There is not really any international definition for where airspace ends vertically, but given the number of satellites whizzing about overhead, and the fact that nearly all of them need to go around the planet thus putting them over many different countries, there’s not really any point to trying to enforce Satellite…

Things are ever-changing. New nuclear actors enter the world stage, meaning we have to watch new areas of the globe for launches. Changes are made to ballistic missiles (better decoys and maneuvering) to make them more difficult to track. And as we develop ways to possibly intercept these, we need more precise…

The audience makes a big difference. With analyses of ongoing operations you may need a lot of commanders on the ground to have access to the info, hence the need for wider dissemination. On the other hand, if you only need a few high-ranking DoD people and NORAD to have access to something, you can hold it much…

“Within 12 miles” could be anywhere from 0 to 11.9 miles from the islands. Not sure what you’re on about.

There is actually a theoretical advantage to having done this years ago... If we had challenged and pushed the issue back then, China may have decided it wasn’t worth the investment if we weren’t going to just “roll over.”

There’s something to be said for flying a lumbering, vulnerable bomber over the islands instead. It is more nonchalant than sending aircraft that can defend themselves. Basically “We aren’t even worried.”

I am pretty sure you can’t self-destruct an ICBM. It would be bad if the enemy were able to figure out a command to send to destroy all your birds in the air. Too big a risk. Once the bird leaves the silo, you can’t stop it.

You can call them nonsense, but people much smarter than you have accepted them for decades. The ability to drop by surprise (first strike) allows you to diminish their capability to retaliate, and potentially ensure your side survives. ICBMs are pre-targeted and more difficult to re-target, so nuclear bombers could…

Divorcing the more horrific elements from design of these weapons is exactly what needs to be done in order to make them effective. If you’re all in knots about what it will be used for you are going to be less effective at making it effective.

No, I am treating it like a gun. You might as well say “Keep the M240 SAW away from kids...” Well of course... keep ALL guns away from kids that age. There’s nothing at all special about this weapon.
You should be more worried about a little handgun than this thing though, as this would be a LOT tougher to…

Absolutely. My comment was more about how redundant the “keep away from children” statement was. It’s a gun. It’s not more dangerous because it “looks like a toy.”

My guess is it would be a waste of money to temporarily paint these white for a training deployment... After all they will probably be shipped somewhere else soon enough. It may not be necessary to actually be camouflaged for effective training and testing. If they were being deployed for battle they would likely get…

Correction 16lbs... that’s still significant for a kid to lift with one hand though.

You heard the part where he said “It weighs about 60 lbs” right? And you have to lift it to insert the magazine, hold it with one hand and crank.

It is a ship... What would it be doing in fresh water? These things don’t patrol freshwater lakes or rivers.

You simply aren’t getting it. Far more lives are taken by drug addicts and gang violence in this country. You are choosing a tiny subsection of violence, tied together by hand-picked criteria and trying to relate it to an insurgency. THAT is my point. If you really cared about lives you would spend less time trying to…

The anti-abortion terror is a breed of its own. Basically you have people that see it as the same as walking up and shooting a child. This means to them it’s not about fighting against someone’s choice, it is a misguided attempt to stop people from killing children.

I’m not actually right or left leaning. I think it is sad the way both sides self-polarize and make ridiculous arguments dodging any real discussion on anything. They each put up a straw man and whack away at it. Your numbers are talking strictly about domestic terrorism. You are omitting most of the world. My point…

There is a difference between “Are we spending too much” and “are we buying/building too much.” I disagree with those that complain about the # of aircraft carriers we have, or the size of our Military. That is necessary. I do agree that we spend too much for what we get out of it due to all the pork-barrel spending,…

Again, you are ridiculous. You can count the # of “right-wing extremists” on one hand. There is no major movement that is a threat, just a few isolated cases. Serial killers are a bigger problem. You are only highlighting because it is politically convenient for you to do so, which shows you as a partisan fool. You…