Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Yes, and a strategic location. China has hinted at making a large manufacturing free zone in Haiti. With a port and large airport. 
Plus we have a lot of investment in the Dominican Republic. 

Iraq II! Taking doomed colonization plans to the Caribbean!
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

... and obtw, hadn't seen this mentioned, but the anti-beard crusade is clearly aimed at black men, who often get a special dispensation re: shaving due to folliculitis. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, wood said:

... and obtw, hadn't seen this mentioned, but the anti-beard crusade is clearly aimed at black men, who often get a special dispensation re: shaving due to folliculitis. 

And maybe Nordic pagans. Frankly I need this administration to make a call on the whole Valhalla issue. 

  • Haha 4
Posted

guess we'll have to add the gillette gamechanger to the didn't serve but cosplays as a veteran starter pack, along with kpods of black rifle coffee, line t-shirts, and a .50 antenna on the truck. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Posted

So, guys who've served.  Shaving in a combatish situation seems like a painful waste of time.  I think of seeing guys in winter conditions shaving with no doubt cold water out of a helmet, and it just makes my face hurt.

Is it anything like McRaven's make your bed everyday?  Because I think that's real.

And about half my GI Joes had beards, along with their life like hair.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

So, guys who've served.  Shaving in a combatish situation seems like a painful waste of time.  I think of seeing guys in winter conditions shaving with no doubt cold water out of a helmet, and it just makes my face hurt.

Is it anything like McRaven's make your bed everyday?  Because I think that's real.

And about half my GI Joes had beards, along with their life like hair.

We were told it was important to keep a smooth face so our MOPs gear would seal to our faces.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
On 10/1/2025 at 1:42 PM, Ojo Rojo said:

Again, I cannot believe what I am seeing.  The Secretary of Defense just called all of the highest ranking military officers from all over the world to talk about *checks notes* PT and facial hair?  I'm sorry, this has to be a bit.  Nobody can be this stupid, can they?  This is directly from the Idiocracy script.  Mike Judge himself could not have written this any better.

 

The hair and the PT crap was the excuse, not the reason. The reason was so he could cosplay being a manly SecWar, show em who's boss, force them to obey bullshit orders to make himself feel big and tough. 

doTArd was there because everything has to be about him, can't let a toadie get any press without him. 

 

 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Sbbruin said:

Um, Pete, it appears the Texas National Guard didn't get your fitness memo.

 

They stopped at Buccees. Also love the weapon carry. Um..... 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

They stopped at Buccees. Also love the weapon carry. Um..... 

Ha, just noticed fatty in the middle with the barrel pointed squarely at pinkie.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted
10 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

Um, Pete, it appears the Texas National Guard didn't get your fitness memo.

 

God damn those dudes are not chasing anyone down ever. We had some big boys in the Navy but I don't think they were even close to this

Posted
On 10/2/2025 at 9:30 PM, TwiceHorn said:

So, guys who've served.  Shaving in a combatish situation seems like a painful waste of time.  I think of seeing guys in winter conditions shaving with no doubt cold water out of a helmet, and it just makes my face hurt.

Is it anything like McRaven's make your bed everyday?  Because I think that's real.

And about half my GI Joes had beards, along with their life like hair.

 

Posted
15 hours ago, Sbbruin said:

Um, Pete, it appears the Texas National Guard didn't get your fitness memo.

 

Those folks were chosen to blend in with the natives:

nup_139905_0003.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
Posted
22 minutes ago, CooterBrown said:

If I've learned anything from the movies, it's how are we supposed to tell who is special forces if they aren't allowed to have a beard?

 

Watch better movies. Also, in the field shit is allowed to grow out. But there was a concept mainly in Afghanistan of "blending in" that never worked. 

I know a lot of SF dudes. Father, brother, #1 client were all group or more. All are clean shaven. 

Posted
1 hour ago, InkaUtexas said:

Watch better movies. Also, in the field shit is allowed to grow out. But there was a concept mainly in Afghanistan of "blending in" that never worked. 

I know a lot of SF dudes. Father, brother, #1 client were all group or more. All are clean shaven. 

Just like Steven Miller's scrotum.  I mean, head.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
Watch better movies. Also, in the field shit is allowed to grow out. But there was a concept mainly in Afghanistan of "blending in" that never worked. 
I know a lot of SF dudes. Father, brother, #1 client were all group or more. All are clean shaven. 

Blackhawk Down is about as good as it gets
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
On 10/8/2025 at 3:00 PM, Macanudo said:

Just like Steven Miller's scrotum.  I mean, head.  

I went my entire life without ever contemplating the phrase Steven Miller's scrotum. And you took that away from me. 

In other news, it seems like it took less than a year under these numbnuts for our military to start falling apart

https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/26/politics/navy-aircraft-crash-south-china-sea

Quote

A US Navy helicopter and a fighter jet both crashed in the same half hour on Sunday during separate routine operations over the South China Sea, with all crew members safely rescued, the Navy’s Pacific Fleet said.

The Navy has launched an investigation into the cause of both incidents that occurred over strategic waters seen as a potential flashpoint for global conflict.

The Navy said on social media that a MH-60R Seahawk helicopter went down around 2:45 p.m. local time “while conducting routine operations from the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz.” Search-and-rescue crews rescued three crew members, the Navy said.

About 30 minutes later, an F/A-18F Super Hornet fighter also crashed while conducting routine operations from Nimitz. Both crew members ejected and were safely recovered, the Navy said.

The F/A-18 is at least the fourth of the $60 million fighter jets the Navy has lost this year.

 

 

  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Blotto said:

The F/A-18 is at least the fourth of the $60 million fighter jets the Navy has lost this year.

That money would have bought a lot of drones. Oh well, who wants to prepare for the next war when the stuff from the last one is so cool. 

I loved these guys:

image.png.f73026d4a81ff8c6d994ca728815710a.png

They convey such power and tradition.

image.png.0c1d0f567fd5834f0cb5e4762d33b679.png

But, you gotta let go. 

Edited by RomaVicta
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
On 10/27/2025 at 8:49 AM, RomaVicta said:

That money would have bought a lot of drones. Oh well, who wants to prepare for the next war when the stuff from the last one is so cool. 

I loved these guys:

image.png.f73026d4a81ff8c6d994ca728815710a.png

They convey such power and tradition.

image.png.0c1d0f567fd5834f0cb5e4762d33b679.png

But, you gotta let go. 

What's kind of interesting is that the tradition of battleships lasted only about 50 years.

Even if you expand the classification to powered, iron/steel hulled warships, it's 75 years, 100 at the outside.

  • Like 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

What's kind of interesting is that the tradition of battleships lasted only about 50 years.

Even if you expand the classification to powered, iron/steel hulled warships, it's 75 years, 100 at the outside.

In the second picture they're in line ahead formation.

Just like these powerful battleships:

image.png.54e6657e350027e756eef73a30537733.png

I've read a lot of fiction and some nonfiction set in those days. 

Posted
52 minutes ago, kevwun said:

It was the successor to the ships of the line though, so the idea of them goes back a few hundred more years.

Accurate. The etymology begins with “ship of the battle line.” The idea of a bigger ship with bigger guns that can hit you from a long way away and sink you before you can hit and sink it has been around for a while.

I could make one of those alignment charts to argue that an aircraft carrier is spiritually a battleship. The airplanes are the “guns.”

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 minute ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Accurate. The etymology begins with “ship of the battle line.” The idea of a bigger ship with bigger guns that can hit you from a long way away and sink you before you can hit and sink it has been around for a while.

I could make one of those alignment charts to argue that an aircraft carrier is spiritually a battleship. The airplanes are the “guns.”

I'll differ with you a little on this one. The ships of the line threw a greater weight in metal by virtue of their array of relatively huge cannons. Line of battle fights were punching matches at close range. The carronade threw a huge ball with great force across short distances. It was developed towards the end of the sailing battleship's reign so reflects how the British and others viewed the way heavy fights would go. The British superiority in gunnery was based more on speed than accuracy.

image.png.451d029fc1a8296cbee43085075d8fbc.png

 

Frigates were designed to fight more like the way you describe. They were far too small with their 20-odd relatively little cannon to withstand a single broadside of 45 heavy guns.

As good as the Aubrey Maturin books are, I still love Hornblower. The stories and his character remain excellent to me. I almost think Aubrey and Maturin divide Hornblower's natures as a cold-blooded intellectual and first rate captain.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Accurate. The etymology begins with “ship of the battle line.” The idea of a bigger ship with bigger guns that can hit you from a long way away and sink you before you can hit and sink it has been around for a while.

I could make one of those alignment charts to argue that an aircraft carrier is spiritually a battleship. The airplanes are the “guns.”

If you're going to include sailing ships with broadside smoothbore/muzzle-loading cannon, then you have to include aircraft carriers.

Although it may have been aspirational, longer-range naval artillery didn't really exist until rifled breech-loaders, which also roughly coincided with steam power and iron hulls.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

I'll differ with you a little on this one. The ships of the line threw a greater weight in metal by virtue of their array of relatively huge cannons. Line of battle fights were punching matches at close range. The carronade threw a huge ball with great force across short distances. It was developed towards the end of the sailing battleship's reign so reflects how the British and others viewed the way heavy fights would go. The British superiority in gunnery was based more on speed than accuracy.

image.png.451d029fc1a8296cbee43085075d8fbc.png

 

Frigates were designed to fight more like the way you describe. They were far too small with their 20-odd relatively little cannon to withstand a single broadside of 45 heavy guns.

As good as the Aubrey Maturin books are, I still love Hornblower. The stories and his character remain excellent to me. I almost think Aubrey and Maturin divide Hornblower's natures as a cold-blooded intellectual and first rate captain.

That’s fair. For sure the “ship of the (battle) line” came with mass rather than distance and quality in firepower. 

Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

If you're going to include sailing ships with broadside smoothbore/muzzle-loading cannon, then you have to include aircraft carriers.

Although it may have been aspirational, longer-range naval artillery didn't really exist until rifled breech-loaders, which also roughly coincided with steam power and iron hulls.

 

Aircraft carriers: Largest surface combatants designed to destroy capital ships and bombard targets ashore. Spiritually a battleship without squinting too much. 

Posted
1 minute ago, 956 Worldwide said:

That’s fair. For sure the “ship of the (battle) line” came with mass rather than distance and quality in firepower. 

What's kind of amusing is that with steam and rifled cannon in turrets came the maneuverability and range to engage another ship or ships at range and somewhat independent of formation (battle lines no longer required).

And then we had maybe a dozen of those kind of naval battles over the next 30-40 years and then nada.

1 minute ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Aircraft carriers: Largest surface combatants designed to destroy capital ships and bombard targets ashore. Spiritually a battleship without squinting too much. 

Right, and much more a dreadnought battleship than a sail-powered ship of the line.



×
×
  • Create New...