DC Tom

Airstrikes are pretty serious development, though. Usually they just trade sporadic artillery fire.

Of course. No one's called the Irish "savages" since January at the latest...

Clarified it for you, GG.

They're not mutually exclusive options. I hope his state goes Democrat, but Trump wins the popular vote, and his head explodes.

I'm on board with this. It is already illegal, and I make the same complaint about superfluous legislation when Democrats propose it for gun control, or when they proposed it for financial reform.

You didn't hear this morning that officials are backing off the human trafficking claim, did you?

I want a cheeseburger...let's see what PERA's up to today... Oooooh...that's a bacon double cheeseburger...

It was a rhetorical question.

How big a shitstain do you have to be to be given "S.744 Border Security Act" by someone, and ask them to google it for you?

Which is why I would lose. I'd always be either buzzing in early, or too late while I aske myself "Is Trebek done now?"

No...I'd hit the buzzer too early. Do you not know how Jeopardy is played?

Because Jeopardy isn't about trivia, it's about buzzer timing. And I'd lose.

There's two thousand in my library. So well over that number.

The Natufians?

I already said it was pilot error. I know she caused the compressor stall - she banked left, and disrupted the airflow to the left inlet. Her big mistake wasn't that, it was increasing thrust to the other engine, which was a big no-no because it induced yaw beyond rudder control. In her case, at landing speeds, it stalled the port wing. All obvious from the film. What I did not know was if it was a one-time panic, or if she was truly unqualified. Which you just answered by saying she'd done it before. That makes it pretty obvious incompetence: if I know you don't firewall the remaining engine on an F-14A, it's not exactly an obscure point, and a pilot shouldn't even have to think about it.

Of course I know. I-400 class, carried two M6A Serian planes. They were specifically designed as special-operations subs for the sole purpose of attacking the locks in the Panama Canal. Stupid idea, even for the Japanese - lots of effort put in to a plan that was militarily pointless. "Carrier submarines" are a non-starter, for a few reasons. Incompatible doctrinal mix, incompatible logistical needs, the technical needs of either are incompatible with the other (how are you going to quietly maintain planes?) Ultimately, the point of a carrier is to operate an air group, which at its simplest means "generating 180+ sorties per day," which you can't do from a submarine.

Yes, an MOU in business is a non-binding statement of intent. In international diplomacy, they're considered treaties by the UN (as they're often used to modify treaties, this trade agreement being an example), and thus are usually much stronger. Which also explains the discrepancy in the reporting of the Moscow Trump Tower letter of intent: in Trump's business world, it's non-binding, representing the outline of a yet-to-be-finalized agreement. In international diplomacy, it represents a much more complete deal and binding obligation on the parties involved.

Fine. Was there ever an official finding she was incompetent? And you know the engine issues in the A-model made it an unforgiving airplane. Her crash was an obvious compressor stall, incorrectly handled.

And that is why I would have voted for him. Honesty.

"Toeing" the line. Not "towing." Royal Navy term: divisions on sailing ships used to line up in formation for inspection with their toes touching a specific deck seam. Thus , to toe the line. Pet peeve.

That'll be interesting, considering their internal microbiome likely can't be duplicated.

The backlash against this particular stupidity is not going to be to the transgendered's favor, either.

Less a function of "women" being incapable, than women who were unqualified being pushed, for social-engineering reasons, into situations they weren't prepared for. It's not their fault because they're female. It's the fault of an organization being paradoxically told that women have to be held to a lower standard to demonstrate they're equal. Did anyone ever conclusively determine Hultgreen was underqualified? Certainly her crash was pilot error, and fairly obvious at that...but the F-14A wasn't exactly pilot-friendly to begin with, and has killed more than its share of pilots.

Generally, you don't evacuate team members. At most, you stabilize them, then let the medic/corpsman treat them while you continue the mission. Not a hard rule, of course - I know someone who engaged a shooter in Iraq, then carried two injured men to a Humvee (with a shattered arm of his own) and evac'd them (deserved a Silver Star for it, only got a Bronze Star for some reason.) But generally, you're not carrying the wounded to safety. But generally, you want the troops to continue the mission, and leave evacuation of the wounded to the people who's mission it is. Plus...the average combat infantryman is carrying far too much ***** to carry a person besides...

Of course, she only has to believe in 1/1024 of science to be a scientist...