oHegseth Hails First Test of AmericaAs oGolden Domeo Missile Defense ShieldoWell put.
https://thelibertydaily.com/hegseth-hails-first-test-americas-golden-dome-missile/
o(The Epoch Times)uThe Pentagon has carried out the first milestone test
of the Golden Dome for America missile defense program, with Secretary
of War Pete Hegseth announcing on June 23 that an autonomous targeting >system and directed-energy technology successfully intercepted a series
of simulated incoming threats.o
oDeclaring the test a ofull mission success,o Hegseth said in a
statement on social media that the system detected, tracked, targeted,
and destroyed multiple drone and cruise missile threats, marking a
watershed moment for President Donald TrumpAs signature homeland missile >defense shield.o
Translation: They fired up the old WOPR computer and it still worked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WarGames
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
oHegseth Hails First Test of AmericaAs oGolden Domeo Missile Defense Shieldo >> >>https://thelibertydaily.com/hegseth-hails-first-test-americas-golden-dome-missile/
o(The Epoch Times)uThe Pentagon has carried out the first milestone test >>of the Golden Dome for America missile defense program, with Secretary
of War Pete Hegseth announcing on June 23 that an autonomous targeting >>system and directed-energy technology successfully intercepted a series
of simulated incoming threats.o
oDeclaring the test a ofull mission success,o Hegseth said in a
statement on social media that the system detected, tracked, targeted,
and destroyed multiple drone and cruise missile threats, marking a >>watershed moment for President Donald TrumpAs signature homeland missile >>defense shield.o
Translation: They fired up the old WOPR computer and it still worked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WarGames
Well put.
IIRC, one of the earlier "national sheild" initiatives actually
managed to intercept an actual missile!
This was great -- until it came out the the missile had a homer in it
to help the "national shield" along.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
oHegseth Hails First Test of AmericaAs oGolden Domeo Missile Defense Shieldo
https://thelibertydaily.com/hegseth-hails-first-test-americas-golden-dome-mis
sile/
o(The Epoch Times)uThe Pentagon has carried out the first milestone test >of the Golden Dome for America missile defense program, with Secretary
of War Pete Hegseth announcing on June 23 that an autonomous targeting >system and directed-energy technology successfully intercepted a series
of simulated incoming threats.o
oDeclaring the test a ofull mission success,o Hegseth said in a
statement on social media that the system detected, tracked, targeted,
and destroyed multiple drone and cruise missile threats, marking a >watershed moment for President Donald TrumpAs signature homeland missile >defense shield.o
Translation: They fired up the old WOPR computer and it still worked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WarGames
Well put.
IIRC, one of the earlier "national sheild" initiatives actually
managed to intercept an actual missile!
This was great -- until it came out the the missile had a homer in it
to help the "national shield" along.
In article <lmhq3lpts6cfbnphh4gb3uvh413n6cq89m@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuireI seem to recall a similar gambit to make sure missiles passed their
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
rCLHegseth Hails First Test of AmericarCOs rCLGolden DomerCY Missile Defense ShieldrCY
https://thelibertydaily.com/hegseth-hails-first-test-americas-golden-dome-missile/
rCL(The Epoch Times)rCoThe Pentagon has carried out the first milestone test
of the Golden Dome for America missile defense program, with Secretary
of War Pete Hegseth announcing on June 23 that an autonomous targeting
system and directed-energy technology successfully intercepted a series
of simulated incoming threats.rCY
rCLDeclaring the test a rCLfull mission success,rCY Hegseth said in a
statement on social media that the system detected, tracked, targeted,
and destroyed multiple drone and cruise missile threats, marking a
watershed moment for President Donald TrumprCOs signature homeland missile >>> defense shield.rCY
Translation: They fired up the old WOPR computer and it still worked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WarGames
Well put.
IIRC, one of the earlier "national sheild" initiatives actually
managed to intercept an actual missile!
This was great -- until it came out the the missile had a homer in it
to help the "national shield" along.
tests is the reason why some Russian missiles have a propensity
to target outhouses.
Ah, here's the video...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQzAjCZr0BM
rCLHegseth Hails First Test of AmericarCOs rCLGolden DomerCY Missile Defense ShieldrCY
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
rCLHegseth Hails First Test of AmericarCOs rCLGolden DomerCY Missile Defense >> ShieldrCY
How much per missile? With rCLIron DomerCY itrCOs something like $100,000
per shot, as I recall. This to defend against barrages of cheap
attacking missiles that can be made for something like a thousand
dollars each.
And then there are the drones, which are even cheaper and cannot be
stopped with missile defence systems.
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Remember Arthur C ClarkerCOs story rCLSuperiorityrCY, I think it was? Where the side with the more advanced technology lost the war precisely
because their technology was *too* advanced ...
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Remember Arthur C ClarkerCOs story rCLSuperiorityrCY, I think it was? Where >the side with the more advanced technology lost the war precisely
because their technology was *too* advanced ...
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance >already said the quiet part out loud:
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US
would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
rCLHegseth Hails First Test of AmericarCOs rCLGolden DomerCY Missile Defense >> ShieldrCY
How much per missile? With rCLIron DomerCY itrCOs something like $100,000
per shot, as I recall. This to defend against barrages of cheap
attacking missiles that can be made for something like a thousand
dollars each.
And then there are the drones, which are even cheaper and cannot be
stopped with missile defence systems.
On 6/25/2026 6:35 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
rCLHegseth Hails First Test of AmericarCOs rCLGolden DomerCY Missile Defense
ShieldrCY
How much per missile? With rCLIron DomerCY itrCOs something like $100,000
per shot, as I recall. This to defend against barrages of cheap
attacking missiles that can be made for something like a thousand
dollars each.
And then there are the drones, which are even cheaper and cannot be
stopped with missile defence systems.
Don't know what the missile cost is, definitely expensive to take out a >ballistic missile coming in at 15,000 mph. Then again, the damage that
a nuclear ICBM will do is simply amazing.
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
In article <lmhq3lpts6cfbnphh4gb3uvh413n6cq89m@4ax.com>,It's been a while but, at the time, the consensus was that it was
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
oHegseth Hails First Test of AmericaAs oGolden Domeo Missile Defense Shieldo
https://thelibertydaily.com/hegseth-hails-first-test-americas-golden-dome-mis
sile/
o(The Epoch Times)uThe Pentagon has carried out the first milestone test >> >of the Golden Dome for America missile defense program, with Secretary
of War Pete Hegseth announcing on June 23 that an autonomous targeting
system and directed-energy technology successfully intercepted a series
of simulated incoming threats.o
oDeclaring the test a ofull mission success,o Hegseth said in a
statement on social media that the system detected, tracked, targeted,
and destroyed multiple drone and cruise missile threats, marking a
watershed moment for President Donald TrumpAs signature homeland missile >> >defense shield.o
Translation: They fired up the old WOPR computer and it still worked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WarGames
Well put.
IIRC, one of the earlier "national sheild" initiatives actually
managed to intercept an actual missile!
This was great -- until it came out the the missile had a homer in it
to help the "national shield" along.
Or was it to provide the real points for the seeker readings to be
compared to? For that matter, perhaps it also provided the real point to >test the interception code.
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:Some military analysts, IIRC, suggest that this shows a change in the situation: the attackers have an advantage over the defenders they did
oHegseth Hails First Test of AmericaAs oGolden Domeo Missile Defense
Shieldo
How much per missile? With oIron Domeo itAs something like $100,000
per shot, as I recall. This to defend against barrages of cheap
attacking missiles that can be made for something like a thousand
dollars each.
And then there are the drones, which are even cheaper and cannot be
stopped with missile defence systems.
Basic Saturation (The 11th Missile Problem): Because interceptor satellites are in constant motion, they cover limited windows of space. A single satellite can only engage so many targets simultaneously, meaning an adversary simply launching a larger volley of missiles (e.g., 11 Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles versus 10) can easily saturate and bypass the system.Didn't we lose a ship in one of the prior wars (Iraq II?) because the
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 23:35:40 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D-|Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
rCLHegseth Hails First Test of AmericarCOs rCLGolden DomerCY Missile Defense
ShieldrCY
How much per missile? With rCLIron DomerCY itrCOs something like $100,000
per shot, as I recall. This to defend against barrages of cheap
attacking missiles that can be made for something like a thousand
dollars each.
And then there are the drones, which are even cheaper and cannot be
stopped with missile defence systems.
Some military analysts, IIRC, suggest that this shows a change in the situation: the attackers have an advantage over the defenders they did
not have before drones/cheap missiles.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance already said the quiet part out loud:
rCLDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who
is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. And
he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. If I
was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be
attacking the only powerful ally I have left.rCY
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US
would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
Particularly since the whole Iran affair is already reaching the
limits of the Efc|Efc+PresidentrCOs somewhat short attention span ...
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance
already said the quiet part out loud:
This is true but the question is whether they actually care about that.
They have certainly done much to produce sympathy in the mideast for Iran. which was generally looked upon by most mideastern nations as kind of crazy.
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US
would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
I seriously doubt that Israel has 300 nukes, but they likely do have one.
Are they crazy enough to actually use it on Iran? I don't think so because
I don't think they really care that much about Iran except insofar as Iran
is providing support that is keeping them from completely taking over Palestine. They care a whole lot about Palestine.
But I wouldn't rule it out, because Netanyahu is a loose cannon and has not always done the logical thing.
I think it's also important to make a distinction between "what Israel wants" and "what Netanyahu wants."
This isn't really Trump's war.... this is Netanyahu's war and Trump just hired on because he thought he could get an easy win out of it. Netanyahu started it and he is the one who is going to have to end it. Trump is having a great time making up peace plans but he's not the guy running the war. --scott
Some military analysts, IIRC, suggest that this shows a change in the >situation: the attackers have an advantage over the defenders they did
not have before drones/cheap missiles.
On 6/25/2026 10:57 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance
already said the quiet part out loud:
-a-a-a-a rCLDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who
-a-a-a-a is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. And >> -a-a-a-a he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. If I >> -a-a-a-a was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be
-a-a-a-a attacking the only powerful ally I have left.rCY
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US
would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
Particularly since the whole Iran affair is already reaching the
limits of the Efc|Efc+PresidentrCOs somewhat short attention span ...
Do you really think that Israel can get more hated now?
On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 02:07:56 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Remember Arthur C ClarkerCOs story rCLSuperiorityrCY, I think it was?
Where the side with the more advanced technology lost the war
precisely because their technology was *too* advanced ...
To some extent that happened in WWII. Cheaper and more plentiful
hardware beat out more precise and higher performance hardware.
The asymmetry of cost in attack vs defense is a major topic.
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance already said the quiet part out loud:
rCLDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who
is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. And
he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. If I
was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be
attacking the only powerful ally I have left.rCY
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US
would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
Particularly since the whole Iran affair is already reaching the
limits of the Efc|Efc+PresidentrCOs somewhat short attention span ...
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Further thought about that: how much does it cost to operate an F-18? $1000/hour? (I suspect more.) How much does it cost to make and launch
one of those drones? $1000?
So each F-18 should be taking out about one drone per hour to make it
a fair fight, economically speaking. Are they really doing that much?
I suspect not, if only because Efc<Efc+ doesnrCOt actually need to be launching drones all the time; just the mere threat that they might do
so requires those F-18s to be continually in the air, doing nothing
but consuming the PentagonrCOs operating budget, just in case.
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
rCLHegseth Hails First Test of AmericarCOs rCLGolden DomerCY Missile Defense
ShieldrCY
How much per missile? With rCLIron DomerCY itrCOs something like $100,000
per shot, as I recall. This to defend against barrages of cheap
attacking missiles that can be made for something like a thousand
dollars each.
The biggest problem with Hegseth's/Trump's fantasy golden dome is that
it will never work for a mass attack. The orbital intercepters,
orbiting at low-earth altitudes, will need to blanket the globe. Handling
a single incoming warhead is possible. Handling a swarm, forgetaboutit.
And then there are the drones, which are even cheaper and cannot be
stopped with missile defence systems.
As shown in Ukraine.
On 6/26/2026 7:51 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Further thought about that: how much does it cost to operate an
F-18? $1000/hour? (I suspect more.) How much does it cost to make
and launch one of those drones? $1000?
So each F-18 should be taking out about one drone per hour to make
it a fair fight, economically speaking. Are they really doing that
much?
I suspect not, if only because Efc<Efc+ doesnrCOt actually need to be
launching drones all the time; just the mere threat that they might
do so requires those F-18s to be continually in the air, doing
nothing but consuming the PentagonrCOs operating budget, just in
case.
These are not cheap drones.
Do you really think that Israel can get more hated now?
In military terms, drones are cheap and easy to make. Iran invented
the Shahid drone, which was such a clever design that the USA had to
copy it.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Further thought about that: how much does it cost to operate an F-18? $1000/hour? (I suspect more.) How much does it cost to make and launch
one of those drones? $1000?
So each F-18 should be taking out about one drone per hour to make it
a fair fight, economically speaking. Are they really doing that much?
I suspect not, if only because Efc<Efc+ doesnrCOt actually need to be launching drones all the time; just the mere threat that they might do
so requires those F-18s to be continually in the air, doing nothing
but consuming the PentagonrCOs operating budget, just in case.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Further thought about that: how much does it cost to operate an F-18? >$1000/hour? (I suspect more.) How much does it cost to make and launch
one of those drones? $1000?
Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance
already said the quiet part out loud:
-a-a-a-a rCLDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who
-a-a-a-a is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. And >> -a-a-a-a he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. If I >> -a-a-a-a was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be
-a-a-a-a attacking the only powerful ally I have left.rCY
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US
would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
Particularly since the whole Iran affair is already reaching the
limits of the Efc|Efc+PresidentrCOs somewhat short attention span ...
Forget the security council. If Israel nukes Iran- and especially if
they target any of the holy cities- I am betting there would be a
response in kind from Pakistan- who has a lot more nukes than Israel.
Chris
You're not even close. The Official DoD Reimbursement Rate for
a single seat, F/A-18E Super Hornet is $17,584/hour.
That includes ground maintenance, fuel, crew compensation, and
some other operational costs. It does not include weapons.
On 6/26/2026 8:51 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Further thought about that: how much does it cost to operate an
F-18? $1000/hour? (I suspect more.)
You're not even close. The Official DoD Reimbursement Rate for a
single seat, F/A-18E Super Hornet is $17,584/hour.
That includes ground maintenance, fuel, crew compensation, and
some other operational costs. It does not include weapons.
How much does it cost to make and launch one of those drones?
$1000?
So each F-18 should be taking out about one drone per hour to make it
a fair fight, economically speaking. Are they really doing that much?
On 6/26/2026 9:39 PM, Chris Thompson wrote:
Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance
already said the quiet part out loud:
-a-a-a-a rCLDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who
-a-a-a-a is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. And >>> -a-a-a-a he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. If I >>> -a-a-a-a was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be
-a-a-a-a attacking the only powerful ally I have left.rCY
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US
would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
Particularly since the whole Iran affair is already reaching the
limits of the Efc|Efc+PresidentrCOs somewhat short attention span ...
Forget the security council. If Israel nukes Iran- and especially if
they target any of the holy cities- I am betting there would be a
response in kind from Pakistan- who has a lot more nukes than Israel.
Chris
How do you know this?
And does Pakistan have delivery systems for their antiquated ultra heavy nuclear weapons that weigh around ten tons each?
The Israelis have several cruise missile 200 kt nuclear weapons on each
of their submarines.
-a-a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin-class_submarine
Lynn
Initially, when the Epoch Times came out, I was glad to see a
publication spreading the word about repression in mainland China.
However, even at the start, I was distressed by its support for New
Age style quack medicine.
Later on, though, when it started supporting the Bolsonaro regime in
Brazil, I felt it was something I could no longer recommend, and its
current support for Trump only makes matters worse.
I can't say if what the United States tested is of any genuine value.
But it does seem to me that recent advances in AI mean that one of the >original objections to Reagan's SDI, that it would require impossibly >powerful computers, no longer refutes the possibility of achieving
this.
And whatever Donald Trump's faults may be, Russia and China are the
real menaces to peace and freedom in the world, and anything that
could take away their power to intimidate and bully their neighbors
would be a great boon to humanity.
On 6/26/2026 8:51 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Further thought about that: how much does it cost to operate an F-18? $1000/hour? (I suspect more.) How much does it cost to make and launch
one of those drones? $1000?
So each F-18 should be taking out about one drone per hour to make it
a fair fight, economically speaking. Are they really doing that much?
I suspect not, if only because Efc<Efc+ doesnrCOt actually need to be launching drones all the time; just the mere threat that they might do
so requires those F-18s to be continually in the air, doing nothing
but consuming the PentagonrCOs operating budget, just in case.
You're not even close. The Official DoD Reimbursement Rate for
a single seat, F/A-18E Super Hornet is $17,584/hour.
That includes ground maintenance, fuel, crew compensation, and
some other operational costs. It does not include weapons.
pt
And if their anti-drone missiles cost more than the drones they areSummary: War is Hell. Financially as well as in other ways.
shooting down (which seems very likely), then there is no way to make
this an economically fair fight: the more missiles the ?? fighters
shoot down, the deeper in the red the whole account becomes.
On 6/26/2026 9:27 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:Or to no affordable defense at all.
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
oHegseth Hails First Test of AmericaAs oGolden Domeo Missile Defense
Shieldo
How much per missile? With oIron Domeo itAs something like $100,000
per shot, as I recall. This to defend against barrages of cheap
attacking missiles that can be made for something like a thousand
dollars each.
The biggest problem with Hegseth's/Trump's fantasy golden dome is that
it will never work for a mass attack. The orbital intercepters,
orbiting at low-earth altitudes, will need to blanket the globe. Handling >> a single incoming warhead is possible. Handling a swarm, forgetaboutit.
And then there are the drones, which are even cheaper and cannot be
stopped with missile defence systems.
As shown in Ukraine.
So we are back to many multiple gigawatt lasers on the ground and in orbit.
Initially, when the Epoch Times came out, I was glad to see a
publication spreading the word about repression in mainland China.
However, even at the start, I was distressed by its support for New
Age style quack medicine.
Later on, though, when it started supporting the Bolsonaro regime in
Brazil, I felt it was something I could no longer recommend, and its
current support for Trump only makes matters worse.
I can't say if what the United States tested is of any genuine value.
But it does seem to me that recent advances in AI mean that one of the original objections to Reagan's SDI, that it would require impossibly powerful computers, no longer refutes the possibility of achieving
this.
And whatever Donald Trump's faults may be, Russia and China are the
real menaces to peace and freedom in the world, and anything that
could take away their power to intimidate and bully their neighbors
would be a great boon to humanity.
John Savard
John Savard <quadibloc@invalid.com> wrote:
Initially, when the Epoch Times came out, I was glad to see a
publication spreading the word about repression in mainland China.
However, even at the start, I was distressed by its support for New
Age style quack medicine.
Later on, though, when it started supporting the Bolsonaro regime in
Brazil, I felt it was something I could no longer recommend, and its
current support for Trump only makes matters worse.
There are people who claim that the Epoch Times is basically a mouthpiece
for the government of Taiwan and that they follow the official party line from there. I do not know if the former is the case but the latter seems
to be.
On Sat, 27 Jun 2026 14:35:19 -0400, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 6/26/2026 8:51 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Further thought about that: how much does it cost to operate an
F-18? $1000/hour? (I suspect more.)
You're not even close. The Official DoD Reimbursement Rate for a
single seat, F/A-18E Super Hornet is $17,584/hour.
That includes ground maintenance, fuel, crew compensation, and
some other operational costs. It does not include weapons.
I figured I was off, but not by that much ...
ClarkerCOs rCLSuperiorityrCY story *definitely* did not take this sort of thing into account.
So every time they fire a missile, thatrCOll be another few grand being totted up on the till, I suppose ...
How much does it cost to make and launch one of those drones?
$1000?
I suspect this figure of mine is not so far off.
So each F-18 should be taking out about one drone per hour to make it
a fair fight, economically speaking. Are they really doing that much?
So that would have to be 10-20 drones per hour. I doubt they are
anywhere close to that.
And if their anti-drone missiles cost more than the drones they are
shooting down (which seems very likely), then there is no way to make
this an economically fair fight: the more missiles the Efc|Efc+ fighters shoot down, the deeper in the red the whole account becomes.
On Sat, 27 Jun 2026 14:35:19 -0400, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 6/26/2026 8:51 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Further thought about that: how much does it cost to operate an
F-18? $1000/hour? (I suspect more.)
You're not even close. The Official DoD Reimbursement Rate for a
single seat, F/A-18E Super Hornet is $17,584/hour.
That includes ground maintenance, fuel, crew compensation, and
some other operational costs. It does not include weapons.
I figured I was off, but not by that much ...
ClarkerCOs rCLSuperiorityrCY story *definitely* did not take this sort of >thing into account.
So every time they fire a missile, thatrCOll be another few grand being >totted up on the till, I suppose ...
How much does it cost to make and launch one of those drones?
$1000?
I suspect this figure of mine is not so far off.
You've been sucking petro fumes too long.
"Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a
person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted
individual or group, making them question their own memory,
perception, or judgment."
But it does seem to me that recent advances in AI mean that one of
the original objections to Reagan's SDI, that it would require
impossibly powerful computers ...
And whatever Donald Trump's faults may be, Russia and China are the
real menaces to peace and freedom in the world ...
There are people who claim that the Epoch Times is basically a mouthpiece
for the government of Taiwan and that they follow the official party line >from there. I do not know if the former is the case but the latter seems
to be.
On Sun, 28 Jun 2026 08:54:40 GMT, John Savard wrote:
And whatever Donald Trump's faults may be, Russia and China are the
real menaces to peace and freedom in the world ...
DonrCOt conflate the way they run their internal affairs with the way
they deal with international partners.
You could say, the one country that does work that way more than any
other, meddling in the internal affairs of others to try to persuade
them to adopt its ideology ... is the USA.
On 6/28/2026 8:37 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
John Savard <quadibloc@invalid.com> wrote:
There are people who claim that the Epoch Times is basically a mouthpiece
for the government of Taiwan and that they follow the official party line
from there. I do not know if the former is the case but the latter seems
to be.
You've got it a bit scrambled, Both Epoch Times and the Shen Yun dance
troupe are organs of Falun Gong, a Chinese religious cult.
Yes, they're anti-CCP,
They have presence in Taiwan, but I don't see any sign of control from
the Taipei government.
Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 6/26/2026 9:39 PM, Chris Thompson wrote:
Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance >>>> already said the quiet part out loud:
-a-a-a-a rCLDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who
-a-a-a-a is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. And
-a-a-a-a he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. If I
-a-a-a-a was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be
-a-a-a-a attacking the only powerful ally I have left.rCY
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US
would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
Particularly since the whole Iran affair is already reaching the
limits of the Efc|Efc+PresidentrCOs somewhat short attention span ...
Forget the security council. If Israel nukes Iran- and especially if
they target any of the holy cities- I am betting there would be a
response in kind from Pakistan- who has a lot more nukes than Israel.
Chris
How do you know this?
And does Pakistan have delivery systems for their antiquated ultra
heavy nuclear weapons that weigh around ten tons each?
The Israelis have several cruise missile 200 kt nuclear weapons on
each of their submarines.
-a-a-a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin-class_submarine
Lynn
Ten tons.
You've been sucking petro fumes too long.
Chris
On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 23:31:20 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/26/2026 9:27 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
rCLHegseth Hails First Test of AmericarCOs rCLGolden DomerCY Missile Defense
ShieldrCY
How much per missile? With rCLIron DomerCY itrCOs something like $100,000 >>>> per shot, as I recall. This to defend against barrages of cheap
attacking missiles that can be made for something like a thousand
dollars each.
The biggest problem with Hegseth's/Trump's fantasy golden dome is that
it will never work for a mass attack. The orbital intercepters,
orbiting at low-earth altitudes, will need to blanket the globe. Handling >>> a single incoming warhead is possible. Handling a swarm, forgetaboutit. >>>
And then there are the drones, which are even cheaper and cannot be
stopped with missile defence systems.
As shown in Ukraine.
So we are back to many multiple gigawatt lasers on the ground and in orbit.
Or to no affordable defense at all.
And that is the character of the age: everything -- absolutely
everything must -- absolutely must -- be Bigger! Better! More
Expensive!
An optimist might think that careful consideration of this might lead
to war being abandoned as just plain too expensive.
Do you have better information? If so, please enlighten me.
Lynn
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:But were we buying things that were Bigger! Better! More Expensive! or
And that is the character of the age: everything -- absolutely
everything must -- absolutely must -- be Bigger! Better! More
Expensive!
An optimist might think that careful consideration of this might lead
to war being abandoned as just plain too expensive.
It worked in the eighties. We outspent the Soviets on the cold war until >they couldn't make their economy function. Few shots were fired.
On 6/27/2026 7:12 PM, Lawrence DAOliveiro wrote:One of the more interesting factoids encountered (possible in a column
The word 'drone' covers a wide variety of UAVs, from stuff you
can launch from your hand, to something that's more like a cruise
missile, with a range over 1000 miles.
On 6/28/2026 11:16 AM, Paul S Person wrote:We don't need a multi-quadrillion (if not quintillion) defense system
On Fri, 26 Jun 2026 23:31:20 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/26/2026 9:27 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:Or to no affordable defense at all.
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:54:47 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
oHegseth Hails First Test of AmericaAs oGolden Domeo Missile Defense >>>>>> Shieldo
How much per missile? With oIron Domeo itAs something like $100,000
per shot, as I recall. This to defend against barrages of cheap
attacking missiles that can be made for something like a thousand
dollars each.
The biggest problem with Hegseth's/Trump's fantasy golden dome is that >>>> it will never work for a mass attack. The orbital intercepters,
orbiting at low-earth altitudes, will need to blanket the globe. Handling >>>> a single incoming warhead is possible. Handling a swarm, forgetaboutit. >>>>
And then there are the drones, which are even cheaper and cannot be
stopped with missile defence systems.
As shown in Ukraine.
So we are back to many multiple gigawatt lasers on the ground and in orbit. >>
The most expensive defense is that of the loser in war because they lost
it all.
A single ICBM getting through to the USA would cost in the trillions in >damages and require a blistering response.
On 6/27/2026 7:12 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 27 Jun 2026 14:35:19 -0400, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 6/26/2026 8:51 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:45:03 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
The F-18s are taking out drones routinely in Hormuz Straits.
Further thought about that: how much does it cost to operate an
F-18? $1000/hour? (I suspect more.)
You're not even close. The Official DoD Reimbursement Rate for a
single seat, F/A-18E Super Hornet is $17,584/hour.
That includes ground maintenance, fuel, crew compensation, and
some other operational costs. It does not include weapons.
I figured I was off, but not by that much ...
ClarkerCOs rCLSuperiorityrCY story *definitely* did not take this sort of
thing into account.
So every time they fire a missile, thatrCOll be another few grand being
totted up on the till, I suppose ...
How much does it cost to make and launch one of those drones?
$1000?
I suspect this figure of mine is not so far off.
So each F-18 should be taking out about one drone per hour to make it
a fair fight, economically speaking. Are they really doing that much?
So that would have to be 10-20 drones per hour. I doubt they are
anywhere close to that.
And if their anti-drone missiles cost more than the drones they are
shooting down (which seems very likely), then there is no way to make
this an economically fair fight: the more missiles the Efc|Efc+ fighters
shoot down, the deeper in the red the whole account becomes.
The word 'drone' covers a wide variety of UAVs, from stuff you
can launch from your hand, to something that's more like a cruise
missile, with a range over 1000 miles. Ukraine is sending drones to
Moscow and St. Petersburg, and taking out oil refineries.
On Sun, 28 Jun 2026 13:58:57 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
<snippo interesting stuff>
On 6/27/2026 7:12 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
The word 'drone' covers a wide variety of UAVs, from stuff you
can launch from your hand, to something that's more like a cruise
missile, with a range over 1000 miles.
I think we can take it that all of NATO has analysts studying what the Ukrainians (and Russians) are doing with drones. I would not be
surprised if some Ukrainian officers have been imported to various
Officer training facilities to give lectures to future staff officers
and combat-unit commanders, as these are clearly going to have to
understand the uses of drones.
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
Do you have better information? If so, please enlighten me.
1. The Pakistanis have some nukes, likely more than a hundred, and they are based on both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs. Yes, they are heavy, but they are not hundreds of tons heavy. Watch the videos of the setup for the Trinity Test.
Most importantly, they have actually tested some of them so we can be assured they will work.
2. Israel has some bombs. As many as 100? Probably not, but close. They are likely plutonium bombs and so a bit more convenient. Israel has probably never tested any of them, so there's no assurance they will work when needed. It's possible they did a shared test in '79 but nobody is sure.
3. Iran doesn't have any bombs. Before this war, they had some uranium enriched to 60% and at one point they had facilities to enrich farther.
They don't have any source of plutonium although they are wanting to build some power reactors which will produce plutonium as a byproduct. What has been lost in the war is still not very well known.
The nice thing about plutonium is that it can just be separated chemically and there isn't the difficulty of separating isotopes.
At this point delivery systems are a non-issue. You put a bomb into a box and have fedex ship it to your enemy. Just like horsehoes, you only need to get close, you don't need to be right on the target.
--scott
The most expensive defense is that of the loser in war because they lost
it all.
A single ICBM getting through to the USA would cost in the trillions in
damages and require a blistering response.
We don't need a multi-quadrillion (if not quintillion) defense system
for that. /That/ we can get with no defense system at all.
And, as you have noted, so long as "they" believe there will be a
blistering response, our time-tested but boring defense system ("MAD")
will work just fine.
One particular issue is that rapidly evacuating wounded to the rear
is often impossible - it must be done under cover of darkness, or in
bad weather.
It worked in the eighties. We outspent the Soviets on the cold war
until they couldn't make their economy function. Few shots were
fired.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 06:40:12 -0400 (EDT), Scott Dorsey wrote:
It worked in the eighties. We outspent the Soviets on the cold war
until they couldn't make their economy function. Few shots were
fired.
It worked because both sides were thinking along the same lines in
terms of weapons doctrine: ICBMs, jet fighters, jet bombers, tanks,
aircraft carriers, submarines, all that kind of thing.
On 6/29/2026 5:52 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Trump has stated that Iran has five nuclear weapons and then he shut up.
The size and type have not been stated, nor any other details. I
cannot find where I read this a couple of weeks ago.
On 6/29/2026 10:35 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
...
The most expensive defense is that of the loser in war because they lost >>> it all.
A single ICBM getting through to the USA would cost in the trillions in
damages and require a blistering response.
We don't need a multi-quadrillion (if not quintillion) defense system
for that. /That/ we can get with no defense system at all.
And, as you have noted, so long as "they" believe there will be a
blistering response, our time-tested but boring defense system ("MAD")
will work just fine.
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
Trump has stated that Iran has five nuclear weapons and then he shut
up.
One of the smartest and most cost effective (financially and
politically) actions was the IMMENSE amount of money and resources
pumped into West Berlin.
The East Germans were (aside from the privileged few) living in
pisspoor conditions, cold, little to eat, broken down buildings,
etc.
They'd look across the Wall to West Berlin and see working
streetlights, private cars, people walking around at all hours,
restuarants open overnight, and even people dropping spare food on
the sidewalks.
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
The basic Triumph of Capitalism, certainly.
One area where that doesnrCOt work: healthcare. The worldrCOs number-one >promoter of Capitalism, the USA, does a lousy job of looking after the
health of its citizens, compared to many other countries with more >rCLsocialistrCY-style, shall we say, healthcare systems.
rCLSoft powerrCY can work both ways ...
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:41:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
Question: do you think the religious leadership that the US and Israel succeeded in obliterating was more, or less, crazy than the IRGC folks
who seem to be in charge now?
On 6/28/2026 12:10 AM, Chris Thompson wrote:
Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 6/26/2026 9:39 PM, Chris Thompson wrote:
Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance >>>>> already said the quiet part out loud:
-a-a-a-a rCLDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world
who
-a-a-a-a is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. >>>>> And
-a-a-a-a he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. >>>>> If I
-a-a-a-a was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be >>>>> -a-a-a-a attacking the only powerful ally I have left.rCY
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US
would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
Particularly since the whole Iran affair is already reaching the
limits of the Efc|Efc+PresidentrCOs somewhat short attention span ... >>>>>
Forget the security council. If Israel nukes Iran- and especially if
they target any of the holy cities- I am betting there would be a
response in kind from Pakistan- who has a lot more nukes than Israel.
Chris
How do you know this?
And does Pakistan have delivery systems for their antiquated ultra
heavy nuclear weapons that weigh around ten tons each?
The Israelis have several cruise missile 200 kt nuclear weapons on
each of their submarines.
-a-a-a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin-class_submarine
Lynn
Ten tons.
You've been sucking petro fumes too long.
Chris
Do you have better information?-a If so, please enlighten me.
Lynn
While there's certaiknly a lot of (arguable) validity to preferring,
maybe... the healthcare systems in Canada, a big chunk of Europe,
and lots of other places to the US ...
the only one who says Cuba is better is... Micheal Moore...
On 6/29/2026 9:57 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:41:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
Question: do you think the religious leadership that the US and
Israel succeeded in obliterating was more, or less, crazy than the
IRGC folks who seem to be in charge now?
All five of the leaderships in Iran were and are crazy. The USA and
Israel have killed off four sets of leaders in Iran now. I suspect
that the fifth set is marked for destruction now.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 22:10:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 6/29/2026 9:57 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:41:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
Question: do you think the religious leadership that the US and
Israel succeeded in obliterating was more, or less, crazy than the
IRGC folks who seem to be in charge now?
All five of the leaderships in Iran were and are crazy. The USA and
Israel have killed off four sets of leaders in Iran now. I suspect
that the fifth set is marked for destruction now.
You havenrCOt said whether you think things are getting better or worse.
On 6/29/2026 11:54 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 22:10:46 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 6/29/2026 9:57 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:41:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
Question: do you think the religious leadership that the US and
Israel succeeded in obliterating was more, or less, crazy than
the IRGC folks who seem to be in charge now?
All five of the leaderships in Iran were and are crazy. The USA
and Israel have killed off four sets of leaders in Iran now. I
suspect that the fifth set is marked for destruction now.
You havenrCOt said whether you think things are getting better or
worse.
Crazy is a level all of its own. There is only one level.
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
On 6/29/2026 5:52 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Trump has stated that Iran has five nuclear
weapons and then he shut up. The size and
type have not been stated, nor any other
details. I cannot find where I read this a
couple of weeks ago.
You probably read it on the gateway dumbshit
site, or perhaps whats not up with that or
the falun gong mountpiece. All of which you've
quoted repeatedly, none of which are known for
accurate reporting.
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
On 6/29/2026 10:35 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
What is your definition of 'crazy'?
How does it differ from Trump, Putin or Kim?
The basic Triumph of Capitalism, certainly.
One area where that doesn't work: healthcare. The world's number-one
promoter of Capitalism, the USA, does a lousy job of looking after the
health of its citizens, compared to many other countries with more >'socialists;-style, shall we say, healthcare systems.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:41:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
Question: do you think the religious leadership that the US and Israel >succeeded in obliterating was more, or less, crazy than the IRGC folks
who seem to be in charge now?
While there's certaiknly a lot of (arguable) validity to preferring,
maybe... the healthcare systems in Canada, a big chunk of Europe, and
lots of other places to the US, the only one who says Cuba is better
is... Micheal Moore...
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
On 6/29/2026 10:35 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
What is your definition of 'crazy'?
How does it differ from Trump, Putin or Kim?
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
The basic Triumph of Capitalism, certainly.
One area where that doesn't work: healthcare. The world's number-one >>promoter of Capitalism, the USA, does a lousy job of looking after the >>health of its citizens, compared to many other countries with more >>'socialists;-style, shall we say, healthcare systems.
Capitalism works because of competition. When there is no competition, >because the industry is dominated by a small number of companies that are
all run by friends of one another, it all falls apart.
Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 6/28/2026 12:10 AM, Chris Thompson wrote:
Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 6/26/2026 9:39 PM, Chris Thompson wrote:
Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran.
That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance >>>>>> already said the quiet part out loud:
-a-a-a-a rCLDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world
who
-a-a-a-a is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. >>>>>> And
-a-a-a-a he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. >>>>>> If I
-a-a-a-a was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be >>>>>> -a-a-a-a attacking the only powerful ally I have left.rCY
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US >>>>>> would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
Particularly since the whole Iran affair is already reaching the
limits of the Efc|Efc+PresidentrCOs somewhat short attention span ... >>>>>>
Forget the security council. If Israel nukes Iran- and especially if >>>>> they target any of the holy cities- I am betting there would be a
response in kind from Pakistan- who has a lot more nukes than Israel. >>>>>
Chris
How do you know this?
And does Pakistan have delivery systems for their antiquated ultra
heavy nuclear weapons that weigh around ten tons each?
The Israelis have several cruise missile 200 kt nuclear weapons on
each of their submarines.
-a-a-a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin-class_submarine
Lynn
Ten tons.
You've been sucking petro fumes too long.
Chris
Do you have better information?-a If so, please enlighten me.
Lynn
Google "Pakistan nuclear weapons"
You'll see that their warheads are mounted on short, medium and
intermediate range ballistic missiles.
A typical missile is the Ababeel which carries 3 MIRVs of 500kg each.
Other warheads are mounted on cruise missiles launched from Mirage
fighters- which absolutely do not have a payload of 10 tons.
Now, why don't you tell us where you got such a preposterous number of
10 tons?
They seem crazy because they are so
poorly-informed and they have no idea what is
going on outside their own office.
Chris Thompson <the_thompsons@earthlink.net> writes:Or perhaps he meant weight all along?
Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 6/28/2026 12:10 AM, Chris Thompson wrote:
Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 6/26/2026 9:39 PM, Chris Thompson wrote:
Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran. >>>>>>>That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance >>>>>>> already said the quiet part out loud:
-a-a-a-a rCLDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world
who
-a-a-a-a is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time.
And
-a-a-a-a he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. >>>>>>> If I
-a-a-a-a was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be >>>>>>> -a-a-a-a attacking the only powerful ally I have left.rC?
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US >>>>>>> would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
Particularly since the whole Iran affair is already reaching the >>>>>>> limits of the Efc|Efc+PresidentrCOs somewhat short attention span ... >>>>>>>
Forget the security council. If Israel nukes Iran- and especially if >>>>>> they target any of the holy cities- I am betting there would be a >>>>>> response in kind from Pakistan- who has a lot more nukes than Israel. >>>>>>
Chris
How do you know this?
And does Pakistan have delivery systems for their antiquated ultra
heavy nuclear weapons that weigh around ten tons each?
The Israelis have several cruise missile 200 kt nuclear weapons on
each of their submarines.
-a-a-a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin-class_submarine
Lynn
Ten tons.
You've been sucking petro fumes too long.
Chris
Do you have better information?-a If so, please enlighten me.
Lynn
Google "Pakistan nuclear weapons"
You'll see that their warheads are mounted on short, medium and >>intermediate range ballistic missiles.
A typical missile is the Ababeel which carries 3 MIRVs of 500kg each.
Other warheads are mounted on cruise missiles launched from Mirage >>fighters- which absolutely do not have a payload of 10 tons.
Now, why don't you tell us where you got such a preposterous number of
10 tons?
Indeed, even Fat Man and little boy were only 10,000 pounds each.
Perhaps Lynn confused yield with weight?
On 6/29/2026 10:35 AM, Paul S Person wrote:Iran isn't a problem at present.
...
The most expensive defense is that of the loser in war because they lost >>> it all.
A single ICBM getting through to the USA would cost in the trillions in
damages and require a blistering response.
We don't need a multi-quadrillion (if not quintillion) defense system
for that. /That/ we can get with no defense system at all.
And, as you have noted, so long as "they" believe there will be a
blistering response, our time-tested but boring defense system ("MAD")
will work just fine.
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:And yet, MAD has worked for a long long time. That's pretty effective.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:41:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
MAD does not work with crazies such as Iran.
Question: do you think the religious leadership that the US and Israel >>succeeded in obliterating was more, or less, crazy than the IRGC folks
who seem to be in charge now?
Religious leaderships are by definition crazy, in that they are all >convinced of their righteousness and that what happens in this world is
less important than what happens to them in the afterlife. This leads
to decisions that are not beneficial to what is happening in this world. >Whether or not they are beneficial to leaders in the afterlife is not a >question I care to answer.
That goes for the IGRC, the revolutionary government of the first Khomeni, >and the administration in Israel. It may or may not apply to the US >government on any given day.
Because inherently irrational governments are so common, MAD is quite >frequently going to be ineffective. MAD depends on people being completely >rational in ways that only Henry Kissinger could ever believe.
kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:I view the entire thing as a fantasy world driven by funny-money with
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
The basic Triumph of Capitalism, certainly.
One area where that doesn't work: healthcare. The world's number-one >>>promoter of Capitalism, the USA, does a lousy job of looking after the >>>health of its citizens, compared to many other countries with more >>>'socialists;-style, shall we say, healthcare systems.
Capitalism works because of competition. When there is no competition, >>because the industry is dominated by a small number of companies that are >>all run by friends of one another, it all falls apart.
Which we learned a century ago, which resulted in busting all
the trusts. Which seem to have returned, sadly.
Along with the gambling market (used to be called the stock market).
Oh for the days when a stock simply paid a regular dividend and wasn't >subject to manipulation on the secondary market[*]. One might wonder
if total capitalization, as measured by the stock price is even a
meaningful metric.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:51:40 -0400, Cryptoengineer wrote:
One particular issue is that rapidly evacuating wounded to the rear
is often impossible - it must be done under cover of darkness, or in
bad weather.
Are they shooting at ambulances as well?
I thought certain of the Geneva Conventions had something to say about
that ...
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
On 6/29/2026 5:52 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Trump has stated that Iran has five nuclear weapons and then he shut up.
The size and type have not been stated, nor any other details. I
cannot find where I read this a couple of weeks ago.
You probably read it on the gateway dumbshit site, or perhaps whats
not up with that or the falun gong mountpiece. All of which you've
quoted repeatedly, none of which are known for accurate reporting.
In article <XRE0S.376797$ipI1.15801@fx15.iad>,
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
On 6/29/2026 5:52 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Trump has stated that Iran has five nuclear weapons and then he shut up. >>> The size and type have not been stated, nor any other details. I
cannot find where I read this a couple of weeks ago.
You probably read it on the gateway dumbshit site, or perhaps whats
not up with that or the falun gong mountpiece. All of which you've
quoted repeatedly, none of which are known for accurate reporting.
I am being misquoted here. I did not say any of this.
--scott
kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
The basic Triumph of Capitalism, certainly.
One area where that doesn't work: healthcare. The world's number-one
promoter of Capitalism, the USA, does a lousy job of looking after the
health of its citizens, compared to many other countries with more
'socialists;-style, shall we say, healthcare systems.
Capitalism works because of competition. When there is no competition,
because the industry is dominated by a small number of companies that are
all run by friends of one another, it all falls apart.
Which we learned a century ago, which resulted in busting all
the trusts. Which seem to have returned, sadly.
Along with the gambling market (used to be called the stock market).
Oh for the days when a stock simply paid a regular dividend and wasn't subject to manipulation on the secondary market[*].
if total capitalization, as measured by the stock price is even a
meaningful metric.
[*] derivative of derivatives of derivatives.....
Chris Thompson <the_thompsons@earthlink.net> writes:
Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 6/28/2026 12:10 AM, Chris Thompson wrote:
Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 6/26/2026 9:39 PM, Chris Thompson wrote:
Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:51:30 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
I think that Israel will end up saying screw it and nuking Iran. >>>>>>>That would make them even less popular than they are already. JD Vance >>>>>>> already said the quiet part out loud:
-a-a-a-a rCLDonald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world
who
-a-a-a-a is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time.
And
-a-a-a-a he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. >>>>>>> If I
-a-a-a-a was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be >>>>>>> -a-a-a-a attacking the only powerful ally I have left.rCY
Any use of nukes would bring the Security Council down hard. The US >>>>>>> would find it very hard to resist the pressure not to veto any
resolution on action against Israel.
Particularly since the whole Iran affair is already reaching the >>>>>>> limits of the Efc|Efc+PresidentrCOs somewhat short attention span ... >>>>>>>
Forget the security council. If Israel nukes Iran- and especially if >>>>>> they target any of the holy cities- I am betting there would be a
response in kind from Pakistan- who has a lot more nukes than Israel. >>>>>>
Chris
How do you know this?
And does Pakistan have delivery systems for their antiquated ultra
heavy nuclear weapons that weigh around ten tons each?
The Israelis have several cruise missile 200 kt nuclear weapons on
each of their submarines.
-a-a-a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin-class_submarine
Lynn
Ten tons.
You've been sucking petro fumes too long.
Chris
Do you have better information?-a If so, please enlighten me.
Lynn
Google "Pakistan nuclear weapons"
You'll see that their warheads are mounted on short, medium and
intermediate range ballistic missiles.
A typical missile is the Ababeel which carries 3 MIRVs of 500kg each.
Other warheads are mounted on cruise missiles launched from Mirage
fighters- which absolutely do not have a payload of 10 tons.
Now, why don't you tell us where you got such a preposterous number of
10 tons?
Indeed, even Fat Man and little boy were only 10,000 pounds each.
Perhaps Lynn confused yield with weight?
On 6/30/2026 3:01 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article <XRE0S.376797$ipI1.15801@fx15.iad>,
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
On 6/29/2026 5:52 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Trump has stated that Iran has five nuclear weapons and then he shut up. >>>> The size and type have not been stated, nor any other details. I
cannot find where I read this a couple of weeks ago.
You probably read it on the gateway dumbshit site, or perhaps whats
not up with that or the falun gong mountpiece. All of which you've
quoted repeatedly, none of which are known for accurate reporting.
I am being misquoted here. I did not say any of this.
--scott
If you count the '>' signs, its clear that Scott is attributing this
to Lynn.
It took me a while to realize that I should stick to stocks that
paid a dividend, because the dividend was a sign that they were
making real money (of course this means missing Amazon et al, but
also Yahoo at $400).
Capitalism works because of competition. When there is no
competition, because the industry is dominated by a small number of
companies that are all run by friends of one another, it all falls
apart.
On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 08:55:07 -0400 (EDT), Scott Dorsey wrote:You don't understand.
Capitalism works because of competition. When there is no
competition, because the industry is dominated by a small number of
companies that are all run by friends of one another, it all falls
apart.
Free-market competition is an inherently unstable state. Without
careful Government regulation, it can all too easily fall victim to
all kinds of anticompetitive practices -- predatory pricing, deceptive >advertising, buyouts of competitors to create monopolies, and even
just plain fraud.
But all this seems impossible to arrange with healthcare. Various
countries, from the oReagonomicso era onward (naturally) experimented
with free-market models for delivering healthcare, but none of them
worked very well. Here in NZ at one point we had the district
hospitals organized into oCrown Health Entitieso which were supposed
to be run sort of like businesses, but all that is mercifully gone
now.
Right now, it looks like only the USA is left, still stubbornlyI suggest studying the French Revolution. Particularly the bloodier
clinging to the idea that the market can be made to work for keeping
people healthy at a reasonable cost. And so you have that guy on trial
right now for murdering a health-insurance executive in cold blood,
and a massive amount of sympathy is going out to him, not his victim.
What is truly horrifying is not that so many people in the USA feel--
this way about health insurance company executives, but that they have
a point.
On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 08:55:07 -0400 (EDT), Scott Dorsey wrote:
Capitalism works because of competition. When there is no
competition, because the industry is dominated by a small number of
companies that are all run by friends of one another, it all falls
apart.
Free-market competition is an inherently unstable state. Without
careful Government regulation, it can all too easily fall victim to
all kinds of anticompetitive practices -- predatory pricing, deceptive >advertising, buyouts of competitors to create monopolies, and even
just plain fraud.
But all this seems impossible to arrange with healthcare. Various
countries, from the 'Reagonomics' era onward (naturally) experimented
with free-market models for delivering healthcare, but none of them
worked very well. Here in NZ at one point we had the district
hospitals organized into 'Crown Health Entities' which were supposed
to be run sort of like businesses, but all that is mercifully gone
now.
Right now, it looks like only the USA is left, still stubbornly
clinging to the idea that the market can be made to work for keeping
people healthy at a reasonable cost. And so you have that guy on trial
right now for murdering a health-insurance executive in cold blood,
and a massive amount of sympathy is going out to him, not his victim.
What is truly horrifying is not that so many people in the USA feel
this way about health insurance company executives, but that they have
a point.
In the current conflict of US-plus-Israel-versus-Iran, cost is playing
a big factor. Both the US and Israel have used up large portions of
their stocks of very complicated and expensive missiles and other
consumable weaponry. Whereas Iran...
Patriot missles? What's the big deal? A mere million bucks per shot,
pocket change, eh? Four million each, you say? Well, still...
I didn't know anything about patriot missles, hadda look it up. In
order to *use* them, you need a fleet -- half a dozen or so -- of
5-ton trucks, each sagging under a load of diesel, electronic and
hydraulic gear in addition to the actual launcher. Basic kit to
launch your first Patriot is a billion bucks, more if you're a non-US
entity buying the whole shebang from the US mfgrs.
Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
Patriot missles? What's the big deal? A mere million bucks per shot,
pocket change, eh? Four million each, you say? Well, still...
I didn't know anything about patriot missles, hadda look it up. In
order to *use* them, you need a fleet -- half a dozen or so -- of
5-ton trucks, each sagging under a load of diesel, electronic and
hydraulic gear in addition to the actual launcher. Basic kit to
launch your first Patriot is a billion bucks, more if you're a non-US
entity buying the whole shebang from the US mfgrs.
How does it compare with the SA-2 in price? The SA-2 design is pretty
old but the Russians keep upgrading the tracking radars. I saw one of
the recent ones in Warsaw a couple years ago and it bears no resemblance
to the ones in Vietnam which killed so many American pilots.
--scott
My uncle's wingman was shot down with an SA-2 in 1965 over Hanoi.
On Wed, 1 Jul 2026 18:23:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
My uncle's wingman was shot down with an SA-2 in 1965 over Hanoi.
Who started *that* war, I wonder?
On Wed, 1 Jul 2026 23:54:09 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 1 Jul 2026 18:23:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
My uncle's wingman was shot down with an SA-2 in 1965 over Hanoi.
Who started *that* war, I wonder?
The French, to be honest.
You don't understand.
In America, the function of healthcare is
to transfer money from The Rest of Us to
the 1%-ers.
Just like everything else.
On Wed, 1 Jul 2026 18:23:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
My uncle's wingman was shot down with an SA-2 in 1965 over Hanoi.
Who started *that* war, I wonder?
On Wed, 1 Jul 2026 18:23:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
My uncle's wingman was shot down with an SA-2 in 1965 over Hanoi.
Who started *that* war, I wonder?
One area where that doesnrCOt work: healthcare. The worldrCOs number-one >promoter of Capitalism, the USA, does a lousy job of looking after the
health of its citizens, compared to many other countries with more >rCLsocialistrCY-style, shall we say, healthcare systems.
Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?= <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:In some sense, yes.
On Wed, 1 Jul 2026 18:23:52 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
My uncle's wingman was shot down with an SA-2 in 1965 over Hanoi.
Who started *that* war, I wonder?
The french.
Those in the 1% are neither more nor
less self-centrically despicable than those in
the 99%.
On Thu, 2 Jul 2026 14:36:23 -0000 (UTC), oldernow <oldernow@dev.null>
wrote:
Those in the 1% are neither more nor
less self-centrically despicable than those in
the 99%.
This is true enough. And from Oliver Cromwell to
the French Revolution to the Soviet Union, we
certainly have seen how toppling a system that
exploited the poor failed to improve their lot.
However, this fundamental problem is inherently
difficult to solve. Some people who have
noted this problem have used it to promote the
following solution: we need to find Jesus!
My uncle came back the next day with a full load of 500 lb bombs and
Stuka dived from 40,000 feet to the mountain top where the SA-2 missile
base was. The SA-2 base could not fire the missiles straight up. My
uncle thought that he took off the top ten feet of the mountain top
along with the missile base.
The North Vietnam of Ho Chi Minh. North Vietnam supported Viet Cong insurgents who were seeking to overthrow the government of South
Vietnam, led by Ngo Dinh Diem, and in 1958 North Vietnam invaded
Laos to create the Ho Chi Minh trail.
Sadly, on June 29, 1973, the U. S. Congress betrayed the people of
South Vietnam, passing a law which barred the United States from
responding to further North Vietnamese aggression against their
country.
But the German Federal Republic had universal health care long
before the Berlin Wall fell.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 70 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 01:29:59 |
| Calls: | 949 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,325 |
| Messages: | 280,988 |