Whatismoo

And it's worth using the term "myth" quite deliberately because of course the reality of as diverse and complex a place like Texas has only a passing resemblance with the fantastical machismo that it has become associated with in the imagination of the MAGA and global Far Right

It might even be better for America and the rest of the world if America's soft power is defined less by a myth of Texan machismo and more by an ethos of Minnesotan solidarity

To be fair he was a bootie, not a tommy!

Larger, longer range, newer systems, twin engines for greater redundancy, probably somewhat more refined design. It's going to be a ~20-25 year newer plane aimed at a much higher end capability set. Which is incredibly powerful because F-35 is already the best jet flying.

From the desk of Douglas Bristol "Everywhere Black Soldiers Went in World War Two, Freedom Followed https://kansaspress.ku.edu/blog/2026/02/10/celebrating-black-history-month/

Order Building Bridges and receive 20% off with code 24BLACKHIST at checkout https://kansaspress.ku.edu/9780700639007/

These mixed fleet RCAF proponents are thinking too small. They don't understand that F-35 is the LOW for the mixed fleet. ~88 F-35A and 40 GCAP/Tempest is the high fleet. The RAF is doing this, and Italy too, so it'll be well supported. Oh and Japan.

"If the government may simply seize *someone* without due process, there is no check on its ability to seize *anyone*."

Perhaps the most fundamental check against tyranny. And it is gravely threatened.

I should post more about defense stuff tbh

INDO(PAY)COM

Lmfao.

“How much do we have to beg? RFFs are reneged”

“It was Centcom once again, then it was centcom again and again - f when will it end?”

“Shooting a jassm at little mud huts”

open.spotify.com/track/7HjR4I...

is it even legal to withhold the funding? Anyway, Schumer should have negotiated him down to the Port Authority Bus Terminal before telling him to get stuffed.

Air Force bans smart glasses for troops in uniform The Air Force is banning troops from wearing smart eyewear like Meta AI glasses. Other services allow commanders to dictate device policies.

Meanwhile in the wearable tech/privacy/opsec world....

Good story here from @pattynieberg.bsky.social @taskandpurpose.com taskandpurpose.com/news/air-for...

Very very complex boat and low budgets plus a withering submarine industry in the 2000s-2010s were bad. It's also massive but only has 16 tubes!

Yep! @midlifesuezcrisis.bsky.social makes this point fairly regularly

Exactly and at that point it's, AIUI, less of a lift to get to growing the force.

There are many things to spend money on. Getting warhead production back to scale the arsenal is something to pursue now but won't see fruition until the 2040s. But we need the capability to flexibly respond if the enemy breaks out, even if we don't build too many warheads until then.

Considering how effectively Russian nuclear coercion has worked to constrain the US and Europe with regards to Ukraine, I think your a bit out over your skis. I'm not calling for anything insane, just going back to the size of arsenal we had in the late 90s / early 2000s!

You're a damned fool if you think that I meant using them. They shape and constrain adversary action without needing to set anything off, and are vitally useful for this. But to do this they must be a credible deterrent, which requires a large and modern arsenal.

Cloisters?

Sometimes I think about the National Automated Highway System, which AIUI fell apart because nobody wanted to pay for the nails in the road.

Does the curse at least come with some free civil war history books?

That's about half what we had in the 80s, and around where the arsenal stood in the 90s and 2000s. I'm not calling for some kind of 1960s style 30,000 warheads nonsense!

At which point you're looking at having to field thousands of warheads no matter what! And the stakes, risk and uncertainty REALLY point away from a thin margin of error on deliverable destruction! And to be clear, I think that 4-6000 each strategic/NSNW warheads is a modest number!

They are an incredibly useful tool of political warfare! I don't think it's a good idea to use the damned things, but the challenge to hold any given target at risk is that (especially with midcourse interceptors) you have to saturate the whole system.

There has been no indication that Russian nuclear weapons are non-functional. Their new missiles have had some issues, but the warheads should work fine. They never got rid of the infrastructure they built in the Cold War to develop and build warheads. We did.

It is me, the world's only PAG fan!

What's your perfect two-ford garage?

They are? They have significantly more nuclear weapons than anyone else, and with a greater diversity of delivery systems.

Politicians didn't have release authority in the US until after the Cuban Missile Crisis, and before that it was in the hands of practitioners, not theorists. Tom Power didn't care about escalation ladders, he cared about killing soviets.

Bullshit, we burned every major city in Japan and nuked two of them while inflicting a blockade and mining campaign so severe they couldn't fish the inland sea and there was STILL a hardline coup attempt to keep fighting. We had to put boots in Berlin to get them to give up.

the estimates are only ~1000 warheads by 2030, so they're still building up. They have a much larger land based force building out though, and are building a large nuclear submarine production capacity.