sherpa

Both are Russian systems.

I am really reticent to comment on this, but these things are far more complicated than is ever discussed on message boards. It is very difficult and extremely threatening to swap military suppliers. For the Ukraine to suddenly decide to swap their Russian defense system to a US/NATO system would have been incredibly aggressive as seen by the Russians. Basically a NATO agreement. Further, the Ukrainian regime is not known for lack of corruption, and keeping US top shelf stuff away from hostile foreigners is a big part of defense trade, and always a huge consideration. See the refusal to sell F-35's to Turkey, a NATO country. I have no doubt that when this thing comes to an end a good deal of US taxpayer paid military material will be ultimately sold to the highest bidder, no matter how despicable. The thought of providing the Ukraine with top of the line "stuff," and the training required to use it is not realistic nor advisable.

The Cliff Notes version of this is that what the Ukraine wants, regarding their airspace problem, is first line US stuff, and that isn't going to happen.

Italy is a member of NATO, so the answer is obvious. Putin isn't Hitler, and the Russian military "performance" is nothing like what the Germans did at the start of WWII. In short, his advance is already pretty much geographically stopped. Again, how is the Ukraine going to conduct offensive operations inside Russia? Further, NATO being what it is now, with Canada and Germany, among others, not keeping up their military capabilities, anything done would be overwhelmingly US, and this isn't our fight, yet. We can't be everyone's big brother all the time.

Not to quibble, but I doubt the Ukraine has the ability to employ weapons that would penetrate Russia, and the effort might be catastrophic for the rest of the world. Name specifics, 'cause that's where the rubber meets the road.

Washington Nationals 2019. University of Virginia Cavaliers basketball 2019 University of Virginia Baseball 2015.

You can frame your view any way you desire. In point of fact, the US military has had its issues with improper behavior over the years. Those individuals, once identified, have for the most part, been prosecuted. We have lost thousands of our folks abiding by the rules of engagement that are specific to each situation. What is going on in the Ukraine bears no resemblance to anything the US has done.

Biden didn't just cancel Keystone. He also issued an executive order that all drilling permits must be approved by a single relatively senior administration official. I believe there are about 4000 permits. Ya...She's going to get to them. The issue of existing permits that are not being drilled is a specious argument. There are lots of reasons why approved permits are not drilled, and I doubt anyone here can speak with authority on the matter. We can do anything we do with oil by using natural gas, which we have an ungodly supply of domestically, and burns cleaner. New on the horizon is the development of solid oxide fuel cells, which can use nat gas, solar, wind or hydrogen. Nat gas and hydrogen don't use near the real estate of solar or wind. Hydrogen produces no greenhouse gasses. Not reasonable? Here's a list of companies that have figured out it works, and have established on site energy production using this, and ensuring they are not cut off when the grid goes down or some local gov entity decides to limit access, as has happened in California many times. Target. Morgan Stanley. Intel. Safeway. Macy's. IBM. IKEA. Comcast. Kelloggs. Staples. Home Depot. Google. Adobe. Honda. FedEx. Yahoo. Owens Corning, and a municipality in Connecticut.

As someone who has served in the US military as an officer and was involved in ROE, and very familiar with what and how the US conducts itself, I find any comparison with what the Russians have done in the Ukraine with how how the US military operates to be grossly ignorant and insulting. Bad things happen in war. Intent and professionalism are important. Barbarisms and murder cannot be tolerated.

Which it never was. They wasted an entire continent for 45 years, and the waste continues.

Too bad the guy was legitimately crazy when he died.

My "favorite" pol. When I was flying Dulles to LA, which I did for two years, she would usually be on the Friday morning flight to LA, and the late Sun flight back. She is the single most imperious individual I have ever seen, and among pols and celebs, there were plenty. It got so bad that I used to get out of my seat early make sure that I was there when she got off, since she was always in first class, to see if she would ever even make eye contact. It got to be a joke. She held everyone in contempt, including her "staff," who used to board early, drop off all her "work" in her first class seat, then go back to their seat in the main cabin. Always left a huge mess in her seat. Just a despicable woman.

Maybe "air strike," but there been a few skirmishes along the way. The Chinese attacked Zhenbao Island in 1969, killing dozens of Soviets. Additionally, E. Royce Williams, a Naval Aviator flying an F9 Panther from USS Oriskany shot down four Mig 15's in a single one vs seven engagement during the Korean War. The story was kept secret for fifty years because of the risk of a US Soviet war, and wasn't admitted by the US until Russia publicized the names of its killed pilots. There is a move afoot to award Williams, a Congressional Medal of Honor, which he richly deserves. Naval Aviator whacks four Migs in one secret engagement.

The issue isn't that you didn't "earn" it. The issue is that the government is forcing you to sell it because they have stapled an unaffordable expense to keeping it in the family.

It would be enormously informative if some think tank would model a simulation to see what a taxation of unrealized gains would cause. At what date would this determination of asset values be made? Can you imagine the market distortions this would cause in the month prior to this date. It is a horrible idea, but leads to the greater point, which is that the less government screws with the personal, financial choices of those who fund it, the better. The problem with that is Deek the first might not be willing to take that risk and create that wealth if he knew if was going to confiscated by the least efficient spending institution in history.

Because Deek the first took risk and invested capital to ensure it for his progeny, like we all try to do. The government has never proposed a reasonable solution to this, and having a third party determine asset value is crazy.

That gets very complicated when real estate is part of the calculus. Bills fans are no stranger to appreciating assets and the tax problems they cause.

Nope. Just one. Elizabeth Warren. The concept is insane. Jefferson warned us centuries ago about having lawyers run the country. Now its proposed to be lawyers and accountants.

With every cell, I hope the Republicans field a better candidate.

Talks between Ukraine and Russia seem to be far more positive this morning. Russian Defense hints they may drastically slow military activity, but not end it. Both sides say demands are more realistic. Futures bounce a little, and oil drops a bit on news. Maybe there's a glimmer of hope.

What? There is no "history." It's a speculative story created as a hypothetical. Useless.

I'm sure your next imaginary narrative that has never happened will be just as convincing.

You ask stupid questions, based on idiotic premises, then tell someone what an acceptable response is? The US, nor any other country for that matter, does not have the ability to dictate internal politics of other countries. Hong Kong was turned over in 1997. The US, nor any US president, and there have been a few since then and have watched this. You can't go to war every time sovereign nations do what they do. Let me ask you a few things, and unlike you, I won't tell you how to answer. Have you ever been to Russia or China? Since the US doesn't control either, does it make sense to you to waste a generation of our youth to try to force something you can't control and really have no standing, (a legal term, but appropriate), in? Last, do you really think this crack team of Biden and Harris with a Dem Senate and House would have caused events in the China/Hong Kong dynamic to have progressed differently?

What I "heard" was in 1898, (not 1998), Great Britain agreed to turn over Hong Kong to China in 99 years. That was done in 1997. Your next claim, which would make about as much sense, is the Trump turned over Jesus to the Roman rulers in Jerusalem. I can't stand Trump, but you sure bring discredit to yourself when you offer ridiculous assertions.

I thought Hong Kong was turned over to China by the British in 1997.