Dat Missiles

[tp4tissue]

Sooooo.. India just lost 3 Rafale (French Gen 4,4.5) , a Su-30MKI (Rus gen 4.5), and a MiG-29 (Rus gen 4),  against Pakistan which years ago bought a few Chinese J-10 and the complementary PL-15 long range missiles 150km mach5, which can match+exceed current US mass produced Amrram 160km mach4, especially the PL-15 domestic version 200-300km.

In this case, it's wasn't about the plane, the Indian side missiles were far inferior, and they were just outranged, no dogfight, never saw anything.

Now, They're using this "news" to push for more of our american Tax $ to develop m0ar far shooty bits, /Raytheon.  They've got missiles that can match PL15, it's just not in mass production, these pipelines are enormously expensive. And you know how ****ty+expensive us-labor is.

Because weapons make us safe,  not diplomacy,  more guns make you safe, even if it plunges us into crippling debt, hungry children, disenfranchises generations of the poor. The money pit cancer that is the deep-state military industrial complex.

Don't get me wrong, Every country has such a money pit.

I mean, India, they have slums right next to their luxury Ferrari shops. Just like our own NYC.



At the end of every "War", people learn, Painfully,  Yea war kind suck, we should never do that again.

50 years later,  Hey, Let's do that again... !!   The OLD people who experienced war, have gone senile, and the YOUNG people don't know anything about anything, coddled, ignorant, arrogant, blind.

[fohat.digs]

Some years ago, but pre-Trump, I read a wonderful book that looked at "violence" (in a wide variety of forms) since the beginning of civilization (it was quite a large book). He studied motivations of land, money, power, population (these are always intertwined of course) etc.

His thesis was that violence had followed a generally downward trajectory (at the very long time-scale of history) with the last great spasm of violence having been World War 2. He argued that after that most of the people in the world have realized that peace and cooperation was preferable in almost every way and that violence in general, and war in particular, was counter-productive and simply "bad for business" all around.

When I read it I was filled with hope and optimism for the future. And then came the 2016 election and its toxic results.

Steven Pinker spoke too soon in  https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13543093-the-better-angels-of-our-nature

[tp4tissue]

It costs us approximately 20x in $amount to blow something up using our arsenal.

So, if we wanted to continue military parity, we'd have to spend 20x more than the Chinese/Russian.

Now, On the surface, China's above board is 200billion, under the table, 600billion. Using their cost functions, production capacity, labor, logistics, highly educated general population, which far exceeds the US, a 20x multiplier, 12 Trillion.

We're only spending 1/10th of that, and it's already CRIPPLING our economy, IRAQ/AFGHANISTAN alone put us into a recession, and we were fighting a Primitive-military that was mostly AK47s.

The truth is, we don't have the man-power, the capital (machines), OR the money.


We've already bankrupted ourselves like the soviets.


Just observe BRITAIN. They had all the most advanced technology, all the machines, plenty of slave labor. WHERE ARE THEY NOW, they're a vestigial organ of the former empire.   Military-EMPIRES bankrupt themselves, as its population (net labor) is Wasted on ever more elaborate contraptions that DO NOTHING to keep them safe.

ALL former empires, (societies based on violence) same pathway.



No one is even scared of the US anymore. They take one look at Ukraine, despite our total investment (prestige) in the matter, Pu7in won.

It's a major global embarrassment. 

We had Middle eastern warlords canceling meetings last minute with the US presidents (Biden), they don't f'n care. America's president snubbed.


Explain how m0ar guns is going to solve anything.