Search results

The US has been working on ABM shield technology for decades.

Trump is still a wild card. The general hope is that he will burn the bureaucracy to the metaphorical ground. Proven track record is that he'll do at least *something* about the border.

Which was preposterous. 20 million already in the country was a more feasible estimate in like 2010.

You really don't know much about what you're talking about here. First off, Congress and the DoD are the ones who keep changing program requirements. It's not like the program was 'Get us a cheap alternative to the F-22' and then Lockheed-Martin went and did their own thing. Over the decades of...

Not liking how over budget things went, and the messiness around it, is a completely valid criticism. There does need to be substantial reform. Unlike some other parts of the government and government-adjacent apparatus though, the military-industrial complex has delivered what it's supposed...

You'll always find soom-sayers about any modern weapon system, and the usually have just enough truth to convince people of the parts that are nonsense. No modern, sophisticated weapon system is as reliable as we'd like; there's simply too many ways for them to fail, and any amount of...

Ya'll are talking about when WW2 will or won't loom so large anymore and comparing it to prior times. You're leaving out one of the most key aspects of why it still looms so large; IE it being the first war with incredibly widespread use of photography, filming, and radio, all of which have...

TL:DR?

Working for the judiciary it's relevant, because someone who is expected to make a career as a Federal Judge would be expected to have basic familiarity with the foundational laws of our nation. I wouldn't expect her to be able to quote it verbatim, though that would be a plus, I would expect...

I don't know why I expected anything else from you on this. You just ignore anything inconvenient to you on other topics, why would you do anything else here? If you can't see the difference between less than 50 million spent to get a functioning reactor going, and billions of dollars being...

Your continuing ability to be hideously wrong and yet so confident about so many different subjects is mind-boggling. The possibility of a self-sustaining nuclear fission reaction was first theorized in 1932. The first successful reactor (CP-1 in Chicago) was built in 1942, just ten years...

...No. Fission is very, very simple to get working at base. You literally just pile together enough fissile material to get chain reactions going. All of the expense and complication is in shielding the rest of the world from that reaction, controlling it to a rate that you want, and harnessing...

If you were familiar with Granholm's history regarding competence, it would make you cynical, not optimistic.

No, we explained exactly how it's illegal. A government acting outside of it's legally-described authority is illegal. That's part of what 'illegal' means. You're just refusing to understand that.

I literally just explained it to you. Go read the post again. Also, from the Constitution again, Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Combine this...

Since you are not American, perhaps this is a perspective failure. Here in America, if the government or a government official is not specifically granted a power, it does not have that power. A government official acting outside the authority granted to his office is doing something illegal...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. " The Federal...

If the laws were being followed around January 6th, there'd be a few dozen, maybe a few hundred, people who'd served months-long jail sentences for breaking and entering, disturbing the peace, maybe vandalism, petty theft, and disorderly conduct charges. One of the members of the Capitol Police...

No. Terrorism is not the answer. Terrorism is violence targeted specifically at causing terror in order to effect political or social change. There's also a bunch of socially-imbued emotion centered around the term. If things get to the point where we've gone past the soap, ballot, and jury...

1. No, they don't. People from several dozen countries do, that's not the same thing as the legal framework and infrastructure being based in those countries. 2. No, I don't think 'only the US has people smart enough.' It has to do with culture and legal environment, and the US has been the...