I would guess that they had an exit strategy in mind the whole time, and considered it part of marketing expenditures. When the cost of maintaining the team became greater than the advertising value, they pulled the trigger.

The short answer is that they don’t make their own engines, so they need to find someone who will produce them. Renault has had 2 full racing seasons, plus the 2 years of notice before the new engine regulations were implemented, to develop a competent engine package, which they have failed miserably at. The fact…

Missiles are well over a million dollars. Each

Engine electrical issues fixed under warranty. Got so I couldn’t trust the car to get me anywhere and back, so it had to go. If it had been reliable, I might’ve kept it...

If it doesn’t look like this, it will be a crime. (Sorry for bad MS Paint, I’m at work.)

Different numbers, presumably.

In F1, drivers pick their numbers.

Yeah obviously Shanghai is in Singapore. Read a map, bro.

Shanghai night GP. Singapore?

Quit trying to make “guit” happen.

Goes back to Plato (paraphrasing heavily): those who are competent to govern are also wise enough to want no fucking part of the job.

Are any of them going to have the political balls to pry the Coast Guard (the branch of the military, yes it is, which does more on a day-to-day basis to serve both America’s economic interests and protect ordinary Americans) out of the grip of the DHS? I suspect not, mainly because the DHS really relies on the Coast…

The biggest biscuit I saw float by was the notion that we’re handing 100 billion of taxpayer dollars to Iran. We’re not doing that. We don’t have some magic pile of 100 billion dollars. That figure comes from the amount of money that Iran is expected to have available when their own assets are unfrozen from accounts…

Given the (relatively)new threat from cruse missile barrage, the future of the mega-huge aircraft carrier is also in question.

O no I don’t think it is at all. My point is that I can understand why some people would want ships like that to support an amphibious assault. I still think it wouldn’t be the best way to do it though.

Carriers are huge but they project power for 1,000 miles. Battleships are very large and project power only as far as their guns shoot. Unless you bring cruise missiles into the argument and then we’re talking about the Arsenal ship concept, which has been repeatedly thrown out for numerous reasons.

There is a report on Korean war by ONI, that the gun with highest efficiency for naval bombardment were 5 inch Cruiser gun.

I don’t know about it being cheaper or not to fire shells v. Missiles but I do know my close friend and boss was a marine during the Regan erra all the way up to 2008 I think. He was a master gunnery Sergeant and faught in rhamadi in 2005 and desert sheild way back in the day. He said one of the things he knew to be…

Agreed that Vietnam is pretty much a perfect case for shore bombardment. BUT a vast portion of the world’s population lives within range of the BB’s guns when you get down to it. Yeah, useless for somewhere like Afghanistan though.

I’m sorry, are you out here arguing against saying “Hello?” when answering the phone?