I never argued a single one of those points, but if you insist: Russia is, indeed, having ammo problems. Asking North Korean for Korean War era stocks is absolutely not something a country who felt comfortable with their stocks of ammo would do. Russia, with a significantly larger Air Force cannot gain air superiority. It’s absurd that they could not before the NATO armaments showed up, and again, that they effectively cannot attack the civilian power supply shows NATO weapons outcompete Russian offensive firepower. Russia could not hold an island against a country with no navy!
NATO military capabilities hinge on air superiority. We literally stopped making many of the things Ukraine wants because it doesn’t allow for quick decisive action like the US expected in a war with Russia or a Russian proxy. As an example, tube artillery was used in the US to start avalanches, not something we expected to return to service.
They wanted ground launched weapons, but our stockpiles are guided bombs that we’d use with impunity after our stealth craft took out the SAM radar and launch sites.
Go be a low level effort useful idiot for Russia somewhere else.
Not quite. Trump is currently being charged in federal court for his part in lying to overturn the election. They used “knowingly false” 32 times in the indictment for a reason. His defense is not that the president is allowed to lie, but rather that he truthfully believed he was telling the truth, so I’m not sure where you assertion is coming from: It is illegal to lie in furtherance of breaking the law, even for the POTUS.
Not quite. The constitution has a cutout for official duties of the office. The president must faithfully carry out the duties of the office. So knowingly lying can fail that test.
If you want someone to blame for the US invasion of Iraq, blame Italy, their Intelligence apparatus, and Nicolò Pollari in particular. He submitted the “Iraq is buying Yellowcake” to the CIA twice, who figured out it was a forgery before setting a private meeting with the vice president who did not know the CIA had already ruled it out.
There’s a chain of reporting issue. Generally, the site you’re on (outside the social media shitholes) will keep track of some identifier of who you are, and which sites you visited. Then they will share your identifier with an advertising partner to deliver you advertisements. The advertising partner will take your data and pass it off to a data management platform (Hi Oracle!) who will then attempt to link you on that site to literally everything you have ever done. They have deals with Credit card companies, TV vendors, car manufacturers, cell service providers, public databases. That’s where the sketchiness happens. The worst part of it all is that realistically, the advertisers don’t care about all that data. They almost always want some very basic demographic data that fits in the old Nielsen family demographic data: It doesn’t make any sense to advertise a Lexus or investment advice to someone making minimum wage. Politicians want to know who likely voters are. Macy’s wants to advertise at people who shop at malls. They also want “Lives within 50 miles of my business”
The biggest worry is that the data platforms collect a lot of exact data that is not used except for super suspect Cambridge Analytica level targeted political advertising, and to add to it: They are reallllllly crappy at their jobs. I work in AdTech, so I can poke around at what they think I am and I’ve had things from “Salad Dressing lover” to being both unemployed and making $1 million/year in the same profile.
He privately owns Twitter, so he can do whatever he wants with it.
The issue is that he took out billions of dollars in Tesla stock loans to cover the Twitter sale, so if Twitter fails and the people that gave him cash ask for the cash back: he has to hand over his collateral, which is largely his controlling stake in Tesla.
Then get educated about how the system is set up to benefit them. There’s systems that could be useful like taxing the underlying assets that underwrite a loan if they reach a certain amount since the wealthy right now are collateralizing financial instruments like stocks to take out loans (Like Elon Musk did with his Tesla stock to buy Twitter, simply bypassing what should have been a taxable event). This one is tricky as HELOCs are used by a ton of lower on the totem pole folks to maintain their homes and cutting that off would come with some fairly disastrous consequences, like poor folks being simply unable to acquire the funds to fix a home issue before it becomes something that causes a complete loss of habitability of the property.
Nah, we give primary homeowners a ton of benefits. Like, if you go to sell your primary home, a married couple gets up to half a million in profits that can go untaxed. If you have a second property that’s not your primary, it’s taxed as capital gains.
There’s a reason primary homes are seen as an intergenerational wealth generating vehicle in the US.
You also don’t get to claim the deductions on a second home unless you are renting it out, so property squatting is disincentivized in tax law.
The issue is that the US doesn’t own all of the relevant patents, just most of them. It’s hard to apply US anti-monopoly laws against a company based in the Netherlands that primarily sells its products to Korea and Taiwan. All the US can do is threaten to pull the EUV-LLC patents that the department of energy developed.
You have to be careful about what tissue you put the epinephrine in. If you don’t hit the right tissue, it can not function or cause you to go into tachycardia. When your brain is also potentially not working super great due to low blood pressure (the shock part of anaphylactic shock), it’s best to have a point and click interface.
I never argued a single one of those points, but if you insist: Russia is, indeed, having ammo problems. Asking North Korean for Korean War era stocks is absolutely not something a country who felt comfortable with their stocks of ammo would do. Russia, with a significantly larger Air Force cannot gain air superiority. It’s absurd that they could not before the NATO armaments showed up, and again, that they effectively cannot attack the civilian power supply shows NATO weapons outcompete Russian offensive firepower. Russia could not hold an island against a country with no navy!
And if Ukraine is not advancing, why is official Russian news talking about retreating? https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/09/06/russia-announces-tactical-withdrawal-from-ukraines-robotyne-a82369