US reminds world...

[PhilFish]

..how it goes.

US Air Force tests nuclear-capable long-range missile

The US Air Force on Tuesday tested an unarmed nuclear-capable long-range missile, according to the Air Force Global Strike Command.

edition.cnn.com

 

[Spamature]

Big deal, we already know the US military can nuke any place in the world.

I want to see them show off their stopping a rogue asteroid capability.

 

[Dawg]

well, world is to end in Fire next time

 

[EatTheRich]

 

[Sickofleft]

..how it goes.

US Air Force tests nuclear-capable long-range missile

The US Air Force on Tuesday tested an unarmed nuclear-capable long-range missile, according to the Air Force Global Strike Command.

edition.cnn.com

Is that why they raided Mara Lago? They needed the code to fire that off?...

Too soon?....

 

[sensible don]

wow, just how much did they just spend showing off?

The Congressional Budget Office is required by law to project the 10-year costs of nuclear forces every two years. This report contains CBO’s projections for the period from 2021 to 2030.

• If carried out, the plans for nuclear forces delineated in the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) and the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) fiscal year 2021 budget requests, submitted in February 2020, would cost a total of $634 billion over the 2021–2030 period, for an average of just over $60 billion a year, CBO estimates.
• Almost two-thirds of those costs would be incurred by DoD; its largest costs would be for ballistic missile submarines and intercontinental ballistic missiles. DOE’s costs would be primarily for nuclear weapons laboratories and supporting activities.
• The current 10-year total is 28 percent higher than CBO’s most recent previous estimate of the 10-year costs of nuclear forces, $494 billion over the 2019–2028 period.
• Almost half (about 49 percent) of the $140 billion increase in that total arises because the 10-year period covered by the current estimate begins and ends two years later than the period covered by the 2019 estimate. Thus, the period now includes two later (and more expensive) years of development in nuclear modernization programs. Also, costs in those two later years reflect 10 years of economywide inflation relative to the two years that drop out of the 10-year projection; that factor (in the absence of other changes to programs) accounts for about one-fourth of the 49 percent increase.
• About 36 percent of the $140 billion increase is projected to occur from 2021 to 2028—the years included in both this estimate and the 2019 estimate. That increase stems mainly from new plans for modernizing DOE’s production facilities and from DoD’s modernization programs moving more fully into production.1

 

[PhilFish]

Is that why they raided Mara Lago? They needed the code to fire that off?...

Too soon?....

They did that for reasons that are likely two fold...

The political theater and hystrionics that resulted..

And the possibility that papers of national security and retention interests were present.


Though I think the desire for hystrionics was first and foremost...as they could have inquired via less spectacular means first..

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Is that why they raided Mara Lago? They needed the code to fire that off?...

Too soon?....

That was actually funny. Give this winger some props.

;-)

 

[Zam-Zam]

..how it goes.

US Air Force tests nuclear-capable long-range missile

The US Air Force on Tuesday tested an unarmed nuclear-capable long-range missile, according to the Air Force Global Strike Command.

edition.cnn.com

You have to test these things once in a while to make sure they still work, no?

Reminding the rest of the world that they still work is just an added benefit.

It's all good.

 

[Sickofleft]

They did that for reasons that are likely two fold...

The political theater and hystrionics that resulted..

And the possibility that papers of national security and retention interests were present.


Though I think the desire for hystrionics was first and foremost...as they could have inquired via less spectacular means first..

Actually I was joking but since you answered:

I don't know how anyone, especially those of us who have paid attention to how the FBI/DOJ has behaved toward Trump since 2016, can take this in any kind of serious manner.

Serious manner outside of a horrendous abuse of power, giant over reach and our descent officially into third world antics.......

 

[PhilFish]

Actually I was joking but since you answered:

I don't know how anyone, especially those of us who have paid attention to how the FBI/DOJ has behaved toward Trump since 2016, can take this in any kind of serious manner.

Serious manner outside of a horrendous abuse of power, giant over reach and our descent officially into third world antics.......

Largely agree. Though I blame all of our politic

 

[Mina Park]

Though I think the desire for hystrionics was first and foremost...as they could have inquired via less spectacular means first..

They did. They've been trying to get Trump to return the documents he stole for over a year, by way of less spectacular means.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/07/trump-records-mar-a-lago/

The problem is that even after those less spectacular means were used, a confidential informant told the government that Trump was not just holding onto documents he wasn't supposed to have, but that those included highly classified documents. Trump responded to inquiries about those by lying -- insisting he had no such records. So, they got a warrant and did a search, and it turns out that he did, indeed, have classified records -- including one set of documents marked to indicate they were so sensitive that even those with Top Secret clearance weren't allowed to see them, unless they were cleared for that particular compartmentalized kind of top secret information.

"Less spectacular means" don't work when the crook insists on stonewalling them. At some point they gave up on hoping Trump could be politely talked into obeying the law, and they got a warrant for a search of his business. Trump's supporters were hoping that the search would come up empty, since that would suggest something was wrong with the information telling the FBI of the crime, but we now know the information was correct.

 

[PhilFish]

They did. They've been trying to get Trump to return the documents he stole for over a year, by way of less spectacular means.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/07/trump-records-mar-a-lago/

The problem is that even after those less spectacular means were used, a confidential informant told the government that Trump was not just holding onto documents he wasn't supposed to have, but that those included highly classified documents. Trump responded to inquiries about those by lying -- insisting he had no such records. So, they got a warrant and did a search, and it turns out that he did, indeed, have classified records -- including one set of documents marked to indicate they were so sensitive that even those with Top Secret clearance weren't allowed to see them, unless they were cleared for that particular compartmentalized kind of top secret information.

"Less spectacular means" don't work when the crook insists on stonewalling them. At some point they gave up on hoping Trump could be politely talked into obeying the law, and they got a warrant for a search of his business. Trump's supporters were hoping that the search would come up empty, since that would suggest something was wrong with the information telling the FBI of the crime, but we now know the information was correct.

How do we know which are stolen or not? Or do we just assume they're all stolen just because ...

 

[Zam-Zam]

How do we know which are stolen or not? Or do we just assume they're all stolen just because ...

People who love Trump will insist they were not stolen.

People who hate Trump will insist they were stolen.

The truth is none of them know.

That will not stop them from insisting, however. Emotion often overrides facts and logic, and we are all worse off for it.

My two cents.

 

[Dawg]

They did. They've been trying to get Trump to return the documents he stole for over a year, by way of less spectacular means.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/07/trump-records-mar-a-lago/

The problem is that even after those less spectacular means were used, a confidential informant told the government that Trump was not just holding onto documents he wasn't supposed to have, but that those included highly classified documents. Trump responded to inquiries about those by lying -- insisting he had no such records. So, they got a warrant and did a search, and it turns out that he did, indeed, have classified records -- including one set of documents marked to indicate they were so sensitive that even those with Top Secret clearance weren't allowed to see them, unless they were cleared for that particular compartmentalized kind of top secret information.

"Less spectacular means" don't work when the crook insists on stonewalling them. At some point they gave up on hoping Trump could be politely talked into obeying the law, and they got a warrant for a search of his business. Trump's supporters were hoping that the search would come up empty, since that would suggest something was wrong with the information telling the FBI of the crime, but we now know the information was correct.

So who is the person that read the Top Secret Documents to know they were there?

 

[RickWA]

People who love Trump will insist they were not stolen.

People who hate Trump will insist they were stolen.

The truth is none of them know.

That will not stop them from insisting, however. Emotion often overrides facts and logic, and we are all worse off for it.

My two cents.

Yep. And if one is not among the “haters”, then the “haters” ALL insist he is one of the “Trumpists”. The boring world of the horrifically dishonest internet extremist…

 

[Zam-Zam]

Yep. And if one is not among the “haters”, then the “haters” ALL insist he is one of the “Trumpists”. The boring world of the horrifically dishonest internet extremist…

I would say none of us is perfect, and that we all can and should strive to be better.

None of us can control the other fellow, but we can all control ourselves. That's probably the best place to start, no?

 

[RickWA]

I would say none of us is perfect, and that we all can and should strive to be better.

None of us can control the other fellow, but we can all control ourselves. That's probably the best place to start, no?

Sure. That’s intuitively true. It doesn’t make the utterly predictable responses of all the usual suspects any less boring though…

Imagine a forum in which varied and diverse people expressed individually-derived views and opinions…perhaps even uttered…in their own words. No verbatim jargon. No monolithic alignment-by-tribe. Actual personal autonomy walked and talked.

It really is fascinating. Even among…say…specifically JUST the Protestant segment of JUST American Christianity - we see largely divergent views of faith and how it works out, interpretations of Scripture, etc.

…and that’s our actual TRANSCENDENT FAITH in the Almighty. Contrast that to mere temporal politics. Dogmatic, robotic alignment to boilerplate unto even exacting phraseology.

Yep. Internet. Predictable. Self-unaware. Boring.

 

[PhilFish]

People who love Trump will insist they were not stolen.

People who hate Trump will insist they were stolen.

The truth is none of them know.

That will not stop them from insisting, however. Emotion often overrides facts and logic, and we are all worse off for it.

My two cents.

Bingo.

 

[Mina Park]

How do we know which are stolen or not?

We know because they were not his property, yet were knowingly in his possession, despite multiple demands for their return. If I tell you to return my phone, and you insist you don't have my phone, and then my phone is found locked in your safe, the reasonable conclusion is you stole my phone. It is, of course, possible someone else stole it and broke into your safe in order to frame you for the theft. But that's definitely not the Occam's Razor explanation.