Even if they're unarmed, if they're T32 that means they are operating under the legal authority of the governor of TX and they have no legal ability to be performing any official duties without permission of the IL state government
Are you shittin me?!?!! No, but you'll print that and I'll probably be investigated
7,754 followers 170 following 6,381 posts
view profile on Bluesky
Even if they're unarmed, if they're T32 that means they are operating under the legal authority of the governor of TX and they have no legal ability to be performing any official duties without permission of the IL state government
No you just say they're a terrorist and that means you can kill them, I've seen the second sicario
We've done several iterations of this discourse, but watching strike videos is in general not a baseline healthy activity
If it really had 11 people on board + the cargo it had to be a decently sized boat
It's not a go-fast but it did look like it was decently big....HF's boom isn't as big as you might think
That would be in line with how the 'non-combat' GWOT theaters have mostly worked, when they wanted strikes to be restrictive
My guess is the EXORD included boilerplate about TdA being a FTO lethal force ROE supplemental whatever blah blah blah, but reserved TEA at a very high level, and then they delegated TEA for this strike
Marine Corps Cobra with a hellfire is my guess LCS with a NSM for the comedy option
yeah that's not even a go-fast by any means
*without, but yes The Guard in a Title 32 status is under the legal authority of their governor, not the federal government If it's T10 now they're under Presidential control, but that also means restrictions like posse comitatus apply (as they're now legally the same as active duty personnel)
Yeah, if they really press to test on this all sorts of things a multitude of state and local agencies in IL can do
Have to define "federalized" If T32, that's not actually federalized, that's just state authority with federal dollars If T10, then they're legally indistinguishable from active duty troops and the same authorities and limitations apply Fwiw the DC playbook was (somehow) T32, because DC is weird
For further reading, Ethical Slut is.....fine (although not exactly about polyamory per se), Smart Girl's Guide to Polyamory (despite the name) is much better
Scheduling is absolutely required to make it work if you're going down that path and also there are definitely people with calendar fetishes
Either the states are sovereign entities or they aren't, and if we're going down the path of the latter we should just rip that bandaid off now
I believe the current term is Special Military Operation
I'm not convinced it's T32 because at this point the only people left at NGB are imbeciles or tanked out of their mind, but there's only a couple options and the fact that the admin is going to stumble around muttering about what they have the right to do doesn't remove the need for authorities
Pritzker should get clarification on the authorities and if it is in fact Title 32 order armed forces under his command to lawfully prevent them from unlawfully entering his state's territory
One of which being the minor detail that deploying them off federal property in the territory of one state under another state's authority without the permission of the government of the first state is quite literally an invasion
Lots of people who prefer a polyamorous relationship structure are either married/partnered already, or are pursuing that sort of 'primary' relationship, while there are also many who are not In theory "solo poly" was supposed to be a shorthand for the latter to ID themselves
As to why all the words and definitions, I like many would prefer for relationships to just be something discussed and experienced with the persons involved, but unfortunately american society decided sex and relationships must be highly regimented, so here we are
See also the concept of a relationship escalator, which is actually a useful analogy for the assumptions inherent in monogamous relationship progression in american culture, but only really works if you pair it with a staircase, where the steps are taken deliberately based on mutual communication
This may seen like a lot but it's all laid out very straightforwardly in one of a couple books on the topic that you can read in an afternoon, so this is very much a case of the most annoying people you know latching onto something while willfully misunderstanding it
I don't know how she meant it (the screenshots are nonsensical), but a common misunderstanding of 'solo poly' is "I date separately from my partner, and I may limit the information I share about my partners with each other" This would accurately be referred to as "parallel"
"Solo poly" means you are not married or otherwise partnered and have no interest in that kind of relationship (solo) but are open to multiple romantic relationships (poly), some of which may grow to be committed to some degree (where it differs from saying you're just single/dating around)
For the record the screenshotted person is a big dumdum who is misusing the phrase "solo poly" to mean something absolutely opposite of how the books that all poly people claim to have read define it
fwiw like half of the folks discussing poly something use it in the way you defined it, despite it being defined pretty clearly the way I laid it out in the book(s) that everyone in the community claims to have read
What solo poly is supposed to mean is that you are not married or otherwise in a long term cohabitating/nesting/etc relationship (solo) but that you are open to multiple relationships, some of which may involve degrees of commitment (where it differs from saying you're single/dating around)
for the record this definitionally would be "parallel" or something like it and "solo poly" means something completely different (that makes zero sense in the context of the person in the screenshot), but more so than most communities no one in polyland knows what anything is supposed to mean so🙃
That would be at odds with the literature, but 🙃
And/or people who are fundamentally unethical deciding poly is a way for them to better frame their lack of ethics, but I repeat myself
The point about hangups is true generally but also this specific one is more "okay even by the in-community rather esoteric definitions of those words what the fuck are you talking about"
"I am poly but am deliberately choosing to have only one romantic relationship" would probably most commonly be described as "saturated at one"
It's a piece of jargon that even people in the space often misuse that has now broken containment
Because even in poly spaces there are still a lot of people with assumptions about partnering and the relationship escalator Sure you could say "I am single and poly but not interested in a nesting partner but am also open to committed relationships vs casual," but "solo poly" is a fair bit shorter
If used correctly it's a marker of your views on how you approach the relationship escalator and your bounds on partnership Like a lot of stuff in the space, it's often not used correctly
Correct, you can absolutely have all sorts of ENM relationship structures while being married to someone, but "solo poly" isn't really one of them
And even then, while people can say whatever words they want a lot of folks in the space would probably say that even if you are not married for romantic purposes the legal entanglement makes it difficult to truly consider yourself "solo" in this context
Fwiw that is not at all what solo poly actually means, although everyone here will I'm sure be shocked to learn that people in this space like to play fast and loose with things like "words"
bsky.app/profile/mike...
That's not correct, what you're describing would be considered parallel The "solo" part is definitionally that you are deliberately not partnering with any one person, and while you may have committed relationships you are your own 'primary' partner How you square that with marriage, well
Less charitable/more likely is just word salad nonsense
Yeah the most charitable reading is a marriage that the person doesn't consider a romantic relationship and doesn't otherwise have a "primary" romantic partner, although I'd argue the marriage aspect in that hypothetical doesn't make "solo" poly the best descriptor
Less charitable/more likely is this is just word salad from someone who hasn't done any of the reading and probably isn't actually poly anyway
I suppose if you were married to someone but weren't living with them and had no significant financial attachments to them you could somehow contort that into considering yourself solo poly, although I'd then question what the point of being married was
The most charitable reading is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the word "solo" appended to "poly" is supposed to mean (you have multiple relationships, some of which may be committed, but you deliberately are not cohabitating/otherwise 'nesting' with any of them)
Being one of the smartest guys in Pete Hegseth's OSD does not actually mean you are intelligent
I mean that is a thing I would absolutely believe Dan Caldwell thinks to be the case, yes
The Vice President was in private chats with minors while he was in his 30s
On the one hand logically this should at most be someone lighting them up with a bushmaster or HITRON going lethal or whatever, on the other yeah some Marine Cobra just hellfired a go-fast
The wise man bowed his head
Framing this as a "strike" means they're either redefining that word down into nothingness or this is even dumber than I would have originally thought
If you go back to the dark side DoD civs can do this also, you just have to affirmatively opt in once in the online ID card system and then it's the same, EDIPI as your KTN
........why would any AD member use this instead of precheck
FARGO??!?!
If all I have to do is believe the worst case about Perimeter, I'll take it
You are being CONNED--ON A LEVEL UNPRECEDENTED IN WORLD HISTORY
Also on Prime last time I checked, but yeah it seems like no one really cares about the copy up on YT
It is absolutely incredible they are going to try to spin this NAIL BITING CRISIS HOW CAN YOU END THE WORLD IMPOSSIBLE CHOICES on the basis of one (1) missile "Well now guess we all have to hand it to MDA after all, salvo the GMD interceptors and then we can figure out what the hell happened"
By Dawn's Early Light is without a fault and is the best portrayal both of nuclear war generally and EAM procedures specifically, period lol The episode of Madam Secretary where we almost accidentally nuke Russia because of a drill is pretty good too
Depends on world tensions and the alert posture, but as long as it's not a depressed trajectory SLBM shot from off the coast you might be surprised how quickly the process can work
CC @forbesmm.bsky.social, I had to see this and so do you
The president parachutes out of Marine One to avoid it crashing when it gets caught in a nuclear blast, so you be the judge And no, THAT one is being directed by Denis Villeneuve 🙃
They apparently portray the PEOC as this impenetrable nuclear proof bunker where the President and everyone spends the crisis, instead of, I don't know, trying to get him and the rest of the NCA to an airborne survivable platform
Idris Elba is not-Obama (he gets word the missile is inbound while he's shooting hoops, come ON)
The core premise of the film is that the US has no idea who launched the missile (singular) from where, and despite being explicitly set only in the 18 minutes from launch to impact the retaliatory option is depicted as coming from a bomber
The Hurt Locker lady made a movie about NC3 and application of deterrence theory written by the NBC News guy that covered for Harvey Weinstein and Matt Lauer
Sort of, SRMs don't last quite as long as basic explosives in terms of energetics, but more of the issue is obsolescence from a technical perspective
Also despite all the whiz bang tech (cf Second Offset) Cold War militaries were still based on industrialized mass of easy to manufacture unguided munitions That has fundamentally changed in the current missile age
So it's best to just build more missiles, and now you're back into the resourcing and budgeting trade space discussion
The core issue is all the stuff you could do to possibly change this (stockpile subcomponents, build out latent production capacity) are just steps on the way to "build more missiles now," except you're spending 60%-80% of the resources to build more missiles without actually building more missiles
All the ~affordable mass~ hooey about getting around this by ~innovation~ ignores that they are making fundamental tradeoffs in performance to achieve higher production rates Which is fine as far as it goes if you have a workable CONOPS, but it doesn't change the underlying truth
No one can Missile production has fundamental limitations on it that prevent it from being scaled in timeframes we would consider useful "You expend years of production in days to weeks" is a fundamental truth of missile warfare
The only thing shelters do is force missiles to use unitary warhead instead of DPICM (more missiles required) and provide some degree of concealment You can do this a lot cheaper with stuff like ESAPs than building "HASs"
And just to repeat, the type of HASs they're assuming are Iraqi style, which we cracked open with ease over 30 years ago The type we would actually build are tab-v style, which were only ever intended to protect against nuclear blast overpressure (at a distance) and frags
Like even if you take this statement at face value (you absolutely should not), the type of HASs they're talking about are more like $15M-$20M a piece to build in the places they're talking about building, and the missiles in question are more like sub $5M per, sooooo bsky.app/profile/shas...
Reiterating this is a bad piece with bad assumptions and bad math, which isn't even getting into how the authors (along with everyone else, seemingly) fundamentally misunderstand what HASs are actually capable of doing
hahahahahahahahaha
new frontiers in calling sky a babykiller
Is Richard Hanania white, the greatest thread in the history of stormfront, locked by a nazi after 12,239 pages of racist debate
well, white people say that anyway which is basically the answer you're afraid of
He also took multiple actions to conceal the relationship from the university/people running the program the mentee was participating in, which is definitely a thing you do when everything is on the up and up
All that's undisputed, the only bit that is contested is whether or not he also physically restrained aforementioned college student against her will in order to have sexual relations with her
By his own admission he carried on a sexual relationship with a college student a decade younger than him who he had an explicit mentor/mentee relationship with and who he, again by his own admission, was using that relationship's power dynamic in pursuit of sex
They've been running ads for useful idiots and red scare on normie terrestrial radio for months lol
Normal responsible companies doing experience with industry type programs with feds are quite careful to keep swim lanes separate 8VC had them use their position as federal employees to uncover leads for 8VC's business with the federal govt, because who needs ethics when you're innovating
The Lloyd Austin Pentagon sent US military personnel to perform taxpayer funded work for this guy at zero expense to him, because ~innovation~
The fact that they made the 26 dual use at all is weird and I struggle to have strong opinions in any direction on their theater stuff because of how strange it is when you try to align it with their conv force structure and what we know about their doctrine And it's only getting weirder
The CCP likely doesn't think so It would kick things up several notches, certainly from a public opinion perspective (although these days who knows how that would spin out), but I don't think that automatically or even likely escalates into use of nuclear weapons
Sort of The thing about the denial/parity/superiority/supremacy concept is it exists temporally and geographically So the PLA would likely say they intend on gaining continuous superiority over the Strait while projecting denial east into the Philippine Sea, specifically to deny US intervention
He's not the only or even worst case of it, but schatz has cooked his brain online into being well below replacement value
If you're a dem pol and you are openly agreeing with sean trende on anything, you need to a) resign immediately b) publicly list your entire staff so they can be blackballed from any future employment in dem politics c) commit seppuku
Writing actually focused on escalation dynamics would look.......considerably different Although I say that, we just had that not great IS piece so
The problem with this is that paper is really part of an intra-airpower community debate on traditional air supremacy vs air denial as models for force design re: Taiwan scenario, that the authors (unwisely) decided to interject escalation dynamics into as an attempt to bolster their argument
Really 2 different kinds of escalation...in terms of a war spinning up out of nothing yeah absolutely that's the kind of thing most likely to cause it, for those reason The original discussion is more in the context of vertical escalation once a shooting war has already unambiguously started
Lol, part of the framing narrative in that wargame is the PI govt generally and the AFP specifically may have taken some latitude with the whole mutual defense treaty thing when those Things Started Happening
Well, it's difficult to the point of being impossible as a practical matter Like if we just kept solely pounding away at their various air domain capabilities, could we probably eventually get to at least a degree of legitimate air parity? Sure, and in the meantime they've seized Taipei
Basically this bsky.app/profile/mike...