What are the odds he IS Deadpool? ...You know, if Deadpool were real.

Pretty sure the argument for/against carriers was a little more nuanced than that. The primary argument being against SUPERcarriers, not carriers in general. Supercarriers being a big, expensive, all eggs in one basket approach (with some serious advantages such as flexibility, endurance etc) vs smaller, cheaper…

Except that’s not his position. I was pointing out that his position is a fundamental misunderstanding of how NATO ‘funding’ works. Beyond membership dues used for administrative purposes, which has been paid by all, there is no NATO funding. The US is not ‘paying more than their fair share’ for NATO. Other countries…

That’s just it, though. Member countries don’t ‘contribute to NATO’, they ‘contribute’ to their own defense budgets, and then are obligated to meet the commitments to NATO. There is nothing ‘owed’ to anyone financially speaking. And the way Trump blathers on about countries not paying what they owe is idiotic.

It’d be easier to believe it was apocryphal if it was JUST a hockey skin. But it’s a hockey skin and a Deadmau5 homage (sure, he’s a DJ, but it’s copying the style a bit too closely). It’s kinda weird to have both his epic and legendary skins point to ‘Canadian’. Once could be coincidence, but twice?

...Except that’s not at all what EO13536 says. EO13526 was meant to update and streamline the classification/declassification process, but it made no substantive changes on what the president or vice president could do in terms of declassification.

Leave the planet and do a few missions, then go back. The planet will have cleaned itself up. Not sure if it just requires a reload by just leaving and going right back, or some ‘time’ by playing out other missions first, but it does go away and open up the rest of the available map.

This, a thousand times this. It’s so frustrating when you’re doing a mission and it requires you to check your email or take a call and you have to go back to your ship, go through the take off sequence, check email/vids, then re-land because you still have stuff to do on the planet you just ‘left’. There was no…

I wouldn’t say nothing like it... There were experimental tilt wing (as opposed to tilt rotor) aircraft before. Conceptually, if not mechanically the same.

There are more images out there than the one shown above, including some factory photos. Easy enough to compare.

It’s a very slightly modified T-90. Probably from knockdown kits and/or tech transfer from Russia (similar to the deal they had with India).

Who says the T-90 is arguably better? And which version? At best, a top end T-90 is about on par with an M1A2. They’re asymmetrically comparable.

I love the Wargame series (for the most part), so this is probably one of the games I’m most looking forward to. I may also be biased because it will actually feature Canadian units as one of the playable factions.

In the context given, yes, there was only one definition. I even provided it to you, and the context of my first reply made it INCREDIBLY OBVIOUS which definition I was referring to (sticking your head in the sand?) You attempted to use ‘ignorant’ to mean rude by saying ‘only ignorant people call other people…

Er, what are you arguing about? I just said you use the definition of the word that fits the context. You know ‘whatever applies’. And no, it wasn’t ‘so I thought’, it was the exact definition I intended to use, you’re the one that attempted to redefine it.

Again, I don’t think you’re grasping the definition of the term. ‘In general’ means a broad array, you’re advocating one very specific knowledge. I would not call you ‘ignorant about cars’, but I could say that you’re ‘ignorant’ because you choose not to know anything outside of cars. Because you’re a ‘real car…

I... don’t think you understand what the word ‘ignorant’ means, then?

Ahh, so ‘car people’ is another term for ‘ignorant people’? I mean, that’s what your advocating. Willfully sticking your head in the sand because it’s not about cars. Cars, cars, cars, that’s all that matters.

I’m guessing you’re relatively young and don’t really remember/didn’t experience the Soviet era? The Soviet Union collapsed for a reason, and it wasn’t because politicians were sold or bought. It was an unsustainable system.

How does it apply historically, either, though? France gets a bad rep because they were overrun and (partially) capitulated during the second world war. They didn’t run away with their tail tucked between their legs. They just got straight up beaten, but it wasn’t for lack of fighting back.