Search Results
7/17/2025, 2:13:18 PM
>>510621918
>our response /chug/chads?
Typical westoid history revision.
Even when they lose they win.
And they always lose.
>Tu144 was result of industrial espionage of Concorde anda cheap copy, despite looking completely different and being the first to fly and enter service with higher top speeds (in fact the USSR got inspired by marketing brochures, and took the concept from "artist renditions" to real flying aircraft faster than the west could go from completed R&D to flying machine).
>"We won in Vietnam", despite getting our shit kicked in (muh KD, when only counting US losses and ignoring the bulk of the ground forces which was their Vietnamese proxies)
>Soviets lost in Afghanistan, despite achieving all military goals and installing a regime that held their grounds for over a year after the USSR got dissolved
>Finland loses all land they fought over in the winter war and continuation war, "muh KD". Karelia, Viborg etc are all Russian now. And Karelia was offered to Finland, for free (including the parts in Soviet before the wars started).
>USSR is first in every milestone of the space race, US plants a man on the moon and declares victory.
>Houthis kick mutts out of the red sea and retains the naval blockade, US launches a few missiles and bails. Declares victory.
>our response /chug/chads?
Typical westoid history revision.
Even when they lose they win.
And they always lose.
>Tu144 was result of industrial espionage of Concorde anda cheap copy, despite looking completely different and being the first to fly and enter service with higher top speeds (in fact the USSR got inspired by marketing brochures, and took the concept from "artist renditions" to real flying aircraft faster than the west could go from completed R&D to flying machine).
>"We won in Vietnam", despite getting our shit kicked in (muh KD, when only counting US losses and ignoring the bulk of the ground forces which was their Vietnamese proxies)
>Soviets lost in Afghanistan, despite achieving all military goals and installing a regime that held their grounds for over a year after the USSR got dissolved
>Finland loses all land they fought over in the winter war and continuation war, "muh KD". Karelia, Viborg etc are all Russian now. And Karelia was offered to Finland, for free (including the parts in Soviet before the wars started).
>USSR is first in every milestone of the space race, US plants a man on the moon and declares victory.
>Houthis kick mutts out of the red sea and retains the naval blockade, US launches a few missiles and bails. Declares victory.
6/26/2025, 11:30:19 PM
People should listen to Melnichenko.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKL6YDtAAB8&t=3489s (58min 10 sec)
Instead of arguing about the 6-7% of human CO2 emissions (and ALL greenhouse gases account for ~30% of the warming of the planet), why not look at the remaining 93-94% of CO2 emissions or the remaining 70% of the warming (heat getting absorbed)?
Why are we so focused on finding the guilty parties to less than 2% of the problem instead of seeking solutions to 98%?
For instance, why not make more clouds that reflect more sunlight back?
Or why not make the surface more reflective? (Like brighter colors on roads, for instance going from black to gray asphalt)
The answer ofc lies in the question and the source stating the problem. But we could look at it from the other perspective.
Whether human CO2 emissions are the cause of warming or not, why not look at the other ways of reducing the temperature?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKL6YDtAAB8&t=3489s (58min 10 sec)
Instead of arguing about the 6-7% of human CO2 emissions (and ALL greenhouse gases account for ~30% of the warming of the planet), why not look at the remaining 93-94% of CO2 emissions or the remaining 70% of the warming (heat getting absorbed)?
Why are we so focused on finding the guilty parties to less than 2% of the problem instead of seeking solutions to 98%?
For instance, why not make more clouds that reflect more sunlight back?
Or why not make the surface more reflective? (Like brighter colors on roads, for instance going from black to gray asphalt)
The answer ofc lies in the question and the source stating the problem. But we could look at it from the other perspective.
Whether human CO2 emissions are the cause of warming or not, why not look at the other ways of reducing the temperature?
6/26/2025, 10:30:58 AM
>>508764952
>Turns out that Europe's 5% GDP multi-trillion rearmament was actually just subsidies to the American MIC again.
How are you surprised?
Not only is it obvious for political reasons, NATO being a vassalage...
You also have it in the requirement: Spend XX% of GDP on the military
Not "have this or that amount of soldiers with X endurance and capability level Y".
Only requirement is to have US compliant weapon systems (NATO standard) and spend a certain amount of money on it.
Then add the political pressure to buy muttmerican, blackmail and bribery and it's pretty obvious what the result will be. The US can always out bribe and out pressure local producers, Germany, Sweden or Italy... so you buy American.
Because in the end, the only requirement is that you spend your money, not that you get anything for it.
>Turns out that Europe's 5% GDP multi-trillion rearmament was actually just subsidies to the American MIC again.
How are you surprised?
Not only is it obvious for political reasons, NATO being a vassalage...
You also have it in the requirement: Spend XX% of GDP on the military
Not "have this or that amount of soldiers with X endurance and capability level Y".
Only requirement is to have US compliant weapon systems (NATO standard) and spend a certain amount of money on it.
Then add the political pressure to buy muttmerican, blackmail and bribery and it's pretty obvious what the result will be. The US can always out bribe and out pressure local producers, Germany, Sweden or Italy... so you buy American.
Because in the end, the only requirement is that you spend your money, not that you get anything for it.
Page 1