I said you either support free speech or you don’t, and you clearly don’t.
If you put weaponry in the hands of terrorists, you are a terrorist.
Therefore:
If you put speech in the mouths of communists, you are a communist.
Libertarians >ARE< Marxist communists. That's the only explanation for their retarded beliefs, every single one of which literally supports communism. They support the John Brown Gun Club, they support Black Lives Matter, they support literal billions of illiterate murderous subhumans flooding across the border, and they believe clownish faggotry like "muh undocumented disabled black trans queer neighbors defending their opium farm with machine guns", with nearly every fucking word in that sentence literally being things communists support.
If you find yourself on the side of communists more often than you are not, you are a communist. And the only proven solution to communism is the total liquidation of all communists, and to do that, it requires you to first acknowledge that merely thinking communist thoughts is enough of a reason.
The GOP is garbage but their authoritarianism isn't one of the reasons. Establishment GOP is unprincipled, uncaring faggotry engineered to fill their wallets with money.
Which we saw play out in reality with the left's retarded attempts to create things like 'Warren's Meme Team' and trying to copy Trump's podcast success by going on shit like 'Call Her Daddy'.
A lot of people were driven to the Left when the right Neo-Conservative War Adventurism. To be clear, the Republican Party was framed as the pro-war party in the 2000's, but really hadn't been 'pro-war' since the Progressive Era under Theodore Roosevelt. Although establishment Democrats had started countless wars and military incursions, they basically ignored their own history and just repeated that they were anti-war because of Vietnam. Truth is, in Vietnam, they weren't anti-War; they were just pro-NVA and pro-Viet-Minh because they supported Socialism and Communism.
Also worth pointing out that the 2000s pro-war stance was entirely because of the retarded fuckup that was Iraq. America was hugely united over rooting out the Taliban from Afghanistan.
It's probably why actual Nazism is slowly on the rise, because White Zoomers are going "Wait so I have three choices, one in which I advocate for freedom and communists and negroes use that freedom to murder me, one in which I live under authoritarianism but it's EU-style where it's used solely to protect communists and negroes so they can murder me, or I can have Hitler-style authoritarianism where I suffer authoritarianism just as bad as I would in the UK, but I can also leave my bike unlocked for more than thirty seconds?"
If we take his premise at face value, based on how Redditors see things:
It's because "authoritarianism" isn't actually a bad thing, and most people support it to 'some' degree. Authoritarianism is a spectrum, obviously. On one extreme end you have a completely lawless post-apocalyptic Mad Max anarchy, on the other extreme you have Equilibrium where if you don't take your emotion-deadening pills, Christian Bale shows up to murder everyone.
People like to live in societies that have rules and structures because most people are smart enough to see that that's how things work best. Free societies are balancing the rights of the people against the need for society to limit those rights.
It's why Lolbertism has fallen out of style on the right, because those of us who aren't retarded realize how fucking dumb it is to say "I don't agree with what you say, but will defend to death your right to say it" to someone who literally wants us dead anyway.
Women go their entire lives without accountability and consequences, their support of Islam is no different, they think everything will just 'work out' for them, probably because "the good guys always win, right?"
So, unpopular opinion: I'm kind of like "who gives a shit" on much about the second amendment anymore... It's just grown tiring hearing chest-beating 'muh sekint amendurr' from LARPing rednecks who want to play with toys but won't admit that that's all there is to it.
Go to any forum full of those kinds of people, that talks about 'muh 2a SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED' and post the schematics for making your own home machine gun, and you'll be banned faster than you could ever be banned on Reddit. There is nothing criminal about gun schematics for machine guns. There is nothing criminal about detailed instructions for making your own home suppressors. Even if I showed off my entirely illegal third-pin-drilled, homemade autosear equipped (for DOUBLE the fun!) AR15, guess what, that isn't a fucking crime for you to have that image on your forum, or to look at it. It's like thinking looking at Hunter's cocaine is a crime. But Fudd-run cesspools like AR15.com are militant about that gay shit because MUH FEDS.
Having an unstamped machine gun is literally just an issue of taxation, but I've met zero shit-talkers who are doing some underground criminal shit. For fuck's sake, go to an AK forum, and you'll find them all taking 922(r) "required US made parts" super-seriously, and making sure all their guns are in compliance, because they're a bunch of bootlicking fags.
When the bump stock ban came down, they all hid their bump stocks, because at the end of the day, they will comply with anything, and the MOLON LABE shit is just them being poseurs. The issue of gun laws is primarily about their guns being toys than it is anything else, which also explains why things like "Sunday Gunday" are just about humblebragging with some wildly overpriced gucci rifle. It's just about showing off how rich and cool you are. Retards are dropping $4,000 for Wilson Combat shitheaps and trying to justify how great it is with completely subjective, immeasurable metrics they don't actually know, like "muh fit and finish".
Arm braces are a great example. EVERY SINGLE PERSON KNOWS AN ARM BRACE IS A FUCKING STOCK. YOU ARE FOOLING NOBODY. I bet fewer than 20% of brace owners have ever even strapped it to their arm. The entire point of the arm brace restriction was to be a loophole in the SBR law... that means arm braces existed because 'MUH COME AND TAKE IT' types dutifully spent millions of dollars on R&D, production, and purchasing these fucking gimmicks to make sure their SBR toy was super-duper legal and extra-compliant with laws they claim they will not comply with... but they literally did, otherwise who the fuck was buying the arm braces, and for what purpose?
It's not that I'm against the second amendment but hearing trashholes post the same copy-pasted Boomer rage on everything for decades just... kinda grows exhausting, y'know? They're a bunch of tough-talking hicks online but a bunch of mewling weeping yellow-bellied bootlicking pussies in real life, which is why a 17 year old kid in Kenosha was left to fight the rioters alone while all the "TRY THAT IN A SMALL TOWN" types hid in their trailers rage-posting their fantasy dreams online.
Why do I have to provide credentials? Credentials for what?
If you actually pay attention, notice I haven't actually said anything about the F-35 specifically. Or at least, only extremely little. A comment about the fuel capacity of the F-35B and some remarks on the maintainability of the LO coating.
I haven't gushed about the capabilities of MADL or the time-to-climb performance, the post-Block 3F unrestrained roll rate, its safety record etc. A remark that the IPP system is very complex and superior to the F-22's APU.
I could, but I don't actually need to. Nor does it matter, all that does matter is that we both know you do not know anything, yet, you will certainly still hold opinions on it.
Opinions that could not have possibly ever come from any source except by way of repeating what a journalist told you to think. Like some kind of... NPC.
Or maybe it's borne out of the same contempt I had when the 'BLUE ROOFS! SPACE LASERS!' Lahaina conspiracy was popular.
Everybody was listening to a literal fucking real estate agent who invented and spread that nonsense, and nobody, not one, was interested in finding someone who had real experience and credentials in something like photonics. Anyone who said anything was screamed at and called a faggot by exactly people like you.
But the real estate agent told you what you wanted to hear, not what was true, and being lied to was more comfortable.
Remember when Mike Lindell got humiliated and taken for a ride, having his money stolen, because he didn't understand anything about cybersecurity? Or CodeMonkeyZ spreading technobabble schizo nonsense that everyone believed?
You're out of your mind if you think this isn't a real problem with the right. In fact, it's almost entirely the reason the left was able to attain so much institutional power.
That's the stereotype. You literally just pulled the 40 Year Old Virgin "You're throwing a lot of words at me I don't understand, so I'mma take them as disrespect".
Imagine being proud of being a stereotype.
You can go out and buy a gun and use it yourself if you want to become an expert on it. Despite this, journalists publish rivers are idiotic lies about even the simple AR-15.
The F-35 can't be bought. You either work for Lockheed or the DOD and that's the only way you're going to know anything about it.
So all your average normie knows about it comes exclusively from "journalists"... The same journalists who are too retarded to know how an AR15 works and lie about it even if they actually do.
For about a decade, it was extremely popular and very good money to spread ragebait about the F-35. And that's all they did was spread bullshit. And who could possibly ever call them out on it when there's zero chance of anyone not on the program of finding out otherwise?
So when it comes to the F-35 and "omg it sucks", literally all of it is filtered through the mouths of retards, and it gets believed by other retards. And those retards think that everybody else they talk to also couldn't possibly know anything so they all get comfortable lying to each other about it.
u/theaustrianpainter just wrote "The F-35 is a failure". I asked what he bases that on. I didn't get a response, nor do I expect I ever will, because he will be forced to admit that he actually believes journalists. Because there's literally no other way he could possibly know anything. Dude probably delivers porta-potties to festivals or some shit, but has really strong opinions about what might as well be alien technology to the masses.
In other words, the people who will tell you that CNN lies will be the first in line to link you to a CNN article backing up their criticism of the F-35.
Literally what the fuck are you talking about? You're trying to make a point that a 'fighter drone' can be immensely maneuverable and high-speed and when I point out all the limitations you come back with what are ostensibly just RC planes that are outlandishly slow and unmaneuverable.
Notice that all the 'drones' you linked, when they needed them to have long-range, all went with wings and high-endurance engines... not solid rocket motors and fins that spend most of their time gliding to the target, like a missile does.
The Army doesn't even consider the Switchblade to be a drone, and the Shahed has more in common with a cruise missile.
I love how the comic is specifically calling out the behavior that everybody in this comment tree immediately engaged with. People who do shit like drive trucks explaining how to design the next generation of weapons.
Question: who here has ever even touched an F-35? Raise your hand.
✋🏻
I actually liked the Super Tucano. Good looking aircraft.
It would've been interesting to have at the very beginning of OIF/OEF, but by the time it would've been spun up for service, the DOD already anticipated the missions there ending.
So there was no point in investing money and pilots into a platform that was only useful in a single environment. The military always looks to fighting 'the next war', and understandably, nobody sees the Super Tucano taking on the Chinese.
These flight hour things are pretty meaningless.
An E-4 doesn't actually cost that much money 'per hour' to fly. It doesn't land and you figuratively swipe a credit card to fix all the shit wrong with it that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Flight hour costs are a function of how new the airframe is, how ubiquitous, any upgrades its received, etc. There's only 4 E-4s. It's the same reason the B-2 is so expensive "to fly". It actually isn't, you just paid for more up-front.
These flying-hour cost graphs could literally just be interpreted to mean "we need to fly the shit out of these aircraft to get costs down". It doesn't actually save you money to do so, but if you flew the entire F-35 fleet on very gentle missions doing simple laps around the airfield for hours upon hours, it'd technically make it "cheaper" to operate.
And that's when you tuck them away in their hangers and save on all the maintenance costs needed after flying missions.
That's not how it works. Aircraft hate being grounded, and pilots need to constantly fly. If they don't, you end up with something like Iraq's air force, which on paper was very good, but they never flew their planes so none of their pilots had any skill, and they all just got butchered.
The same way you stop a plane from being fried, you retard.
You mean by putting a man in the seat who can make decisions and command the aircraft regardless of electronic threat environment?
So the exact opposite of a drone?
And for targets like that, probably way cheaper to just send a helicopter or drone.
Literally what happened.
The Army wanted the USAF to keep the A-10 because it's pretty useful for them (mostly because it's faster and longer-ranged than an Apache), but the USAF correctly said "you have the AH-64 for a reason".
And it's extremely expensive to keep the A-10 around for something that we don't even do anymore, seeing as how the 'strafe mud huts' wars have ended.
Once the MQ-9 hit the scene, the A-10 did basically nothing in Afghanistan. The entire CAS role was replaced by MQ-9s, which were much better at it, because they could see everything, all the time, with more endurance on station, and deliver weapons much more accurate and useful for the purpose than the A-10 could. It also made it much safer for the guys on the ground, because the MQ-9 can fire its weapons off-boresight, which means it can land Hellfires behind itself, just like the Apache could. If you're getting fucked up, the A-10 has to circle around, the TACP has to vector it in, it can't see shit so it may shoot you so it needs visual aids to find the target, and it has to circle around, do a BDA, and reengage. It's very time-consuming when seconds matter. The MQ-9 just watches the entire time and can let one off the rail at its leisure.
The problem with the MQ-9 is it's 100% worthless in an electronic warfare environment, and if it comes down to popping satellites, the entire fleet is grounded.
Fighters gain Air Superiority in a combat zone. Air-to-ground attack aircraft kill shit.
I mean, you know it's called the F/A-18, right?
That's kind of my point with the "muh multirole" mockery. People unironically say gay shit like 'The F-35 sucks multirole means it's a master of nothing! Why can't it be more like the F/A-18/F-15/F-16???' which are all multirole aircraft.
Even the goddamn motherfucking F-14 ended up having bombs strapped to it.
This is an unbelievably retarded idea that you clearly have not actually considered all the problems with. You're the soyjak in the meme.
This is "guy who builds houses thinks he can design weapons platforms" logic. Which is easy to do when you don't actually have to come up with ideas that work at all.
Drones with data link? What drones? How did they get there? What are they powered by? How are they designed? And literally how the fuck do you stop that all from being fried the second an electronic attack aircraft arrives in the area?
I designed guns in a notebook when I was a kid. Literally none of the guns would ever be operable, didn't make any sense, and weren't designed with any semblance of understanding of the engineering involved with designing a real gun.
"My one sentence explanation to design the future of air war" is your version of my notebook, but you're presumably an adult, which...
So your argument is 'muh multirole'.
Please refer to the comic.
A fighter should be
This is the point of the comic. "Should" be? Really? According to who? You don't think it's super fucking weird that every single defense company on the planet, no matter the country, hasn't built dedicated single-role fighters in 30 years?
That doesn't clue you in that maybe this 'muh multirole' is clownish antiquated nonsense that spun out of the goofy days of air combat in the 1960s and the Century Fighters, when we had a new aircraft rolling off the production line every four years, that did only exactly one thing, and they all ended up in landfills?
We haven't formally built an "interceptor" aircraft in eons. How come nobody is complaining that that role is 'missing'? It's because technology moved on, and the 'interceptor' role became worthless.
a fighter should be specialized in destroying other aircraft to gain air superiority over an area;
And once its has that superiority, its worthless. It's not like the enemy will just have a new swarm of fighters appear out of nowhere. What are they going to do then? Fly around and look scary? Strafe targets with their 20mm?
You were literally just complaining about tax money being spent, and you're now advocating for multiple expensive aircraft, that all do something different, even though they could be combined into one. And every aircraft means a whole new supply chain, maintenance teams, and pilots.
You can cry about multirole or you can cry about expense, but you don't get to do both.
VS the aim 174/260 missiles (as the latest and greatest) which are going to basically do just that.
Which are still required to fly on a host aircraft into combat, because they need something to get them into their limited range, and they need something to tell them where and what to shoot.
Damn almost like you need something with significantly more endurance than a missile, which means it'll need a turbojet engine instead of a rocket motor.
And that thing needs to have stuff like a radar system much larger and more powerful than in a little tiny missile, so it can see many hundreds of miles away, instead of just squinting through a straw at nearby targets.
And that thing needs to have constant power instead of operating off of a single-use battery that can only power the on-board systems for a few minutes since radar systems are immensely power-hungry, so it'll need a big generator and power management system.
And that thing should also have a lot of other doodads to help coordinate attacks with others around it, like datalink systems. And just in case, we'll need to be able to communicate and issue controls to that platform so it can change missions, or fly elsewhere.
And there's no point in making this a disposable system so let's make it able to fly back and land on a runway.
Wow all of this adds up and sounds like it's really heavy, we'll need to add wings to provide lift, and space for fuel for the engine, and then we'll need to build a really big structure to carry all of this.
Boy all that added mass and the aerodynamic requirement for that thing called "lift" really did a number on its ability to pull high-g maneuvers, because when this platform tries a high-g turn, the wings act like a giant fucking airbrake, sapping all your energy, speed, and control.
...
Congratulations you just invented the fighter aircraft. Welcome to the world of sub-10gs.
I'm sure you know better though.
The f35 being multirole isn't the problem, the problem is multirole close in fighters are the weak point, they can't carry bigger weapons (especially without hypersonics, which are going to be more and more important as time goes on), and a lot of the 'stealth' weapons we have are just low obs, not truly stealthy, which means they can get shot down by advanced tech.
Well the F-35 isn't replacing literally every fighter aircraft. That's why they're keeping on with things like the F-15EX. The F-35 is in a bit of a 'weird spot', because it's fitting in to a slot that's current occupied by F-16s, and F-16s have also been in a 'weird spot'. F-16s aren't great. They can do a lot, but they get flexed on hard by the F-15E in most capacities. Which is why I think it's funny when people go 'MUH MULTIROLE' when the main reason the F-16 is still around is specifically because it's a swiss army knife of an aircraft.
a lot of the 'stealth' weapons we have are just low obs, not truly stealthy
TBH I have no idea what you mean. In military terms "stealth" doesn't exist. It's literally all LO. Though you are right, except for only a couple weapons they're all as stealthy as bricks which ruin the profile when put on external racks.
Also the f35b sucks balls and never needed to get made.
Probably true. The lift fan required so much volume taken out of the fuel tank that its range (which is incredibly impressive on the A and C) is ridiculously short. It is super cool though.
and skipped the 35 as a fighter/bomber and just made a more dedicated ground attack aircraft with some a2a ability
Like a non-stealth ground attack aircraft?
Those weapons platforms are going obsolete. Against a modern peer, helicopters are too vulnerable. In Ukraine, Russia is terrified of losing their helicopters so they just lob unguided rockets from 15 miles away and hope they land. Platforms like the A-10 or SU-25 are utterly useless, they're downed by pretty much anything that wants them dead.
In a war against China, for example, I'd rather have a ton of AIM 174s/hypersonic missiles on missile trucks with a few f35s than a ton of f35s with sidewinders and amraams and few missile trucks.
I can't comment on the AIM-174. But the entire point of stealth is to basically 'shrink' the effective range of radar systems. Every stealth aircraft can obviously be seen with radar if its gets close enough, the point is that an overlapping air defense network suddenly has lots of holes in it when you effectively reduce the range the S-400 can see from 200 to 100, and it requires the enemy to over-commit air defense assets to fill in the gap.
The biggest problem with the AIM-54 is that the little tiny radar dish in it couldn't see anything (this is a problem on all radar-guided missiles) so the F-14 had to paint the target to steer it in the correct direction. The enemy knew the entire time they were being attacked, and could take action. The AIM-54 was old as fuck, though, before modern battery tech, so I'm sure the 174 is not nearly as blatant, but my point is that weapons systems like the -174, I'm going to bet, are designed to give non-stealth aircraft a fighting chance that stealth aircraft are less vulnerable to... so the Air Force/Navy won't really care if it doesn't fit inside an F-35 because it doesn't need to.
This is why I hate 'conspiracy theory'.
It's like all these retards demanding the JFK files or Epstein list, thinking it will 'vindicate' them. There's only two possibilities:
The files tell them exactly what they wanted to hear.
The files do not.
In the case of #2, do you think any conspiracy theorist will ever say "wow maybe we were wrong"? Nope! Have you ever heard of any conspiracy theorist, anywhere, ever looking at all their evidence and going 'yeah I think maybe we're wrong on this one'? It has never happened, and if they were actually following evidence and logic, shouldn't it happen all the time?
They will double down, and now insist that the files were altered/covered up and the conspiracy is now even deeper, and they will insist that somehow, on every single topic, that magically their own beliefs are certain to end up being correct about everything, every time, and any time they aren't correct, it's because they actually still are correct but reasons reasons reasons.
You can't even get retards who believe HAARP is weather control to admit they were fucking duped, when the actual origination of that conspiracy theory was some faggot making it the fuck up to sell a book. He had zero whistleblower testimony, no leaked government documents, no scientific analysis of the technology, and no attempt at all to infiltrate the facility or rent its use to explore what it can do.
He literally just made it the fuck up so he could pay his rent.
And that's now permanently a belief that the subhuman conspiracy theorist crowd will take to their graves, and if you challenge them on it, they activate their NPC programming and just babble retarded shit about cloud seeding.