and traps. It still gets my metabolism up as the tension in that environment is relived. Just an incredible environment Interesting footnote. Tony Scott from Paramount was responsible for the filming of that. He really liked the sun backlighting the scene, but since it was during actual operations, Enterprise needed to turn and it would change the lighting. Scott asked the skipper to keep going for five more minutes, and the skipper said that would cost $25,000, so Scott wrote a personal check, and Enterprise stayed the course for five more mins.

All true, but it has been inverted for so long now that I don't think it has any probative value other than bouncing along the bottom. Covid had a bit to do with it, bit the Fed has gotten really good at doing their thing. I wouldn't bet either way. The one thing I would bet on is that 35 trillion in debt is not a long term positive, and will have to be reconciled. We either inflate it away or other, less desirable options occur.

I'm not a fiction guy. My favorite three: Undaunted Courage, Stephen Ambrose. The story of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Simply incredible. I also like it because I'm a Jefferson fan, and he was responsible for it. As well, both Lewis and Clark are from where I now live and Lewis was born on the same road I live on. Shattered Sword. Jonathan Parshall. The best book on the Midway battle, which changed WWII in the Pacific. The Making of the Atomic Bomb. Richard Rhodes. I got this because I had forgotten the physics involved, and wanted to review. The book was so much more. Way, way better than Oppenheimer, which I didn't find interesting at all.

Madrid is close to Santa Fe, and since New Mexico is kinda close to Phoenix, should be a few options not hard to find.

It is not the "end of story." Your view contains one incredible flaw that deems it idiotic. Unlimited migration allows grossly failing governments to survive because instead of change, people simply leave. That is a catastrophic view because it enables horrible governance, and weakens effective ones. Your "end of story" is a guaranteed failure.

Absolute idiotic nonsense. Again, I don't think you have any idea about the issue, and it certainly isn't "my side." Just more dopey, ill-informed wackiness.

How about we enforce the "sensible" immigration laws we have, then have a debate and vote on changing them. That is how the process is supposed to work, and it is a gross failure over the past few years.

We have laws regarding immigration. Laws passed by representative government. I am very suspicious that you have no idea regarding the industry this has become, or the reality that sensible immigration law should not be suicide.

"Military analysts." In this conflict, never have so many said so much and been believed so little. It's like viewing a Hamas press release. Total waste of time.

Can we get over McCain? The guy was a terrible Naval Aviator who would not have been winged except for his father. He was disliked immensely in the light attack community. He did a great job as a POW, as did hundreds of others. Signed some really bad stuff, but under torture most did.

And guarantees future hostage taking, just as Putin has figured out that arresting Americans on idiotic charges gets him prisoner swaps.

Knock what off?

i have quite a few friends over the years who are very well associated with the military. Folks from junior enlisted who I served with, to a couple who I could name who served as Commanders in Chief of the Pacific Fleet. You don't know the truth.

Yep. Totally ignorant.

It is impossible for me to imagine anyone less respected by the US military than a San Francisco Democrat, and specifically Harris.

This is looking like a "blue on blue" incident, which means it was shot down by it's own forces, probably Patriot. It was not shot down by Russian defenses. Evidently Zelensky fired his Air Force Commander over this. It is always really difficult to make sure you don't shoot down your own guys, and they apparently have not figured this out.

Totally disagree. Much, much easier to make WMD appear.

So it was easier to cover up a conspiracy involving the US intel apparatus including more than one organization than it would be to plant a suitcase or two of "stuff" into a building? OK.

I saw the bat signal in the sky. I don't get involved in this Jan stuff though. Don't know enough about it and was not interested to find out, but standard riots of stupid morons don't get me into the research.

That doesn't answer the question. You said they "lied." I suggested that if indeed lied, they would have placed the proof there. During and after the regime's fall, they had full access to the real estate and airspace. If it was a "lie" they most likely would placed the proof to defend against the lie allegation. That is the point I am making, and not interested in going over the value or results, but there was another issued that was involved, and that was it was becoming very obvious we weren't going to maintain no fly zones, but that was far from the reason for the action, just a factor.

You still haven't answered the question. No worries from me. The US did not know about Pearl Harbor. The US did not know, but should have if there had been reasonable response to evidence the FBI had about 9-11, and WMD in Iraq was thought to be a fact by the US, and other intel agencies.

No, and you can avoid it again. Not my concern. If the Bush group lied, which means intentional, planned deception, why wouldn't they plant the WMD to make their case? Incredibly easy to do, yet wasn't. No lie here. No lie at Pearl harbor, which I noticed you snuck in. And the reason is that they did not "lie."

You haven't answered the questions posed at all. No surprise.

Thanks for taking this sidebar. Appreciated. This issue, as painful as it is for us, all of us, exposed what the politics of this brings. The Dems approved the mission, in overwhelming numbers, having been presented the exact same evidence from the intel community that the executive was. When it was determined to be wrong, a failure of the intel community, they backed out, blaming it on the Bush Admin. Same as they backed out when Pelosi claimed she was never informed about interrogation techniques, which is preposterous. They do the same thing every time.

Ya. True.