The Political Discussion Thread

[Annoyed]

As far as Syria goes, I think Trump handled it just right.
A carefully targeted and limited response, not meant to say anything more than "Stop That!

He hit them with armament from 2 destroyers. He could have just as easily used a carrier strike group.

[SGalisa]

I haven't been here in a while..but I suppose I *should* drop by now and then..

No, you really don't have to............

Well, I can see you (GF) missed me (NOT) much..

For the record, and not that this matters here, been spending my spare time admiring kitty cat pics & videos of Maine Coons and British Longhair cats. Refreshing thru the newbies some memories of our former 4-legged, longhaired-furry kitties -- thru a few absolutely gorgeous (approx. foot high) substitutes that even Falcon Horus might like..
That's also known as *restorative therapy* for an otherwise bumpy week/month.

As I mentioned in my recent Hot Topics post, there's been some chronically serious things happening on the homefront. Still not energetic enough to bother reading much of the world news yet. Got other things to tend to. Might take a few months to bounce back..or never.

Answer-- The chicken came with the eggshell. The eggshell is part of its protective birthing process. Chicken DNA came BEFORE the egg was formed to begin with, otherwise, there would be NO chicken NOR any egg or membrane that protects the chicken critter from the eggshell itself.

. . .Every chemist who has done the egg in vinegar experiment knows that the eggshell disappears into liquid calcium (and whatever else it is made of). What's left is the genetic DNA making up the chicken embryo. Eggshells don't suddenly produce chickens or reptiles or fish. The genetic code for the creature HAS to be there in order for the creature to mature into its pre-birth state.

No, really, the answer is the egg.

Somewhere a chicken ancestor (Gallus Gallus) laid an egg from which a Gallus Gallus Domesticus emerged.

So, the egg was first.

I'm not sure if I'm reading your comment incorrectly or what. If you're referring to the entire egg with complete and intact DNA, then strangely, we *are* talking about the same thing, but from a different approach ("the egg" = the entire creature's genetic DNA minus the sperm portion to fertilize it).

However, if you mean the "eggshell" itself (outer portion only) came before the innards of the chicken (the gooey creature's genetic materials/stuff already residing within the protective eggshell), then what you wrote is wrong; because nature doesn't squeeze some specific DNA into just any eggshell starting from the outside to the inside -- and then out hatches a chicken, fish, dinosaur, or reptile. The genetic coding HAS to be inside the eggshell with protein & yoke, in order for the creature to become the creature it hatches into (sperm + entire egg contents in that sense). Robin eggs hatch robins (and are also often blue with speckles), chicken eggs hatch chickens, turtle eggs hatch turtles, fish eggs hatch fish, etc.

[SoulReaver]

As far as Syria goes, I think Trump handled it just right.

so when Hillary provokes the ruskies verbally = dangerous warmonger
but when the LSOS provokes the ruskies with an airstrike = competent peacekeeper?

[Gatefan1976]

As far as Syria goes, I think Trump handled it just right.
A carefully targeted and limited response, not meant to say anything more than "Stop That!

He hit them with armament from 2 destroyers. He could have just as easily used a carrier strike group.

so when Hillary provokes the ruskies verbally = dangerous warmonger
but when the LSOS provokes the ruskies with an airstrike = competent peacekeeper?

Hillary said it was the right thing to do as well.

[Annoyed]

From what I've read, we notified Russia of the strike beforehand, and our weapons were deliberately targeted to avoid Russian barracks. We were deliberately telling them that they weren't the target.

PS: It still amazes me that they can target missiles that accurately over that distance.

[SoulReaver]

From what I've read, we notified Russia of the strike beforehand, and our weapons were deliberately targeted to avoid Russian barracks

to attack Assad is to attack Putin
(also did you miss the part where the Kremlin was pissed at this?)

Hillary said it was the right thing to do as well.

she wasn't the one the neocons marketed as the Peacebringer

[Gatefan1976]

I know SR, just pointing it out, reason should be obvious.

[Annoyed]

to attack Assad is to attack Putin
(also did you miss the part where the Kremlin was pissed at this?)

Here's a free hint about life. If your enemy is pissed at something you did, you did the right thing.

But Putin can't DO anything about it. As is proper, the international community considers this a justified strike. He can hold his breath until he turns blue in the face, but his hands are tied, Unless he wants to fight the whole world, or most of it anyway.

[SoulReaver]

Here's a free hint about life. If your enemy is pissed at something you did, you did the right thing.

bingo...you took the bait sooner than I expected
here's another hint: when you take a strong stance, stand by it lest you lose all credibility
especially if it's a controversial stance

the man all neocons were up until yesterday hailing as a model leader and a staunch friend of the US, you now refer to as "your enemy"

might wanna make up your mind...comrade


btw that'll be $10 for the hint (you are a capitalist & nothing's free in life)

But Putin can't DO anything about it

previous hint [cont'd]: is that the same Putin you spoke of when you accused Hilary of dragging the US into a war that would seriously threaten you?

again make up your mind, pronto

[Annoyed]

bingo...you took the bait sooner than I expected
here's another hint: when you take a strong stance, stand by it lest you lose all credibility
especially if it's a controversial stance

the man all neocons were up until yesterday hailing as a model leader and a staunch friend of the US, you now refer to as "your enemy"

might wanna make up your mind...comrade


btw that'll be $10 for the hint (you are a capitalist & nothing's free in life)


previous hint [cont'd]: is that the same Putin you spoke of when you accused Hilary of dragging the US into a war that would seriously threaten you?

again make up your mind, pronto

Why don't you take a few hours and dig through my posts to see where I've said anything about Putin being a friend to the US, or that I thought Hillary would get us in a war.
Here's a hint: you won't find anything, because I've never said either of those things. ($20 bucks please, inflation ya know.)

Despite all the BS regarding the Russian and the last election, I don't believe for a second they actually were able to hack into the system and alter the vote count. Social engineering to try to turn public opinion, sure, but that's fair ball, we've been known to do it ourselves.
And as far as Hillary goes, I opposed her for so many reasons that I didn't need to concern myself about what she might do in office. There was no way I would ever support her.

[SoulReaver]

$20 bucks please, inflation ya know.

blame your president for that one :|

alrite but most of those who voted for him are also Putinist converts who decried Hillary as an anti-rusky harbinger of war while hailing the LSOS as a lightbringer of stability & peace

Despite all the BS regarding the Russian and the last election, I don't believe for a second they actually were able to hack into the system and alter the vote count

if China could hack into US military servers why can't Russia pull off something similar?

[garhkal]

PS: It still amazes me that they can target missiles that accurately over that distance.

True, but at what cost.. Checking, a single Tomahawk costs almost 570K a piece..

A flight of F117's could have done the same dropping "Smart bombs" imo at 1/5th the cost..

[Gatefan1976]

True, but at what cost.. Checking, a single Tomahawk costs almost 570K a piece..

A flight of F117's could have done the same dropping "Smart bombs" imo at 1/5th the cost..

I don't think trump could afford to loose anyone on this operation, not after the last incident. This was pretty much a clean op.

[Womble]

True, but at what cost.. Checking, a single Tomahawk costs almost 570K a piece..

A flight of F117's could have done the same dropping "Smart bombs" imo at 1/5th the cost..

Smart bombs cost $40 000 apiece. An hour of warplane flight = $10 000. 1/10th of the cost... assuming no warplanes get shot down, that is. Losing a single warplane turns that upside down.

I think the Tomahawks were chosen because of the Russian air defenses being present.

[Annoyed]

True, but at what cost.. Checking, a single Tomahawk costs almost 570K a piece..

A flight of F117's could have done the same dropping "Smart bombs" imo at 1/5th the cost..

But a strike with Tomahawks does not risk the lives of any U.S. pilots or other military personnel. Granted, I suspect it would have been a low-risk mission, but not zero risk. I would rather spend money on expensive military hardware than spend servicemen's lives.