Carrolade

joined 11 months ago
[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

lol I would absolutely check out this community. Idea is brilliant, honestly.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think he's going to go down in history as one of the most successful civilian wartime leaders, ever. I truly cannot even begin to imagine how much he has had to learn on the job, and it has certainly taken years off his lifespan. Pictures of him now vs pictures of him pre-war could almost be a father and his son. But his sheer effectiveness at rallying his people and the world has been nothing short of legendary.

"I need ammo, not a ride" is fully equivalent to "We will fight on the beaches". So far I consider him in that same tier as the titans of history. This, I think, is what historical figures look like when you're living alongside them, certainly mired in propaganda and debate, but with a certain shine that is hard to deny.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Just call it the Russo-Ukrainian War. It's the formal English language name we seem to have settled on, and is unbiased and objective, just listing the two main participants.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world -1 points 4 days ago

That's a region. It's also not what you said, you said rust bowl. You know bowls and belts are different things, right? Belts hold your pants up, bowls are dishes you eat food out of.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

You read too much bullshit. The US is the second-largest manufacturer on the planet, after China. We have quite a lot of industry still. Nor was "rust bowl" ever a term, which you'd know if you were an American.

If Russian production is so plentiful, where are all the T-90s? Seems to me a major producer of materiel wouldn't be needing to field its T-64's in a modern conflict.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (4 children)

... remember the Rust Bowl? lol You should do your homework a little better.

Now I will agree that it takes years, absolutely. Not decades though, which is what you said earlier. Also, fortunately, the process of scaling up armaments production was already started, about two years ago.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago (9 children)

Scratch? No, not even close. A reduction and an elimination are not the same thing.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (11 children)

Decade? Probably not, unless you're trying to spin up domestic production from nothing.

Few years maybe. Depends who you buy them from and how developed their industry is. S Korea does a lot of artillery production. US has its fair share if you want jets. Everyone's got small arms, trucks, stuff like that.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 19 points 4 days ago (13 children)

You see, weapons do not grow on trees. Instead, you need to allocate resources, to either construct them yourself, or purchase them from other people who do. This is usually done with money.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 75 points 5 days ago (2 children)

For a conservative that's amazing, I'd be kinda proud of him. I'd comply with his request, assuming he wants you to see a couple other doctors and not attend some conversion camp or something. I'd just frame that as getting a second/third opinion, basically, which is always a good idea anyway.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 29 points 5 days ago (4 children)

Interesting to be cutting oversight during a time when Boeing was having so much trouble with its planes.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Pfah, weak. A coal powered turbine delivers superior performance, and coal is cheaper than snow leopard food.

view more: next ›