Ozark

@The_Crack_Emcee @passcoderonald Whether Iran is justified in attaining nukes for self defense or not has zero bearing on whether countries who they have sworn to obliterate should allow that to happen. Your are conflating with your perceived morality with global security. Nukes don’t care about morality.

No, because we are the ones who started all this bullshit. We are the ones who overthrew their democratically elected government. We are the ones who installed the Shah of Iran that they hated. We are the ones trying to install his son who they don't want. We are the ones who tried to steal their oil for the British. We are the ones who killed two negotiators in the middle of what everyone said were good negotiations. When is it going to get through your head that they are defending themselves against our predatory nature?

“Hey remember you told us we didn’t need Greenland because we can use those bases whenever we want” “Yes” “So can we use those bases?” “No”

@The_Crack_Emcee @J_Donduan @passcoderonald Thank you for your service. I apologize for the child comment.

@J_Donduan @OzarkPath @passcoderonald I didn't need to know you agree. I already knew you were wrong.

@Spikeypine34271 @passcoderonald Do you define defensive alliance is that you can only respond with arms after being attacked like the white hat in cowboy movies? If so, do you realize that Iran just launched a missile 2K miles at UK airbase Diego Garcia. So, you are cool w nuclear tipped Iranian OCB?

@passcoderonald The bases are to defend NATO countries, not to start wars to grab up oil

@The_Crack_Emcee @passcoderonald Iran just launched an ICB 2K miles. Stopping those missles from being nuclear tipped does not defend you?

"Why not?" "Because they're supposed to be used for defense and you're attacking people, AFTER overthrowing their democratically-elected government and installing one that you liked but they HATED. And you've been attacking them ever since, like a stalker who can't get over an old girlfriend." "I don't think I like you very much."

@JakubBlahousek @passcoderonald Iran just launched missile 2K miles. How is stoping Iran from threatening the EU w nukes not helping NATO?

@passcoderonald You can use any base for defensive NATO purposes :-) Not for your YOLO war.

@minordissent I fear a larger % of conscientious/ grit than many can accept is also genetic.

The trouble with genetic determinism vs blank slatism is that they are both right and both wrong. If you have a 80 IQ okay, yes, you are screwed. But once you pass 110 or so, your bottleneck becomes your beliefs and models about yourself and the world. They may take a lot of time to reprogram, but if you’re willing to just keep working at it you can go far further than you ever imagined.

@e_considine @RonDeSantis Why would a school w 10% more students (110) need to 2 principals? I think your comment sounded smarter in your head than it reads.

@RonDeSantis Ok so if a school has 100 teachers and grows to 110 teachers, that is 10% growth. If they had 1 Principal in 2000 and now 2, that is 100% growth.

Bureaucracy run amok.

@DistopianGirl @ChrisO_wiki Why should US maintain bases in EU if they can only be used to directly defend EU against Russian aggression? I see how that is good for EU but why should US fund 65%?

@ChrisO_wiki I could be wrong but I thought the US used European bases primarily to protect Europe in the event of NATO Article 5 being triggered? If the US does not want to be part of NATO as Mr Trump has said, then there is no need for the US to access base anywhere in Europe. Right? 🤷‍♀️

1/ The US attempted to send several Iran-bound bombers to an Italian air base without prior authorisation and was refused permission by the Italian government while the aircraft were in flight. The news comes a day after Spain disclosed it was refusing US military overflights. ⬇️

@Inventingfanneh @MDC12345678 Initially UK denied access to Diego Garcia.

@MDC12345678 What bases have they been denied access to just out of curiosity?

We are moving back into a world of great power competition. The United States is behaving accordingly. It is prioritising its own interests, demanding burden sharing, and applying coercive pressure where it sees weakness. People in Westminster may not like it, but it is entirely predictable. But the real scandal is not Washington. It is that Britain is utterly unprepared for this shift. Since 1991, we have hollowed out our industrial base, neglected energy security, embraced fragile supply chains, and convinced ourselves hydrocarbons can be wished away and replaced by inefficient renewable energy. At the same time, we have allowed defence and national resilience to atrophy. So we enter a harder world exposed, dependent and strategically incoherent. Against that backdrop, picking fights with the one power that still underwrites our security is not principled. It is reckless. If you lack the capacity to act independently, you do not get to indulge in gestures of autonomy. Denying access to bases was a strategic blunder. Continuing to publicly slight the Trump administration to score cheap political points back home is short-sighted, self-indulgent, and actively undermines our own security. Strategy begins with reality. And the reality is this: power still governs the international system. We have forgotten that. The Americans have not. If Britain wants to successfully navigate this new world, it must rebuild the material basis of power at home. Abundant supplies of hydrocarbons and nuclear power, food security, industrial capacity, a vibrant domestic tech sector, and a properly funded armed forces. Everything else flows from that.

@JennyfromtheGOP @elonmusk 🤣😅😂

@elonmusk Save the gays and not just the Strait! 🤣

💪

@elonmusk #AMAOIA

@MacroBombastic @XFreeze Delaware law did not change in 2018 but her interpretation of applicable laws shifted significantly from prior precedents.

@XFreeze Buddy, you think one judge is the problem, but what about the law she's enforcing?

This ONE activist Delaware judge has single-handedly destroyed the state’s future economy by driving trillions of dollars worth of companies out of Delaware Literally just one person doing the job of wrecking an entire state How can you let woke, activists become judges with this much power over America’s corporate capital? Insanity

@madretiree @XFreeze I am guessing significantly longer. When started undergrad B-school in 1989 Delaware was were most of the Blue Chips and Fortune 500 were chartered. Profs explained it was due to that states judiciary system specializing in corporate governance dispute resolution.

@XFreeze It started a great change. Companies realized how important which state they are incorporated in and where they are headquartered. This started the movements to Texas, Tennessee, and Nevada. Great for these states. Delaware has had all these companies for over 50 years.

@_BRCooper @ray4tesla Agreed (especially lefties). Accumulating credentials is a lot easier than competing and winning in the market place. Lefties too often view competing & hard work w derision.

@ray4tesla I have an engineering degree. I learned a lot in school while earning it. But I didn't learn anything that couldn't be learned by an ambitious person who opened a up a textbook and started actually building stuff on their own. People mistake credentials with knowledge.

In this 2015 interview, the host — a Tsinghua University professor — expressed genuine curiosity about how Elon Musk was able to found SpaceX without prior experience and knowledge in aerospace, especially given that rocket science is one of the most demanding hard sciences — and that Musk was serving as both CEO and CTO. Musk explained that deep expertise can be built outside formal academic programs — by reading extensively, conducting experiments, and speaking directly with experts in the field.

@cryptocyberteam @ray4tesla All leftists got is but but but Elon got gov subsidies. I respond at least he took advantage of the opportunity by multiplying it 100000X to help US lead world in multiple tech fields. Too many waste or steal subsidies. Not Elon.

It’s rocket surgery not brain science I mean Duh!? Just read a few books and you get space X. All the crying liberals who are jealous of Elons prosperity can now repeat his endeavors so easily and then we will see them all give each dollar away so that the population can all get about $300.00 and the world is saved so simply and easily. I can’t wait to see how many space X companies we get in the next year and how many homeless are saved because of it.

@oddroadmap @Gaurab Nope. It’s cheaper to esport Canadian & Mex crude to US than anywhere else. So we are natural trading partners.

@Gaurab So we need to take over Canada and Mexico soon?

The U.S. is running Elon's playbook on LNG: Build it before the world knows it needs it. A decade ago, American LNG exports were near zero. Today the US is the world's largest exporter at 15 billion cubic feet per day with eight new terminals under construction. Capacity doubles to 29 billion cubic feet per day by 2029. Total capital committed: $150 billion. The contracts are 20-year take-or-pay, denominated in USD. During COVID, buyers cancelled every cargo they could. They still paid billions in fixed fees. Then Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz. Qatar, 20% of global LNG supply, went offline. Vessel transits dropped from 129 per day to 4. Europe needed a replacement. BUT the contracts were already signed. US share of European LNG: 27% in 2021, 56% today. Germany went from zero LNG imports to sourcing 94% from America. Japan is locked through 2050. American LNG is a 20-year legal obligation with no exit clause.

@DruckerAaron @Gaurab Incorrect. Global energy sales are highly influenced to outright controlled as part of national security by most countries. Dem Admin work against fossil fuels blocking builds of pipeline & LNG export facilities while Rep do opposite.

@Gaurab There was no grand strategy. The people/ companies you’re saying are visionaries, are the same ones that built LNG import facilities that started operations a year before the shale revolution. They had to build the liquefaction because they already had sunk investments.

@Eggplant_Elon @newstart_2024 I sincerely wish that you were correct but sadly the US military had literally thousands of varying job types that mirror broader society. Most of the bottom 10% US IQ are supported by others, Gov, family, or incarcerated

I disagree. I think your error is conflating cognitive ability as measured by IQ tests with total human value and productive capacity, which is a category error. IQ captures certain kinds of abstract reasoning well. It does not, however, capture reliability, physical skill, social ability, or the many forms of work that societies have always needed done. Second, the military is a specific institutional context with specific task demands, training pipelines, and tolerance for error. It is not a scale model of all human economic activity. There is plenty of productive, valuable work in the real economy that bears no resemblance to military operations.

Jordan Peterson shared one of the most sobering statistics I’ve heard in a long time. The U.S. Armed Forces — after over a century of careful psychometric research driven by life-and-death necessity — will not induct anyone with an IQ below 83. They concluded that there is simply nothing in the military (at any level) that such a person can be trained to do without being counterproductive. Peterson noted that this threshold captures roughly one in ten people. And if the military’s complexity is even roughly comparable to broader society, that means about 10% of the population has no viable place in our cognitively demanding world. He emphasized that this isn’t about lack of money or short-term training. The data shows it’s extremely difficult to turn low cognitive ability into the kind of adaptive, creative problem-solving that modern society requires. It’s a raw, uncomfortable truth about human variation that most people prefer not to discuss openly. What do you think — is this statistic something society needs to confront honestly, or is there a better way to think about it?

@Fool_be_Wise @BrianMcDonaldIE Russia’s one tech bright spot was weapons exports, which their failures in Ukraine combined with sanctions is eroding.

@BrianMcDonaldIE “Full spectrum industrial capacity” is a bit of a reach. In what sector is Russia’s technology less than a decade behind? Who outside of Russia buys anything produced by this industrial capacity?

Nominal GDP is a terrible way to measure a state like Russia, and it's one of the reasons poorly informed Western pundits keep misreading the country. On PPP, it’s the world's 4th largest economy (over $7 trillion) and bigger than Germany or Japan, with full-spectrum industrial capacity. That’s not a "middle power." Russia can build nuclear submarines, icebreakers and nuclear power plants, launch people into space, produce advanced weapons, export energy at scale and, perhaps most crucially, feed and fuel itself. Italy can’t.