This Is Why We Can Never Let Down Our Guard

[boevans]

You read it? How?

A Republican house member said that on News Nation this afternoon.

You doubt that many GOP house members are unhappy with Gaetz? Oh, yes, you are the Admiral.

 

[JoeB131]

Tell Trump that, he's America's president.

Until he's removed.

Putin doesn't want the war either. I think Putin will tell Trump what terms are acceptable to Russia, before Trump makes any demands.

Putin totally wanted this war.

Who is that in your opinion?

I don't know. you brought up other posters.

Well that's the big question?
All of Trump's popularity is based on saving the people's money Joe and the Ukraine represents that even more than the border issue. We both know the border thing is just Trump's bullshit that's meant to bring him support on rthe racism of the R's.

Trump doesn't have popularity, guy. He barely won because America was too misogynistic to elect a woman, but it's not because anyone "loves" Trump.

You're basing your talking points on the false premise that Putin is ambitious and is intent on conquering Europe. That isn't true! Putin has taken a stand against America's aggression through Nato's support. America still considers Russia to be iin the way of it's global hegemony, but America is never going to be willing to fight a nuclear war over it.

I would hope not. But we can't let Putin violate international law just because he has nukes that might work.

Russia isn't weak as was surmised in the beginning of the war. They might have the strength and ability to defeat America in a conventional war. War strategists are talking in terms of an American aircraft carrier going to the bottom and leaving 2000 to 5000 Americans swimming. I don't do armchair wars so I'll leave that to your opinion.

Russia's performance is a joke. They're being beaten by a country 1/5th their size.

America's military holds power over all other political power and could need to exercize their power to save America's democracy.

Um, no, guy, the American military is mostly non-political. They don't take sides, even when they think the president is a complete buffoon.

Normal educated people would think so too. But Trump's people still think the Dems stole an election and they thought that a coup attempt could right all wrongs. I wouldn't gamble on anything those ignorant ck-skrs think?

Normal people wont like it if Trump sells out an ally.

And some others consider Russia the world's most potent superpower, with the most advanced weaponry that will allow Russia to defeat America's military prowess. (with or without China's assistance.)

Russian equipment is a joke.
This war shows how inept their military is.

They are pulling old tanks out of museums because they can't replace the ones they are losing fast enough.

 

[JoeB131]

They don't need experience. They'll learn on the job. If you've never done that, that might be another concept you can't grasp. What they do need is the right vision of what government should be and the courage to make that happen. And every single one of them have that.

You don't "learn on the job" running an 800 billion organization.

 

[Foxfyre]

You don't "learn on the job" running an 800 billion organization.

And yet unless they have served as Vice President or have been in Congress for a considerable time, pretty much every new President learns from scratch on the job how to be President of the United States with the largest economy and largest work force in the world. Some master the job quickly and do it well. Others not so much. Same with each new CEO of big business. They have to learn their jobs too.

 

[JoeB131]

In a conventional weapons fight, Russia is predicted to to win against all comers. It's nonsensical to try to ignore the vulnerability of America's AC carriers they depend upon almost exclusively. Russia has concentrated on overwhelming that US threat with it's huge hypersonic missile arsenal.

Russia is having a hard time against Ukraine. If the allies were able to march on Moscow without risking a nuclear war, they'd easily be knocked off.

Obviously, no one wants to do that because of nuclear war.

Russia's real problem is that most of the rest of Europe doesn't like them, probably because they have memories of the bad old days of the Warsaw Pact.

His appointments to critical positions are being designed as an insult to the US military and so the military too won't allow Trump an easy ride!
Possibly a one-way ticket to hell for anybody interfering with the military's power?

If Trump can't work with career military and civilian professionals, he probably shouldn't have the job.

 

[JoeB131]

And yet unless they have served as Vice President or have been in Congress for a considerable time, pretty much every new President learns from scratch on the job how to be President of the United States with the largest economy and largest work force in the world. Some master the job quickly and do it well. Others not so much. Same with each new CEO of big business. They have to learn their jobs too.

Um, not really.

Most of our not-Trump presidents have had considerable experience in Congress, as VP, or as governors.

Trump had no experience, it's why he was such an utter failure as president. Also, he's a 78-year-old man-child with a narcissistic personality disorder.

What kept him from being an even bigger failure last time was that he appointed people like Sessions, Barr, Mattis, Coats, etc.

Now he's appointing people for their loyalty to him personality or their willingness to drop to their knees.

This won't end well.

 

[JoeB131]

I don't know whether Matt Gaetz has honor or decency and neither do you. And unless there is irrefutable evidence that he has no honor or decency, i believe as a Christian it would be dishonorable to judge him and doubly so out of malicious partisanship.

I think the drug use and sex parties with 17 year old girls has answered the question on his honesty.

Woman testified to House Ethics Committee that Gaetz had sex with her when she was 17: Sources

The woman at the center of the DOJ's probe of Matt Gaetz testified to the House Ethics Committee that he had sex with her when she was 17 years old, sources say.

abcnews.go.com

The woman who was at the center of a yearslong Justice Department investigation into sex trafficking allegations surrounding Rep. Matt Gaetz testified to the House Ethics Committee that the now-former Florida congressman had sex with her when she was 17 years old, sources familiar with the investigation told ABC News.

The woman's allegation regarding Gaetz became part of the investigation following claims by Greenberg, a former friend of Gaetz who is currently serving an 11-year prison sentence after reaching a deal with investigators in May 2021 in which he pleaded guilty to multiple federal crimes, including sex trafficking of the woman when she was a minor and introducing her to other "adult men" who also had sex with her when she was underage.

 

[mudwhistle]

They also have no training either.

No training and no experience. That's two strikes before they even get up to bat.

If a community-organizer can be president, then an Infantry Major can be Sec of Defense.

 

[otto105]

They oppose the corruption, misuse, ineffectiveness, inefficiency, wastefulness, malfeasance in those agencies and will correct that. I don't expect a leftist to understand that concept, but it is a good thing to restore government to be an affordable, effective, efficient servant of the people instead of a government that sucks everything it can get out of the people and absorbs a bigger and bigger share of the GNP.

Grandma coyote

They’re the swamp and you love it because you have no morals or ability to think critically.

Don’t put your blame on anyone else.

 

[Donald H]

Until he's removed

Yes, removed by the military for compromising US foreign relations on wars.

Putin totally wanted this war.

I don't know. you brought up other posters.


Trump doesn't have popularity, guy.

Oh o.k. Joe.

He barely won because America was too misogynistic to elect a woman, but it's not because anyone "loves" Trump.

We could have a long discussion on why Trump won, but not here and now.

I would hope not. But we can't let Putin violate international law just because he has nukes that might work.

Russia and China have allowed the US to violate international law about 40 times siince WW2. But we can agree that was then and this is now.

Russia's performance is a joke. They're being beaten by a country 1/5th their size.

America losing is the joke, if there's a joke. America's conventional weapons are inferior and ineffective against Russia/China weapons technology.
The UK is considering scrapping an AC carrier after losing one or two in war games.

Um, no, guy, the American military is mostly non-political. They don't take sides, even when they think the president is a complete buffoon.

Of course they're 'mostly' non-political and they won't permit Trump's appointments to take them down. Trump is appointing bodies who are publicly stating that America is to blame for the war.

Normal people wont like it if Trump sells out an ally.

You yourself already know that the majority of voting Americans aren't what we would call being normal. They've elected a narcissistic psychopath as their president.

Russian equipment is a joke.
This war shows how inept their military is.

You're being shown things by US propagandists. You're shutting out the truth.

 

[Donald H]

Russia is having a hard time against Ukraine. If the allies were able to march on Moscow without risking a nuclear war, they'd easily be knocked off.

Obviously, no one wants to do that because of nuclear war.

Russia's real problem is that most of the rest of Europe doesn't like them, probably because they have memories of the bad old days of the Warsaw Pact.



If Trump can't work with career military and civilian professionals, he probably shouldn't have the job.

Of course Trump shouldn't have the job Joe.

But since Nov. 5, who's your daddy?

 

[Donald H]

OMG, he swallowed the Russki propaganda whole!

If Russia is so good, why is tiny Ukraine kicking their ass after almost 3 years? Like most of their weapons, their hypersonic missiles are crap that can't even hit their targets in Ukraine which is a hope, skip and a jump from their launch site. They are also easily shot down using American technology. Their technology is so good they are buying missile and drones from Iran and those are just as shitty as theirs were.

UK war games have just established that they lost an aircraft carrier or two, and they're considering scrapping one of them to pay bills, Admiral.

 

[Donald H]

Moscow used to turn out clear eyed, cold hearted experts.

You are not any of that. Rely on you, and Russie has no hope of surviving.

Don't believe me, but don't shortchange yourself by blacking out everything that isn't US propaganda.

 

[JoeB131]

Can we all agree that Donald H is a Russian Troll?

es, removed by the military for compromising US foreign relations on wars.

If it happens, it will because his mental state will be so bad, even Republicans will agree to remove him.

We could have a long discussion on why Trump won, but not here and now.

Yes, we could. But since you are a Russian Troll, you probably don't get how American Politics work. Trump got 50.1% of the vote against an opponent that was selected at the last minute. That's really about it. Six million less people voted because they didn't like any of the candidates.

Russia and China have allowed the US to violate international law about 40 times siince WW2. But we can agree that was then and this is now.

Really? I keep asking you for this list, but you can't give me one. Heck, I was willing to give you Iraq, but even that one shouldn't count, because Bush secured a UN resolution to go into Iraq that China and Russia agreed to.

America losing is the joke, if there's a joke. America's conventional weapons are inferior and ineffective against Russia/China weapons technology.

No, they aren't. As the Russians are now finding out in Ukraine.

You yourself already know that the majority of voting Americans aren't what we would call being normal. They've elected a narcissistic psychopath as their president.

Yes, they have, but I think that's more a problem of becoming numb to him. Trump has become like the crazy uncle at Thanksgiving. We've all gotten too used to him.

You're being shown things by US propagandists. You're shutting out the truth.

Actually, I've encountered both Russian and US weapons during my time in the military. Russian equipment is far inferior.

 

[JoeB131]

UK war games have just established that they lost an aircraft carrier or two, and they're considering scrapping one of them to pay bills, Admiral.

I think you are misunderstanding the issue.

The UK is considering mothballing one of the Queen Elizabeth class carriers due to high operating costs. The ship have had a lot of issues, mostly with propulsion, but the real problem is that they don't have much of a mission.

The Royal Navy's Aircraft Carrier Nightmare Is Getting Worse

Earlier this year, there were reports that the UK's Royal Navy might be forced to sell one of its Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers due to the high operating costs – not that it would likely find any eager buyers considering that both the flagship HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of...

nationalinterest.org

Now, do we really want to compare that to Russia's lone Aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kustanov. It's been in drydock since 2017 for an overhaul that never seems to get completed. Its sailors have been reassigned to the Army to fight in Ukraine.

Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Let's move on to China's three aircraft carriers, shall we?

Well, two of them are Kustanov-class (one they bought from Russia, the other they built a cheap copy.) Since we've already established these carriers are kind of shit, let's move on, shall we?

The third one, the Fujian, isn't even completed yet. It's undergoing sea trials. It might carry 50 aircraft when operational.

Now, compare that to the US Navy.

We have 10 Nimitz class carriers and 1 Ford class carrier, with three more Ford Class planned or under construction. They carry 90 aircraft. four times more than the Russian/Chinese Kustanovs and twice as many as the Fujian class.

But where the real advantage is in experience. The Chinese (and really, we are only talking about the Chinese as a credible threat) simply don't have that much experience with carriers or carrier operations. The US had over 90 years of doctrinal experience with them.

 

[Donald H]

I think you are misunderstanding the issue.

The UK is considering mothballing one of the Queen Elizabeth class carriers due to high operating costs. The ship have had a lot of issues, mostly with propulsion, but the real problem is that they don't have much of a mission.

The Royal Navy's Aircraft Carrier Nightmare Is Getting Worse

Earlier this year, there were reports that the UK's Royal Navy might be forced to sell one of its Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers due to the high operating costs – not that it would likely find any eager buyers considering that both the flagship HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of...

nationalinterest.org

That's the cover story Joe.

Now, do we really want to compare that to Russia's lone Aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kustanov. It's been in drydock since 2017 for an overhaul that never seems to get completed. Its sailors have been reassigned to the Army to fight in Ukraine.

Maybe the Russians have no need for it? And so why risk it? Those things have become sitting ducks for even US missiles!

Let's move on to China's three aircraft carriers, shall we?

Well, two of them are Kustanov-class (one they bought from Russia, the other they built a cheap copy.) Since we've already established these carriers are kind of shit, let's move on, shall we?

China isn't an aggressor and so likely have no pressing need for them. If they moved one close to the US they would be risking losing it. I think China's interest in them is intended for the future.
US aggression in Taiwan doesn't require any of the three for Taiwan's defense.
America does need them for it's plans of aggression., but can they be effective against Russia? Would you know the answer?

The third one, the Fujian, isn't even completed yet. It's undergoing sea trials. It might carry 50 aircraft when operational.

Now, compare that to the US Navy.

We have 10 Nimitz class carriers and 1 Ford class carrier, with three more Ford Class planned or under construction. They carry 90 aircraft. four times more than the Russian/Chinese Kustanovs and twice as many as the Fujian class.

Do you know if building three more is the best use of the military budget? Maybe you could construct a scenario from your armchair that takes into consideration their value vs. the threat they could face?
I've heard comments from Ritter and other American analysts that 10 aircraft carriers could be eliminated by 15 hypersonic missiles. Or it could have been 50 they were talking about? Would you know?

But where the real advantage is in experience. The Chinese (and really, we are only talking about the Chinese as a credible threat) simply don't have that much experience with carriers or carrier operations. The US had over 90 years of doctrinal experience with them.

I hear your confidence and I don't doubt the US 'doctrinal' experience is the greatest on the deployment of AC carriers, but I'm still concerned about the hypersonic missile effect of sending one to the bottom, and leaving 2000 to 5000 American sailors swimming?

 

[JoeB131]

That's the cover story Joe.

Um, no, that's been the discussion about these carriers since their construction. In fact, the HMS Prince of Wales was considered for scrapping halfway through her construction, until they realized it would cost more to scrap her than finish her.

Maybe the Russians have no need for it? And so why risk it? Those things have become sitting ducks for even US missiles!

Or the Russians really suck at having a Navy, because they always have. I mean back to the Tsarist times. Just for laughs, look up the Russo-Japanese War. Fun times. Or during WW2, when the Brits loaned Russia a battleship, and it came back in such poor repair that it had to be immediately scrapped. It's not just building ships that's the issue, it's having the expertise to operate them.

HMS Royal Sovereign (05) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Arkhangelsk ran aground in the White Sea in late 1947; the extent of damage, if any, is unknown.[62] The Soviet Navy returned the ship to the Royal Navy on 4 February 1949 after the former Giulio Cesare was transferred to the Soviet Black Sea Fleet.[59] The Soviet Navy – intending to keep the vessel – had initially sought to avoid sending the ship back, claiming that she was not sufficiently seaworthy to make the voyage back to Britain. After an inspection by a Royal Navy officer, however, the Soviet Navy agreed to return the vessel in January 1949. Upon returning to the Rosyth naval base, Royal Navy personnel thoroughly inspected the ship and found much of her equipment to be unserviceable. It appeared to the inspectors that the main battery turrets had not been rotated while the ship was in Soviet service (although pictures exist to disprove this belief),[63] and were jammed on the centreline.[64] She was sold for scrap, the last member of her class to suffer this fate.

China isn't an aggressor and so likely have no pressing need for them. If they moved one close to the US they would be risking losing it. I think China's interest in them is intended for the future.
US aggression in Taiwan doesn't require any of the three for Taiwan's defense.

Okay, the thing is, I actually GET China's legitimate claims to Taiwan, but it's hardly US Aggression if the people of Taiwan don't want to be ruled by Beijing.

China wants carriers because they want to be in the Big-Boy's club, but they aren't there yet.

America does need them for it's plans of aggression., but can they be effective against Russia? Would you know the answer?

Sure, I know the answer, but I doubt your handlers at the Troll Farm have shared it with you.

Do you know if building three more is the best use of the military budget? Maybe you could construct a scenario from your armchair that takes into consideration their value vs. the threat they could face?
I've heard comments from Ritter and other American analysts that 10 aircraft carriers could be eliminated by 15 hypersonic missiles. Or it could have been 50 they were talking about? Would you know?

Okay, again, Ritter is a fucking child molester and traitor.

We are building more Ford-class aircraft because the Nimitz-class ones are reaching the end of their lifespan. The Ford replaced the Enterprise, the first nuclear carrier built in the 1960s. So they will be one to one replacements.

I hear your confidence and I don't doubt the US 'doctrinal' experience is the greatest on the deployment of AC carriers, but I'm still concerned about the hypersonic missile effect of sending one to the bottom, and leaving 2000 to 5000 American sailors swimming?

Oh, you're not concerned, you are upset that Svetlana left you to be a mail-order bride to some fat American.

As for the Chinese missile forces, um... yeah, about that.

US intel shows China's army had missiles filled with water instead of fuel in a corruption scandal that led to Xi's military purge: Bloomberg

US intelligence also indicated that entire fields of missile silos in Western China used lids that posed problems for launch, Bloomberg reported.

www.businessinsider.com

China's army fielded missiles filled with water instead of fuel and arrays of silos with improper lids — examples of military corruption that led to a dramatic purge of top officials, Bloomberg reported, citing US intelligence.

Bloomberg, which did not name its sources, reported on Saturday that the intelligence indicated Xi Jinping's recent ousting of more than a dozen senior commanders in the People's Liberation Army stemmed from serious issues of graft such as these.

The purge went so far as to ax even the Chinese defense minister, Li Shangfu, who disappeared for two months before being replaced in October.

US intelligence sources told Bloomberg that corruption was so severe in China's Rocket Force and the wider PLA that it would most likely force Xi to recalibrate whether Beijing can take on any major military action soon.

 

[DonGlock26]

AOC spells out exactly why Democrats can't be trusted, and why we can never let down our guard.

Democrats get a shellacking but never learn from it.

Why?

Because they cannot fathom that they're wrong or doing something illegal.

They just try to figure out another way to accomplish what they got caught doing.

You can't reason with a death cult.

 

[DonGlock26]

Again, if Trump sells out Ukraine to your Kremlin masters, he will be a disgrace.

The Democrats & EU had their chance and failed to stop Putin's occupation. The Ukrainians are down to chasing their middle aged men around trying to draft them.

 

[DonGlock26]

Sacrificing the people of Ukraine to a dictator is called what.

NATO policy?