sherpa

I never said anything of that sort. I am not an insurance adjuster and I am saying that what Russia is doing in the Ukraine is absolutely a war, by any definition. You brought 9/11 into this, and I have no idea what the definition they use is, but I guarantee that this Russia thing fits it.

Maybe you don't understand what I said. The Russian invasion of the Ukraine is the very definition of war. 9/11 was not. You suggested the linkage between the two. I denied it. 9/11 wasn't anything like what the Russians did.

I'll leave the nuance of what is and isn't a war as defined in a war clause, but I am reasonably certain that one sovereign country launching an invasion against a neighboring sovereign involving all its' military ex navy meets the definition. That aint 9/11

The deterioration of Germany's military capability is stunning. Recently, not one of their transport aircraft were mission ready. Their fighter aircraft are in equally bad condition, at one point they had about 28 mission ready. Tanks and ground forces-same thing. This has been a wake up call for them. The "war" portion went really well. The "peace" portion was horrible, and the Russians have no apparent ability to experience a greater outcome in Ukraine.

Insurance companies are indemnified by a war clause that eliminates their exposure during war.

There is no reason to send US submarines into Russian waters, and by the way, all US submarines are nuclear powered. I get that there are people here who think trump is kind of special. He is a total idiot regarding military issues, and it would be best for all involved if he departed the political environment and simply faded away.

Positioning them a vast difference from using one.

I am not stating anything other than my view. Chemical or bio would have a similar but not quite response as a nuc. It is a bit easier to hide those. Using a nuc changes the entire calculus. It hasn't been done wince WWII, and it isn't at all necessary or even desirous to achieve his objectives. I'm not going to speculate on a response to delivering a nuc to a Ukrainian city, since I think it is an unreasonable suggestion, but it would be the end of his regime.

He isn't effectively using a nuclear weapon. Nuclear weapons have long lasting radiation effects, and he doesn't need to. If he did, that would be the end of this Russian regime. Yes, a retaliatory nuclear strike is worth it, if they launched a nuc against a US target. This aint that.

I expect you're using "nuke" figuratively. If he ever used a nuclear weapon against a city there would be no turning back. It is simply unthinkable, and I am starting to doubt his military would obey a clearly illegal order.

I'm kind of up to speed on at least the air and air delivered stuff, and we've got very interesting "new and improved" systems, and are working on even cooler stuff, like drone wingmen. What is important is that we prevent them from getting into the wrong hands, something that was incredibly poorly handled when we quit Afghanistan. Ultimately that stuff ends up in the middle east somewhere.

Always sounds attractive. The problem is that when you realize that a lot of "stuff" sold to relatively unreliable govs ends up in the hands of very bad people, and the market for those type of things is really avtive.

Just an observation from my view. Flying supersonic requires huge fuel consumption, something Russians don't have I seriously doubt any sounds are from sonic booms.

Now fully focused, and exceeding expectations. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60771210 It gets better and better with this thing. Amazing stuff to come in the next few months, and that's just the start. Webb is going to be amazing.

You can overcome lots of things. You cannot overcome other world obnoxiousness. When the Secret Service views an assignment to cover you as punishment, you've got serious people problems.

I am proud of you Tibs. There are a few components to that link. One is the drastic diminution of the Russian Air Force and their obvious inability to coordinate and support their ground forces. Two is the obvious lack of training, especially in close air support, which is training and com intense. Three is something we have always known from debriefing, which is that the Russians have limited capability to prevent friendly shoot downs. They simply haven't cared. Four is that Putin is screwed. His only out card is a NATO intervention. Th last ten minutes or so discuss that in detail.

A very reasonable, accurate assessment of many issues tht have come up in this thread, specifically, the air war. The guy with the Navy shirt on is Ward Carroll, a retired F-14 RIO, (back seater). Many things I have mentioned are explained in detail, ie., no fly zone, providing airplanes etc. Time spent watching this is far better spent than watching the TV nonsense spewed out by ignorant "hosts." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBARgW_vHVE&t=79s

Putin has been out of touch with reality for quite a while. His military isn't anywhere near what he thought it would be. His ability to strike fear is gone, except for the very real threat of nuclear options. A dictator who surrounds himself with people who only tell him what he wants to hear is ultimately ill-informed. The Russian military has been lying and misleading their leaders for years. That's what happens when you are underfunded and need to keep your career on track. This has been suspected for years, and now is grossly obvious to the entire world.

That's a different issue. I'm doubtful that anyone would ever propose forcing homeowners and businesses to retro fit from nat gas or other heating systems to heat pumps in New York State, a state remarkably unfit for heat pump heating. The suggestion is preposterous, wouldn't work, and necessitate a massive increase in electrical utility capacity.

I've got to waive the caution flag on the veracity of this one. Sorry, but I can't believe there is any way that anyone is going to legislate that homeowners eliminate existing heating systems and install different ones. That would be an immense expense per building. Further, heat pumps are great as AC and will heat OK down to about 45 degrees ambient. Once you get below that, their efficiency falls off dramatically. Get below about 40 and you are going to need the supplemental heat they use, which is resistance heating. Running a toaster is the same. Extremely expensive. We have custom built the last three houses we've lived in, and did a ton of research on HVAC. One was in the Chicago suburbs with nat gas. The next was in Central Virginia, with geothermal. Worked great. The one we are built here is heat pump, but supplemented with three LP direct vent fireplaces. Our winter temps are rarely below freezing. I would never live in a house in New York State with a heat pump. What would happen is that people would install woodstoves and other far less clean options to be comfortable. Still, I can't believe that any state would mandate the type of heating system used. California, potentially, but only in new construction.

I'm not sure what their efficiency is in this new tragedy, but this link points out direct ways to donate regarding the issue: https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/9-highly-rated-charities-donate-safely-to-help-ukraine

Just insanity. Glad nobody in that decision making chain had the same view. Let's take two squadrons of our most advances airplanes and place them as bait on an airfield that could easily be taken out.

As I said, and will again, this is covered ground. Page 128 of this thread has my response, so kindly stop asking the same stuff.

You. Th guy that claimed that deploying two fighter squadrons to the Ukraine was a good idea. The guy that claimed that this could be done with drones. The guy that we were jamming the Russian Air Force resulting in them being "blind." Now the guy that suggests that this British system is the only one that tracks after being shot. Covered ground.

I think it's kind of funny to watch you attempt to familiarize yourself with this kind of stuff. Your knowledge base is remarkably limited.