Going a little fast there, buddy. Where’s the fire? *Points back at police officer’s car.

That is much better looking that the Z8.

Yes

It is really disappointing that Jalopnik would support such an absurd position. This site has not typically lowered itself to coddle the politically correct whiners who choose to be victims because it is trendy. 

I don’t think that is what the adjective before capitalism is trying to allude to.

It’s really a former shop truck that’s now a showpiece.

I like the rims, just not for this ride.

Beautiful truck, but it would make a better shop truck is the fuel cell was not in the bed.

Yeah it better go faster than that. 25 years ago the F1 did 240 with the rev limiter removed. This thing looks like a teardrop and has 1.5x the horsepower.

worth the tickets

The real crime would be putting a front license plate on that car.   

It’s a strangely written piece. It starts off about how America had upped the game by installing the Pershing II in the 80s that couldn’t hit Moscow (but the Soviets thought it could) and then mentioned the Soviets had installed a lot of missiles that could hit London in the 70s. Then it talks about how the Americans…

Actually, between the Russia breaking the treaty for over a decade and China military buildup, the DOD has been thinking of dropping out since 2013.

Agree with you and the other responders. A one party treaty is meaningless, especially when dealing with Russia.

And I would add, Russia and Putin have already demonstrated that they don’t give a single fuck about the “legal and moral high ground,” with this or anything else. They’re very happy to leave us sitting there while they develop a new generation of weapons we don’t have. And with China not even a signatory, it’s a dead…

Yep, pretty much this. I didn’t read the article, just saw the headline and scrolled to the top comment to make sure the readership is keeping the blogger honest.  

As much as I dislike this current administration and its eagerness to rip things up just for the sake of looking like they’re doing stuff (or simply out of spite), you’re perfectly correct. The INF was a dead letter, and China not even being a signatory means morality or legality arde irrelevant.

In between Russia’s disregard of the treaty and China’s non-signatory status, I’m not totally sure what “moral leverage” actually gives us. If it was just Russia we had to worry about, I could understand why leaving the treaty might not be wise. However, history marches on, and unfortunately the rise of China has made…

When David Tracy offers to buy it.