circuscritic

The cost per round is a lot more than just power generation when talking about lasers.

The wear on tear on lasers is a lot different than other systems and when the case is being made for their cost effectiveness they need to be factored in, instead of the highly misleading figures that only prices out electricity.

There is no doubt that lasers will play a bigger and bigger role in combat systems, especially in a layered air defense networks.

But it’s dishonest how these articles only cite the cost of electricity. It would be like citing the cost of a single shell of artillery to imply that is the only expenditure when the system is used.

Just like a Howitzer, the parts on lasers experience wear and tear, but to replace them cost a hell of a lot more than a new barrel.

Yes, in the long-term lasers will be more cost-effective than ground to air missile interceptors*, but any reporting that is clearly trying to make an argument for cost savings, should have the integrity to get figures that factor in battlefield maintenance of those systems.

*When applicable. Lasers will not remove the need for any existing systems, but will provide a cost savings by providing additional options for the air defense system’s operators.

Interesting that they allowed these two issues within the same piece of propaganda, considering these are the same class of people who enabled the elite to entirely remove any politics relating to the improvement of material economic conditions for working class people from public debate, or elections, and replace it entirely with the politics of culture war.

It’s kinda like atheists who pray during bad turbulence, might as well give it a shot.

The reason he fell from favor was a coordinated and relentless media attack and smear campaign because he was beholden to Old Labour values, and not New Labour’s brand of limp dick neoliberalism.

That may sound overly simplistic and vulgar, but it’s accurate, and if anything, less vulgar than the smear campaign that was used to gun down his political career as party leader.

These are squad level ground launched air to ground munitions i.e. they’re small enough to be carried by infantry units and have the explosive charge more akin to antitank munitions.

…it’s a monarchy.

If anyone you read, or know, ever refers to a monarchy as progressive, you can immediately disregard everything they ever write, or say.

The only context where it’s at least explainable would be in a limited to direct comparison between Jordan and the other regional monarchs with large petroleum reserves.

You can categorize any smaller country as a pawn when they’re placed between two competing powers, but they often really don’t have much of a choice in that.

And TBF Castro wanted to push the Cuban missile crisis a hell of a lot further then then Khrushchev was willing to. So maybe more pitbull than pawn, at least for a time.

But real talk, America has horribly exploited and abused Cuba since the Spanish-American war, and let’s just say, still lightly meddled in their affairs for nearly 50 years prior to the post war occupation.

So getting your feels up in a twist about Russia managing to sail a handful of warships to Cuba, is kinda petty. Especially considering that it’s even odds that the fucking engines catch fire on the return trip.

I don’t think they’re making a moral argument, but pointing out the reality of the situation as it stands.

This is a problem that can only be fixed through legislation and aggressive enforcement backed by large punitive actions.

Until that happens, it’s better to acknowledge and understand the reality of the situation, than to believe that a morally righteous condemnation will somehow unmake that reality.

It sucks. I agree with your philosophical stance, except for the payment for personal data, as I’d prefer a complete opt-out. However, none of that changes where we’re at right now.

lol.

Just search for Purism customer support experiences.

I’m honestly amazed there hasn’t been a fraud, or some other consumer protection type criminal investigation.

All that baggage, and their hardware is also laughably outdated and overpriced.

Which is unfortunate, because the concept is amazing and clearly there’s a sizable market for it.

Here is an example of just ONE flavor of Purism customer experiences:

Announce current gen hardware and current pricing.

Customer pays

Customer receives hardware 5 years later, after being told approx. 362 times that cancellation refunds are down, or unable to be processed.

Customer tries to immediately return the 5 year old laptop that was just delivered and is told “No Returns”

There are other variations that you can read about on various forums.

There’s too many factors to name in a brief comment, but here’s an interesting statistic:

In all recent European elections, all center-left parties that have tried to swing to the right on immigration to try and woo right-wing voters, have lost seats. No exceptions.

Edit: Clarified the swing on immigration was to the right.

WP artillery is legal illumination round, and it’s use in war is not this automatic war crime that people often believe.

You just described a legal application of WP:

Illumination of battle space to enable artillery spotters to coordinate indirect fire missions using standard munitions e.g. 155mm, mortars, etc.

However, intentional use of WP as an incendiary munition is where it does become a war crime.

I’m not saying US Forces in Iraq did, or didn’t, illegally use WP, but I am saying you described it’s intended and legal application.

Legal doesn’t mean moral, justified, or right, it just means it’s not a criminal act under the legal frameworks we currently use to manage warfare.

It’s telling that you think a multi-day combat operation over a geographically dispersed area is just one very long firefight.

It sounds like you’re basing this off a mixture of movies, television, and your gut.

Are you relying to the wrong the wrong comment? Or did you just not read mine correctly…?

Before I lay into the absurdity of your response as it relates to my comment, please double check.

Because it should be obvious that my comment adheres to the UN charter you reference and I never claimed that systemic only includes weaponized rape ordered through the chain of command.

Thanks for clearing that up, you’re being intentionally disingenuous.

Never have I defended the IDF, nor have I condemned any Palestinian combatants.

I certainly never expressed any skepticism about the genocide or sexual violence that does appear to be deliberately systemic within the IDF, or at minimum, widely tolerated up the chain.

So, with that out of the way. Re-read my comments, and then decide to engage honestly, or just go and try and peddle your uninformed garbage somewhere else.

There’s a huge difference between isolated incidents, and the systemic use of rape as a weapon of war.

One’s a regular criminal offense, and the other is Hague War Crime Tribal level of offense.

Did you really just try and claim that rape doesn’t happen during active and protracted urban combat…?

Also, while I agree that of the attackers that day, the Hamas forces were the least likely culprits due to training and defined mission objectives, they weren’t the only people to enter Israel after the barriers were breached. That doesn’t mean they didn’t, just that I think there are other scenarios with a higher probability.

And last, I’m not really sure if you’re being intentionally honest with your retelling of events, or if you really just don’t know that much about the scope and duration of the attack. Either way, you don’t really have a firm grasp enough to speak on this with any sort of authority, certainly not with the confidence you seem to have.

Rape happens in war. I don’t believe it was used systemically on Oct. 7, as Israel claims, or at least, there’s no evidence of that.

However, to claim that no one was raped during an attack that long and protracted, and with so many people involved, defies history and the realities of conflict.

What’s worse, anyone claiming “no rapes happened” as a counter to “it was systemically used”, means that a single case of rape invalidates their claim, and by default, bolsters Israel’s lie.

Sepuku or bust

Those Russian mercenaries are running recruitment operations to feed foreign nationals e.g. Syrians into the Ukraine theatre.