So do you think taking the CO2 from where it's been, in the 180-280 ppm range for the last million years or so, to 420 ppm and climbing should have no effect? Nothing to see here, move along?We should ask our non-enemy...
So do you think taking the CO2 from where it's been, in the 180-280 ppm range for the last million years or so, to 420 ppm and climbing should have no effect? Nothing to see here, move along?We should ask our non-enemy...
Actually, I’m more concerned about the number of people on ventilators in Amarillo, TX.So do you think taking the CO2 from where it's been, in the 180-280 ppm range for the last million years or so, to 420 ppm and climbing should have no effect? Nothing to see here, move along?
Does an LHD count?Actually, I’m more concerned about the number of people on ventilators in Amarillo, TX.
Trivia question: when’s the last time the US Navy lost an aircraft carrier? Answer it correctly and you’ll see why I think we should be more concerned about some other more pressing issues in the near-term future.
Actually, I'm sure you don't care about them at all.Actually, I’m more concerned about the number of people on ventilators in Amarillo, TX.
WWII? Kamikazes off of Okinawa?Trivia question: when’s the last time the US Navy lost an aircraft carrier? Answer it correctly and you’ll see why I think we should be more concerned about some other more pressing issues in the near-term future.
Ding ding ding!!!Does an LHD count?
I probably gave them as much thought as you did until about an hour ago when you found a convenient infographic for your internet argument with a stranger. Which is to say: exactly zero. (Still waiting to hear about Austria and Germany by the way. Can't wait to hear your take).Actually, I'm sure you don't care about them at all.
We're already fighting that "future" war. It just presents itself as jovial zoom meetings between heads of state.Tactics and strategy. glad you're thinking about the first.
Along with all of all the other reasons we fight, future wars are going to be driven by the flowdown from energy and climate issues. War is going to follow from it. Pretending that "it" doesn't exist is setting us up for failure. Like pretending that the fact that the Persian Gulf has a shit-ton of oil has nothing to do with our being over there.
Luckily, the smart people recognize this and are planning now.
Actually I was thinking that literally anything could be spun as a threat to national security if you spin it hard enough. If abstinence sweeps the nation and people stop having babies, in a couple decades your military recruit numbers will plummet. If a pacifism movement sweeps the nation and no one wants to join anymore, it would be a couple years. For a brief moment in 2020 the military wasn’t sure whether it wanted to accept recruits who had had covid (and recovered). Obviously millions of teens have had it asymptomatically or been exposed to it, which would reduce the pool of eligible recruits if the policy disallowed them from joining. I’ve seen articles about how if teens are too out of shape, on drugs, or undereducated it can present recruiting shortfalls, and therefore be a national security threat if not overcome or reversed.So you think taking the CO2 from where it's been, in the 180-280 ppm range for the last million years or so, to 420 ppm and climbing should have no effect?
Trivia question: when’s the last time the US Navy lost an aircraft carrier? Answer it correctly and you’ll see why I think we should be more concerned about some other more pressing issues in the near-term future.
Wait, you mean to say there isn’t currently a liberal majority on the SCOTUS? Kidding...ish.I assume you are referencing Michael Anton’s speech at National Conservatism Conference last week. Here is a 17 minute clip well worth watching which references the history of Hong Kong and China’s plans for Taiwan - at the end, he references the sinking of the USS Yorktown at Midway in June 1942 as well as the loss of USS Bonhomme Richard last year.
Under the pen name of Publius Decius Mus, Anton wrote the article “The Flight 93 Election” which was important for generating turnout for Donald Trump in his upset victory over Hillary Clinton, without which there would be a 6-3 liberal majority on the Supreme Court.
I assume you are referencing Michael Anton’s speech at National Conservatism Conference last week.
….that regularly gets roasted on this site by a bunch of the 80 pound brain super mod types.