Jump to content

Bevo

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    15028
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bevo

  1. I know a RT that we could use at guard
  2. I have a house overlooking Flathead Lake and one in Red Lodge, so it hits very close to home. Red Lodge is only 69 miles to Cooke City and an additional 89 miles to West Yellowstone. So, as the crow flies, I'm only 150mi or so from southwest Idaho. Oddly, West Yellowstone is in Montana but the maps show it in Idaho. A search states that the park was created before the states became states and had official borders.. And initially they just drew a big rectangle around the thermal features and said "this is the park" without any regard to the Territory (what Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming were before they were states) boundaries because it didn't really matter. Apparently as they were becoming states, Wyoming tried to buy the whole of Yellowstone from Montana (which now has 2% of the park but 3 of the 5 entrances) and Idaho (1% of the park and no entrances except the dead end road going to Bechler Ranger Station) but both said no.
  3. What time does the draft start back up today?
  4. He's 6'5" 290lbs and moves well - maybe the 9.95ers are having problems projecting what position he will play.
  5. Are you sure the car was the problem?
  6. Back in the 70s, Japanese automakers got into the US market by making reliable compact cars. However, they moved away from that market to increase profits. The concept of a cheap car is fine. But cheap cars aren't great money makers for automobile manufacturers. And the luxury auto market is pretty crowded. All, this is to say that I wouldn't invest in the company because I don't think the concept is sustainable, meaning that I think the company will fail. Plus, I'm not so sure a $20,000 car is "cheap" for young adults. That still seems like too high of a price point for low income who probably live in an apartment complex with no outlets in the parking lot.
  7. But if it has a USB port, you might be able to plug in a dildo.
  8. stay put and get the tOSU lineman
  9. Obviously, if you have 10 employees now, he must have been impressive sticking it to Lil' Becky Beaver.
  10. Roger Waters is a bad person to quote when it comes to Ukraine.
  11. Except for West Yellowstone and Targhee in the SE, Sun Valley in the South, and Boise in the SW.
  12. Reminds me of a former baseball player for the Cleveland Indians. Kept chickens in his locker.
  13. Us olds get sympathy sex from our wives while the youngins have to group text and keep their fingers crossed that some dumb girl pulls through?
  14. Trump’s deal would plunge the world into war Summarize Rewarding aggression and overturning rules-based order will simply trigger many more invasions Con Coughlin23 April 2025 6:04pm BST Credit: MIKHAIL KLIMENTYEV/AFP US president Donald Trump’s seven-point proposal for ending the Ukraine conflict may be many things, but it most certainly is not a peace plan. It is a blueprint for more war. Surrender, capitulation, betrayal, appeasement, abandonment. These are the words that better describe the egregious apology of a peace deal that the Trump administration is currently hawking around Europe. For, rather than attempting to address the fundamental causes of the conflict – namely Russia’s unprovoked invasion of a sovereign state – Trump and his band of fellow travellers have reached the perverse conclusion that the best way to achieve peace in Ukraine is by rewarding Russian president Vladimir Putin for his blatant act of military aggression. That certainly seems to be the essence of the terms presented in the one-page document given to Western diplomats meeting in London yesterday. It proposes allowing Putin to keep nearly all the Ukrainian territory he has seized since launching his initial invasion of Ukraine in 2014, while giving the Ukrainians – who are unquestionably the innocent party in the conflict – next to nothing in return. By far the most outrageous suggestion made in the proposal, which Trump has called his “final offer”, is that, in return for Russia halting hostilities along the current front lines, Washington would agree to de jure recognition of Russian control of Crimea. In addition, Russia will enjoy Washington’s de facto recognition of all the territory in eastern Ukraine that Moscow has captured, occupied and illegally annexed during the past decade or so. This concession not only rewards Putin’s decade-long military effort to destroy Ukraine’s independence; it is a flagrant breach of one of the key pillars of the post-war international order, which decrees that the sovereign integrity of any nation is inviolable. If Russia is allowed to drive a coach and horses through such a fundamental premise of international law, then what is to stop China from seizing Taiwan, or Argentina the Falkland Islands? Far from being a prescription for future peace, Trump’s capitulation to Moscow lays the foundations for future conflict. Other aspects of Trump’s so-called “peace deal” are equally unpalatable to anyone who supports the principle of defending Ukrainian sovereignty from Russian aggression. Apart from requiring Kyiv to surrender its territory, the deal demands that Kyiv abandon its aspirations to join the Nato alliance. In return, an ad hoc collection of European countries – no doubt a reference to Sir Keir Starmer’s “coalition of the willing” – will commit to providing a “robust security guarantee” to protect Ukraine from any future acts of Russian aggression. As Trump’s deal makes no mention of the US providing any military support for such a force – one of Starmer’s key requirements – the proposition already looks dead in the water. Trump is also offering Putin some important incentives for agreeing to the deal, such as the lifting of US sanctions that have been in place since 2014, and the offer of future economic cooperation in the energy and industrial sectors. It almost beggars belief that Trump, who took office vowing to end the Ukraine conflict in “24 hours”, could produce a document that is not just deeply flawed, but one that constitutes such a blatant threat to world peace. Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy, apparently produced this mockery of a peace deal having had four hours of talks with Putin in Moscow last week. To judge by the eventual outcome, the most charitable view of the US envoy’s endeavours is that he simply took dictation from the Russian leader. Putin will certainly claim this deal – assuming he agrees to it – justifies his warmongering in Ukraine which has already claimed hundreds of thousands of lives and left large tracts of Ukraine uninhabitable. More importantly, it will allow Russia’s battered and exhausted military to regroup and prepare to engage in future aggressive acts against Europe’s borders, safe in the knowledge that, even if such attacks occurred against Nato member states, he has nothing to fear in terms of an American military response. Suddenly, Trump’s quip, made during the presidential election campaign, that he would encourage Russia to attack Nato allies in Europe who did not make adequate financial provision for their defence, deserves serious consideration by Washington’s erstwhile European allies. Given this administration’s open disdain for European concerns, which saw US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Witkoff withdraw at the last minute from yesterday’s London summit on the peace proposal, European leaders need to take a leaf out of Ukraine’s book and acknowledge that the US can no longer be trusted to protect their interests. Judging by Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky’s initial response to Trump’s offer, Ukraine is likely to conclude that it is better to continue fighting than suffer the national humiliation of surrendering its territory to Russia. And if European leaders need any further evidence that they must safeguard their own future security needs, then the Ukrainian “peace deal” devised by Trump’s administration of mavericks should give them all the persuasion they require.
  15. You should have at least waited until 1982 before giving up on them.
  16. Well, if you were a Korn fan, you would know, that Korn has covered several David Bowie songs, most notably "The Man Who Sold the World". So if you want Krempin, you should give a shit - and perhaps write an open apology letter to him.
  17. Shhh. I'm trying to fix a post that I made while driving: Luther Vandross helped David Bowie on the Young Americans album. At the time, Luther Vandross was a relatively unknown singer who had been working as a session vocalist and songwriter in New York City. He was brought in to assist with the backing vocal arrangements on "Young Americans," including the title track and "Fascination," which he co-wrote. Vandross not only contributed vocals but also arranged some of the backing vocal parts on the album.
  18. Scratch all that bullshit. Too much to correct.
  19. Sang backup to David Bowie and helped put together American Girl.
  20. If you don’t got Mojo Nixon, your store could use some fixin’.
  21. Lott? Seriously, you didn’t realize that he was that fast? As a sophomore he was the long jump jr Olympic champion. And as a sophomore he ran a 10.9 100 and had a 7’ high jump. He also hurdles and his dad was a track star and corner and his mom played basketball at Texas.
  22. Any comments from spring practice insiders on whether Simmons looks better/bigger this spring? If Simmons improves which is likely, opposing QBs are in for a world of hurt.
  23. He is probably 3 years away from being productive in college. He is a very good athlete but he only weighs 245lbs on a 6'6" frame and he isn't quick enough to be real successful as a DE. Plus he stand up too high for decent leverage. So, basically he will need to gain about 70lbs and improve his technique. Hopefully, he can get to campus next year at 260lbs, and then by his second year in the program over 300lbs. Then, he can be successful inside at DT. This is the type of project most successful teams wants as opposed to maxed out suburban kids.
  24. We won’t be after him this time around.
×
×
  • Create New...