seeadler.bsky.social
Ex-RM from NI with a PhD. Author and professional editor. "Bluesky elder," apparently. #BSMRGUK
To my Ukrainian friends: вдачi і вдалого полювання
2,912 posts
706 followers
878 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
I think New York shouldn't be addicted to electing mayors who have to resign in disgrace.
comment in response to
post
Not sure I agree with that, on the basis that what they *haven't* done is upgraded the radar system to compensate (forcing the missiles a Zumwalt carries to be modified, making them non-interchangeable), meaning that an Arleigh Burke is a more capable missile boat at a fraction of the cost.
comment in response to
post
Useful for what, exactly?
comment in response to
post
"We've designed a stealth ship explicitly to provide Naval Gunfire Support but the stealth isn't very good and the guns are so expensive to operate that we haven't made any ammunition for them" is, for the Zumwalts' crews, a genuinely astonishing and existential place in which to find themselves.
comment in response to
post
"Don't tell me about the finest traditions of the Navy! It's nothing but rum, something-or-other that I can't quite bring to mind at the moment, and the lash!"
comment in response to
post
What do you mean?
comment in response to
post
"...in any case in which the Armed Forces of the United States are introduced in hostilities [...], such use of the Armed Forces of the United States in hostilities pursuant to this Act [the War Powers Resolution] shall be reported WITHIN 48 HOURS..."
comment in response to
post
The before and after shows a deeply impressive camouflet effect: www.theguardian.com/world/live/2...
comment in response to
post
Your objections are fair, but my counter to them is simply quantity: the US dropped more bombs, that are more capable of penetration and vastly more destructive, with far greater accuracy.
comment in response to
post
I'll take that bet.
In 1944, 1 bomb 1/3rd the size with less-powerful explosive contents brought down tens of thousands of tons of earth and rock on the Saumur railway tunnel, blocking it and preventing German reinforcements arriving in Normandy.
comment in response to
post
Most expensive aircraft ever built.
comment in response to
post
Err, $2.1b, but yes, it's pricey.
comment in response to
post
TBF, re. #3, the US DoD has been planning that attack for 20+ years. The MOP bomb was *designed* to attack specially hardened, deep-buried targets in Iran, N. Korea and China. The only novel bit of the op was getting the Israelis to do all the SEAD work.
comment in response to
post
Well, he's already successfully taken over the United States...
comment in response to
post
Misread the letter "I" as a letter "G"?
comment in response to
post
The only probability on which I would bet is this: oil prices will increase substantially, although I do not know for how long.
comment in response to
post
It isn't – you're out by an order of magnitude.
comment in response to
post
Each GBU-57 MOP – the giant bunker-buster bombs the US used on Iranian nuclear targets last night – costs $3.5 million.
comment in response to
post
LMFAO when the best defence your counsel can conjure is "my client is not a good guy."
comment in response to
post
Poor Silver St. Cloud.
comment in response to
post
It goes wrong for him from the very first word of that quote...
comment in response to
post
You were a member of the Central Intelligence Agency's External Advisory Panel for the Iraq Working Group, so I know you know this, but when *religious fervour* gets mixed in with identitarianism and governance, de-escalation usually falls off the table.
comment in response to
post
But Iran *isn't* like Russia or North Korea, as you well know.
comment in response to
post
I do.
Poetry should be honest.
comment in response to
post
Iran has, in every way imaginable, threatened Israel. This is what has made everyone so wary of the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran.
Tell me something. What would the international response to Iran be if it simply... stopped threatening Israel? And why does it not choose to do so?
comment in response to
post
"If you attack us, we'll commit suicide. We'll try to take you with us, but still: suicide."
That's not a compelling deterrent.
comment in response to
post
If Iran knows that using nuclear weapons would be suicide, then their motivation cannot logically be deterrence.
comment in response to
post
In the mid-00s, a Shahab-3 missile – a potential nuclear delivery vehicle – was paraded through Tehran with a banner reading "Wipe Israel Off The Map" draped over it.
That's not deterrence. That's a statement of intent.
comment in response to
post
"I am pushing back on the idea that if it gets them it will immediately use them" can be fairly and reasonably paraphrased as "they might not holocaust Israel immediately."
You just don't *like* that it can.
Moreover, Iran has stated repeatedly that its goal is destruction, not deterrence.
comment in response to
post
Oh good. "They might not holocaust them immediately." That's reassuring. I'm sure that'll be enough for Israel to pack up and go home.
comment in response to
post
A state that repeatedly calls for the complete destruction of its neighbour, and does so on the basis of pure and unadorned antisemitism, does not have an objective right to a nuclear arsenal. isgap.org/wp-content/u...
www.memri.org/reports/frid...
comment in response to
post
Poor English, you say? Excellent. I'm an academic editor and an expert on the use of English; you can walk me through your reasoning.
Off you go, Simon.
comment in response to
post
Cheerfully battering on, as always 😊
comment in response to
post
I think it's just the regular sort.