Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
33 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

The first thing Russia or China would go after in a shooting war against the US is GPS and communication satellites. Both nations have proven they have the capability to hit satellites in motion. We need to have some sort of defenses in place.

 

On a slightly related note: I hope the military is still teaching people how to read maps and navigate without GPS.

 

GPS first.  Communications satellites are higher, and harder to get, and GPS is more critical.  Knock out GPS, and you don't just impact map reading.  You turn back the clock 30-50 years on the DoD's inventory of precision standoff munitions.  And EVERYTHING is a standoff PGMs these days - Tomahawk, ALCMs, ATACMS, JDAMs, WCMD, JSOW, any artillery platform larger than a mortar...anything not aimed by eye, laser, or radar has its accuracy cut by a factor of 10.  Even the SLBM fleet.

 

Losing the communications satellites would be a disaster.  Losing GPS would be catastrophic.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
4 hours ago, dpberr said:

Space Force is essentially trying to operationalize Battlestar Galactica.

 

I'm pretty sure that's the entirety of the white paper on the subject.

 

You need to spell it right. 

It's Spaaaaaace Fooooorrrrrrrce!!!!

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted

Who among Trump’s advisors support and believe in more than Trump?

 

Or is every one of his advisors not to be trusted and believed? 

 

I ask because he se he believed in the generals. Until hey didn’t believe in him. 

 

Is there anyone in his in his cabinet whose negative judgment of Trump you’d believe?

Posted
29 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

Is there anyone in his in his cabinet whose negative judgment of Trump you’d believe?

 

Do I even care?

Posted
24 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Do I even care?

 

A lot of people here seem to excuse every critique by his advisors as Deep State or some other disregarding of the source. So my question is: When would someone believe the closest insiders?

 

His Sec of State and Defense Secretary have called him more or less unfit. His Chief of Staff has called him a moron or something like that. So who in his cabinet would you believe?

 

He is headed for a cabinet of Sarah Sanders’s. 

Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, BeginnersMind said:

So my question is: When would someone believe the closest insiders?

 

Maybe when they're directly quoted, not a quote attributed to them by anonymous sources citing unnamed methods.

Edited by Koko78
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
On 12/22/2018 at 2:41 PM, The_Dude said:

 

He put his neck on the line during the Bin Laden raid. 

 

Give him credit where its due. 

 

Further, he didn’t alienate allies. 

They're not allies if they're out to get you

Posted
3 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

It's also worth considering that the source is trying to back-fit partisanship assumptions to prove partisanship.  That whole thread is tautological navel-gazing, and largely meaningless.

 

The last 8 posts or so are not. I promise. 

Posted (edited)
On 12/27/2018 at 2:46 PM, The_Dude said:

 

...who’s out to get us?

Them. 

 

On 12/26/2018 at 5:02 PM, BeginnersMind said:

 

A lot of people here seem to excuse every critique by his advisors as Deep State or some other disregarding of the source. So my question is: When would someone believe the closest insiders?

 

His Sec of State and Defense Secretary have called him more or less unfit. His Chief of Staff has called him a moron or something like that. So who in his cabinet would you believe?

 

He is headed for a cabinet of Sarah Sanders’s. 

You included "more or less unfit", "moron or something like that" and parlayed that into what seems to be an attack on Sarah Sanders. 

 

There is some recent historical precedence here as it relates to Sec of Defense taking shots at the former boss. 

 

As an aside, it seems to me a guy like Mattis would have no problem taking Trump on directly is he felt it was warranted. Part of his resignation included suggesting the president should have someone who aligns with his vision. That sounds reasonable enough to me. 

 

Seems to be the nature of being president. 

 

I would consider anything that came out, but my first question is always "Is there an axe to grind?". 

Edited by leh-nerd skin-erd
Posted
4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

The last 8 posts or so are not. I promise. 

 

Which would be where I stopped reading, because I got to the "8 posts left in thread" link and said to myself "This so much largely meaningless tautological navel-gazing that I'm not going to bother finishing."

15 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

...who’s out to get us?

 

The Hajis.  And the DEA.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • 1 month later...
Posted
Quote

 

I am pleased to announce that Kelly Knight Craft, our current Ambassador to Canada, is being nominated to be United States Ambassador to the United Nations....

 

 

 

will be opposed................................just because

 

 

Reminder: 2016

WASHINGTON -- Kelly Knight Craft, a native of Glasgow, Kentucky, and top donor to President Donald Trump, was confirmed by the U.S. Senate as ambassador to Canada Thursday. The vote was unanimous.

×
×
  • Create New...