Jump to content

BamaATL

Full Members
  • Posts

    4540
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by BamaATL

  1. 1 minute ago, B00M said:

    Someone catch me up. We’ve had the technology to go to mars and start crudely colonizing since what, the ‘80s? but instead, we’re fucking around and maybe going to land on the moon again (yay?) sometime in the next decade, where there are basically no useful resources, and the exercise in no way actually helps us get to further worlds? 

    In theory, we've had the tech to at least land people on Mars from the 70s (they'd have likely been dead bodies, but hey).  Going to the moon actually makes more sense than meets the eye, and it does have resources.  

    1.  Water exists on the moon, it isn't plentiful, but it exists.  Where water exists, you can make rocket fuel.  For deep space manned exploration, barring improvements in propulsion, that will be important.

    2.  It's beneficial to have a proving ground for new tech, like regolith 3D printing, or farming.  The moon being only a few days away makes it a realistic test bed for emergent tech.  In other words, you can afford to have something fail on the moon and get a replacement or a return to Earth in short order.  Something like that happens on Mars, everyone could die.  

    3.  Helium 3 exists in abundance on the moon's surface, while it doesn't here on Earth.  This makes it potentially highly commercially profitable.  

    There are lots of other reasons, but a big one to me is the fact that we aren't likely to send people without lots of fail-safes.  To me, that means we will realistically we will need essentially weigh stations in space in between here and Mars, all equipped with the ability for things like life support, supplies, and return options.  I think it's far more viable (mind you not economically) to build a series of O'Neill cylinders as both research stations and lifeboats.  

    That isn't to say that leap in technology can't turn all this on it's head, after all, more or less we are using the same principles Robert Goddard and Werner Van Braun used.  The Starship could be a game changer for a lot of reasons beyond itself, for example, the ability to get new test beds into orbit on the cheap could (and likely will) lead to new breakthrus.  

    • Like 3
  2. 29 minutes ago, MissingInAction said:

    I've been to the battlefield. The union troops were trying to advance up a 40 degree incline with cannons pointed down at them. An absolute meat grinder. Tablets cover the area marking where entire companies were obliterated.

    It was fucking brutal, worth a stop if you are ever in the area and a bit of history fan.  I don't live far from Kennesaw Mountain, which was a battle in the outskirts of Atlanta, the earth works still exist and one area where a company from Tennessee made the bend and walked directly into artillery.  None survived.  

    What is crazy, is that with the benefit of hindsight, it's easy to see that conditions and battlefield tactics had changed, yet for at least another sixty years plus, everyone still taught the Napoleonic tactics.  As it applies to today, the Russians still use some of this, (i.e. columns, over dependence on artillery, etc).  It isn't just that they take untrained peasants and run them onto the field, it's also that their command is taught tactics that are 200 years old. 

    • Hook 'Em 4
  3. 8 minutes ago, Bevo said:

     

    For being born and living in Vicksburg during the Civil War? I would have to ask my mom, but I'm pretty sure that it was a woman with her children in the cave. And not that I need your approval but some years later my mom's family was pretty prominent in support of desegregation in Mississippi - like they are in books.

    Easy joke (relax not serious), It's pretty easy to be in a book in Mississippi, you just have to write it.  

    Of course no civilians deserve anything of this sort, just pure horror and misery. 

    An interesting thing to think about though, is how the siege of Vicksburg essentially foretold where artillery based warfare was going; i.e. the stagnation and trench warfare of WWI.  In this case the side that one eventually exhausted supply of the enemy, however, what happens when neither side can be exhausted (hint, it's fucking bad).  

    • Hook 'Em 3
  4. 3 minutes ago, softlynow said:

    Like the best athletes, he just makes it look easy.

    I know you can work hard at public speaking, and I know you can improve at it, but some people just have a natural gift with it, Obama is one of those.  I'm not trying to take away from his the hard work he put in to it.  He's just really good. 

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 1
  5. Earlier a poster put together an idea of a potential battle plan with the idea of going towards Melitopol (I forget the poster, apologies), that's a long way from the river banks.  However, using the deep state map, I did notice that merely by crossing the river bank anywhere between Kherson and NIkopol, with any heavy equipment (to include HIMARS) they would be within the 300 km range of the Kerch Bridge, making an ATACMS strike possible.  I'm not sure that would do the job entirely, I suppose it depends on the warhead.  If they are going for it, I would at least have to think this is a strong secondary objective.  

    In searching, the average depth of the Dneiper in this area is between 1.3 meters and 12 meters, however, I'm unclear if this is pre dam demolition or post.  Additionally, the width of the river in dry periods ranges anywhere from 200 ft to 1200 ft, again, not clear if this is pre or post dam.  In any event, if it is significantly low from even these readings crossing heavy equipment with pontoons might be possible, but I have to imagine still extremely difficult.  If they do accomplish this, it would potentially open a door behind the Surovikin line.  Fingers crossed.  

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 2
  6. 2 minutes ago, Brandywine said:

    What happened to him? He should go to work for Fox. 

    He was the first to buy into Zaslav's (and his dipshit Licht) mandate for "both sides" bullshit, and he hasn't let it go.  Zaslav's day's are numbered, the Discovery merger is going to rank up there with the AOL Time Warner merger as being one of the biggest media disasters in history.  

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
    • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
  7. 2 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

    Aaaaaannnd CNN's first comments after that speech are about how Biden talked about his legacy more than promoting Kamala.  Easiest decision ever to turn that shit off and go to bed.

    Calling CNN a dumpster fire is an insult to a dumpster fire.  

    I still like looking at Erin Burnett though.  

    • Hook 'Em 5
    • Drool 1
    • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
  8. 3 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

    you are thinking nefarious.....

    what you are forgetting is the US fucking blocking the attack on Gerasimov because reasons.    the US intel team could just as easily have been told from the top to tell the Russians that info to try and keep the peace.

     

    we are absolutely horrible allies unless we need to start killing MFers

    I actually get asking for them not to kill Gerasimov, he seems quite shitty.  

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  9. 22 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

    So you have not been to Washington lately? Everyone wants to tell someone what they know. Just sit in the right bars or hotel lobbies.

    Politicians are gonna politic, that part I get.  This however, is something more damning, at least to me.  This indicates that our intel people are either incompetent or are compromised, or worse both.   After that, who can blame the Ukrainians for keeping us at arms length on planning?  

    • Hook 'Em 5
×
×
  • Create New...