jasory

The details in your own post undermine your conclusion. Ukraine has operated the Mi-8 family for decades, and is probably already familiar with low-level flight tactics over their own territory, which is a dissimilar flight environment to the US Southwest.

In reality this is more than likely pilot training for Southwest Asian operations. US still conducts some operations in the Middle East incase you weren't aware.

If you have Nautilus as the filemanager, you can write a Nautilus script that does this for you, you just then have to right click and select the script. You can run essentially any script this way, I use it for some preset file conversions.

First paragraph is entirely nonsense, second paragraph is more accurate.

EM/matter interaction is what you are concerned with. The type of interaction is dependent on the substance and the frequency of the EM field. It's perfectly possible to have extremely high amplitude radiation with no interaction, so the idea that you would get "cooked" regardless is complete nonsense.

But that's not socialism, is it?

Also you can try to argue that some methods of welfare distribution are inefficient, but you can't argue that the needs are being ignored.

So your response is to make an irrelevant and sophomoric monologue?

You acknowledge yourself that the ideal tactics don't actually work in Ukraine. And yet you never ask yourself why, and how you are supposed to mitigate the countermeasures.

Also, try not to accuse others of falling to a notion, when they give zero evidence for you to claim clairvoyance. Notice that I didn't accuse you of falling for the "meat wave" notion, even though you were almost certainly alluding to it.

But did Jesus proscribe government welfare programs? It seems to be that the basis for "Jesus was a socialist", is based on his teachings on charity. But this can be done by personal charity, and infact those are the examples he gave. Nowhere in the Bible does it say "you should vote for needs-based welfare programs".

The obvious response to this is "companions in guilt". It's a meta ethics argument that essentially points out that moral reasoning is no different than other types of reasoning. There is no need for "genetic memory", when like logic it's simply a consequence of how human minds are structured.

Why don't they have any APCs? What was causing them to lose them at such a high rate? Surely if they produce more of them, they won't lose them again to the exact same battlefield tactics.

You complain about propaganda, yet the way you seem to avoid repeating the "propaganda", is to regress to completely ignoring why APCs weren't protecting troops anyway.

The reality is that in Ukraine, the drone and artillery concentration is such that armored vehicles aren't effective. What is effective is having small agile units that can advance before the enemy can direct fire at them.

Automotive chips are probably engine and transmission components, nothing special used by autonomous vehicles.

Bad faith argumentation has nothing to do with honestly presenting your views. I can defend positions I don't actually hold just fine, an argument doesn't gain any special properties depending on who makes it. I could even claim that I held these beliefs and it would have no effect. Rather, bad faith argumentation has to do with how you engage with your opponents arguments, not your own. An example of bad faith would be if your opponent said that they liked Germany, and you then spun it into portraying them as a Nazi.

Later generations have more time to prepare for retirement, rather than simply axing the benefits of the people that have already retired.