If I were a Republican in Congress I'd introduce a bill requiring people who made such promises to make every effort to fulfil them. Of course it would never pass or survive a court challenge, but it would be fun.
The shuttle had a problem having to meet military requirements because NASA could only make the numbers work by hijacking the Air Force's launch budget. Congress should never have allowed it.
You're really trying to jam a round peg into a square hole here. Brajlovsky and Orlov were both good characters, and the entire plot revolved around the proposition the Russians could get to Jupiter while the US couldn't. You really have to be drowning in anti-US sentiment to see the movie the way you see it.
Sure... the wheels will be in motion. And by the time the crews are trained it won't matter any more. The US spends billions training sailors to use their equipment, and it takes years to bring them up to speed.
US carriers most likely carry nuclear bombs for their aircraft if it comes to that. The government won't say where its nuclear weapons are, but unless they've had a drastic policy change those bombs are still there. So yeah, they can destroy countries.
The Chinese have a ballistic missile with a conventional warhead designed to attack aircraft carriers, which is more dangerous than one with a nuclear warhead. Because it might actually get used. Every country with nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles can take out a CBG if it's willing to pay the price.
There are lots of ways to sink a ship. When I worked in that business we took very seriously the threat of low-flying aircraft with modern ECM pods and laser-guided bombs. The Queen Elizabeth will be commissioned in May, so while the Royal Navy may not have anti-ship missiles that doesn't necessarily mean it won't have a way to sink ships. I suspect F-35s, with their low radar cross-section, will be well-suited to that role.
Providing money when you go to war is too late. It takes months to secure missiles and integrate them with modern warships (which will probably be on the bottom by then).
It is almost impossible to report news without some sort of bias, implicit or explicit.
But that's no excuse not to give it the old college try. I expect people to have viewpoints different than my own, but I don't like to be deliberately manipulated.
Seems pretty easy to me. Twitter just ejected a bunch of people for their political views, and everybody on the other side cheers them on. But by all means, pat yourselves on the back. I'm sure actual Nazis were proud of themselves for burning books and removing undesirables from positions of power.
There's a big difference between looking up highly exothermic reactions in a textbook and having step-by-step instructions for creating a bomb from readily available materials. For one thing, if you don't know what you're doing there's a good chance you'll blow yourself up.
Slashdot Mirror
If I were a Republican in Congress I'd introduce a bill requiring people who made such promises to make every effort to fulfil them. Of course it would never pass or survive a court challenge, but it would be fun.
Who? Name names. Anyone I could possibly have heard of?
Yes he did:
Newsflash: Soyuz isn't a rocket.
It wasn't Trump that was trying to get us into a war with the Russians. I'll sleep easier knowing Clinton won't be anywhere near nuclear weapons.
The shuttle had a problem having to meet military requirements because NASA could only make the numbers work by hijacking the Air Force's launch budget. Congress should never have allowed it.
The Chinese manned space effort as a serious enterprise is virtually brand new, too. China didn't put a man in space until 2003.
You're really trying to jam a round peg into a square hole here. Brajlovsky and Orlov were both good characters, and the entire plot revolved around the proposition the Russians could get to Jupiter while the US couldn't. You really have to be drowning in anti-US sentiment to see the movie the way you see it.
I have to admit it does seem like the admiralty is counting on peace, which is never a good strategy.
Sure... the wheels will be in motion. And by the time the crews are trained it won't matter any more. The US spends billions training sailors to use their equipment, and it takes years to bring them up to speed.
As a matter of fact, I understand it very well.
The first link is pure speculation and the second is irrelevant.
US carriers most likely carry nuclear bombs for their aircraft if it comes to that. The government won't say where its nuclear weapons are, but unless they've had a drastic policy change those bombs are still there. So yeah, they can destroy countries.
The Chinese have a ballistic missile with a conventional warhead designed to attack aircraft carriers, which is more dangerous than one with a nuclear warhead. Because it might actually get used. Every country with nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles can take out a CBG if it's willing to pay the price.
There are lots of ways to sink a ship. When I worked in that business we took very seriously the threat of low-flying aircraft with modern ECM pods and laser-guided bombs. The Queen Elizabeth will be commissioned in May, so while the Royal Navy may not have anti-ship missiles that doesn't necessarily mean it won't have a way to sink ships. I suspect F-35s, with their low radar cross-section, will be well-suited to that role.
And then there are submarines.
Come on, now. Brexit does nothing to UK military power unless the UK decides to leave NATO as well.
Providing money when you go to war is too late. It takes months to secure missiles and integrate them with modern warships (which will probably be on the bottom by then).
Hopefully they do better than they did with Outlook. Mac users won't be thrilled with getting 70% of a product.
But that's no excuse not to give it the old college try. I expect people to have viewpoints different than my own, but I don't like to be deliberately manipulated.
Seems pretty easy to me. Twitter just ejected a bunch of people for their political views, and everybody on the other side cheers them on. But by all means, pat yourselves on the back. I'm sure actual Nazis were proud of themselves for burning books and removing undesirables from positions of power.
You realize we've had devout Christians in the oval office before... right?
Would you be OK with a defendant in a lawsuit for which you had legitimate cause tying you up in court until your money ran out?
This kind of unhinged nonsense just confirms Trump's election was the right thing for the country.
Yeah, except... no. Those allegations fell apart the day after the election.
Besides, we had a sexual predator in the White house starting in 1992, and it didn't seem to matter much.
There's a big difference between looking up highly exothermic reactions in a textbook and having step-by-step instructions for creating a bomb from readily available materials. For one thing, if you don't know what you're doing there's a good chance you'll blow yourself up.