While deserving, this would require violating our own laws.

We cannot cut down all the trees to find the devil Mr. roper.

No generation has retired on 401Ks to prove it works generationally.

(It won’t)

The passive income to companies that manage 401k plans is the reason it will not change.

Fidelity investments had 3.5 TRILLION in assets under management when I was there years ago.

They take in money passively doing nothing but automatically redistribute it year over year for a target date fund.

It’s a scam to the tune of billions a year and we do Notta.

Oh the ones from BPS space are even more impressive with adjust on the fly tracking to 3D points and launched from a VLS he made himself.

Safely? Yes.

Keep the reaction stirring under ice and if you see the temp rise above 15 C you dump the whole thing in a water bucket or you get a runaway exothermic reaction that is never good with a high explosive forming crystals in the solution.

If you are stupid, don’t ventilate, or are stupid stupid it will light your shed on fire and potentially kill you.

That’s why you work at lab scale, and why you always keep your reactions under the temp limits with acids added slowly.

Basic chemistry safety covers all the bases here.

My preferred blasting caps are nickel guanidine based. I can play with the crystal morphology to produce small more friction inert powder and it is an extremely simple synthesis.

You can use reloading press combined with highly suggested lexan sheet as a blast shield and wooden block to gently press the powder into caps. China sells packs of 1000 electrical ignition assemblies for $40 that you can then set off with a COTS or a clacker.

I cannot emphasize enough that working at small scale and knowing what you are doing are important, but in faster time than it takes to print the parts for that drone you can absolutely complete the reaction, do some recrystalizstion, dry your product,and be ready to mix with plasticizer.

I synthesize energetics. I can make a primary explosive that is stable enough for cap usage with a solo cup. I can synthesize secondaries like RDX above (one of the more complicated common ones) in short order with a basic chemistry set and the internet to order basic reagents. None are controlled substances.

It is trivially easy to make effective shapes charges and energetics at home.

Synthesis is federally legal in the US so long as you do not assemble into a device or transport. You can do both with an SOT as an FFL.

If I wanted to, I could make a shaped charge that was point imitated and base detonated for the above projectile and it would punch through about 1.5 feet of homogeneously rolled steel.

The limit to threat is not the access to explosives, as the chemistry and processes are published freely online as easy to replicate. The drone parts and control surface actuation is by far harder and I say this as someone who has a professional background in computer science and software engineering.

It is not that I don’t want her in the White House. It’s that I know in the current electoral college, she is unelectable.

Principles, morals, and virtue are great. You have to fucking win to govern.

Jeff Jackson is a much better choice IMO as about the furthest left young actually electable official you can tap in 3 years.

8 people now have more than 53% of the world combined.

As I have stated in other comments:

“To be very clear, we never should have been there fighting in cities in an unjust war or inversion…”I will repeat it over and over again.

I joined the military before it was known where I would go. I joined before we knew about WMDs or the lack thereof. I joined to give to something bigger than myself, and serve my nation. It was an idealistic view of civil service, and I was deployed to a theater I did not want to be in. The military doesn’t choose where we go. Elected officials do. Enlistments are 4-6 years in length. I watched the towers crumble in high school and signed the recruitment documents.

While deployed I rebuilt infrastructure, brought cooking oil to families, created wells for water, rebuilt community, and in 10 months we went from casualties every single day to press being able to walk the streets openly daily without issue. We treated their people with dignity and respect. We ensured women were present to search other women at traffic security points. We took our boots off in reverence when entering homes to speak to leaders. We learned Arabic to ensure communication in stressful situations could be maintained.

I stood on top of IEDs as part of my job, and placed my whole body over a family in a living room of their home when an insurgent was firing into their living room. He was shooting at us because I had rendered safe two blast grenades he stages by the road side to kill people that I was still holding.

So no, I do not want nor justify any use of military force beyond defense of our own sovereignty. Once deployed, enlisted personal are under oath to follow all orders deemed legal by the UCMJ. Which include, killing people who shoot at you, in urban areas, near civilian populations.

A CWO5 ordered me to shoot a child while deployed. He was running towards our vehicle with a bulky vest under his shirt. 2 weeks before that the parents of a child rigged a suicide best to him and detonated it to kill marines. I shouted in his language and mine. I tried desperately to think of something as this kid was not stopping and the crew served weapon on top was rotating to mow him down. I ran at the kid and hugged him, picked him up, and figured if I was wrong it would just be me as I carried him away. Kid had had a back brace for spinal deformity. I would rather be wrong, and die, than be wrong and kill an innocent person.

War is a horrible practice. It should never be entered lightly, as no conflict will avoid harming innocent people fully. They are the monument to all our country’s sins, but in the case of Platner he did his job and did it with more than enough due diligence to say with certainty it was not a war crime.

I don’t know how so many keep missing the point here.

Routinely, one weapon system is not authorized for use, when another of lesser explosive yield is authorized for use.

They did not, due to concerns for collateral damage, want to use the higher powered indirect fire option (mortars). So the marines created a way to calculate trajectory for use of a lower powered option (40mm grenades).

Every single conflict in the last 100 years occurred with noncombatants in the theater of conflict. None, I repeat none, hold themselves to the standard of never using a munition is it could harm a civilian at all. We try like hell to avoid it, and you do due diligence to target attackers embedded in civilian infrastructure as precisely as possible.

In the very same deployment, in the very same AO, the same command team did change authorization later for the larger indirect fire munition (mortars). There was no evacuation of civilians. Decisions on what weapon to employ are made based on ground conditions at the time.

Tell me this; what is the standard of when you can use a munition? 90% confidence no civilian casualties? 99%? 99.99999%? If it is 100% no military force could ever fire a shot, so why does this use of force in a calculated way to avoid civilian collateral damage not make the cut but other instances do?

Alright, so again, I didn’t just randomly google these topics. I was in Iraq at the same time. I was a marine. I am deeply intimately familiar with the system in question. I currently synthesize high explosives. I have participated in ballistics research and high explosives effects research in Aberdeen proving grounds.

I was there, and used the weapon system in question.

That out of the way, here is some nuance.

Marines taking indirect fire were authorized at the time to use indirect fire weapons to suppress that indirect fire. By definition, indirect fire lands on a target you cannot observe. When an infantry rifle squad employs indirect fire from say, a M203, it is because you cannot hit the target with direct fire of a rifle or cannon.

A mk19 is simply a larger version, but the rounds almost universally issued as HEDP. The majority of their utility is in being light armor penetrating because they are constructed with an inverted cone that is base detonated. It sends the majority of its energy into the direct front of the impact in a focused plasma from the explosive detonation in the projectile. It is surprisingly ineffective as an area fragmentation weapon, even when labeled as dual purpose. I watched them get fired at attacking insurgents where the grenades detonated right next to them along a wall and do no damage to anything but the small hole in the wall of that explosive jet. On multiple occasions.

As for employment, we used indirect fire, regularly, in theater against incoming indirect fire. This was done in often, urban environments and cities. Most of all the fighting in the country after the initial invasion weeks occurred inside those cities, because no real point in fighting in open desert for nothing.

So to be very clear, mk19s were employed OFTEN in operations in urban areas, against indirect fires, as indirect fire suppression.

Further still, it is the literal smallest indirect fire weapon option to exist in the arsenal, so you could not be more judicious to respond to incoming fire than the use of a 40mm grenade.

I personally watched firefights where we used them to similar effect though not anywhere near as much advanced planning was used as he described in that Reddit post. Using the marine corps published calculations for trajectories, mapping out impact areas in advance to ensure accuracy to the limits you can within a remote FOB, is the work mortar men do to ensure accurate fire returned.

So if every single incident of returning indirect fire is a war crime, then there are a hell of a lot more war criminals in the military that need prosecution.

To be very clear, we never should have been there fighting in cities in unjust war or inversion, but it is incredibly clever ingenuity that chose the minimal explicit yield possible, with lots of effort specifically to avoid collateral damage when used. The pre-sighting described and calculating trajectories is not the work you spend weeks on if you intend to harm the wrong person.

You can believe no indirect fire weapons should ever be used in cities, and that is a fine enough opinion. You would be saying that in he face of everyday single conflict in the history of warfare in the last 100 years though and all people involved in indirect fire in places not entirely around military occupants as war criminals. Done enough opinion, but that is a vastly different interpretation that what is currently followed as a war crime in ANY modern conflict.

I have addressed this before.

Nothing about that post is a war crime.

At that time, the BC did not want to authorize mortars for returned fire when getting hit with indirect fire, that was detected by acoustic sensing to translate the source firing positions.

So the marines created an even less explosive yield return fire solution that he is talking about. A 40mm HEDP grenade has a smaller blast radius substantially than a mortar. They are authorized to use indirect fire weapons when attacked. They spent a lot of time and effort to calculate exact trajectories and angles needed to return fire to the calculated coordinates.

In sum, he created a less harmful indirect fire solution with a lot of due diligence to make it accurate to the threat.

It not a war crime.

It’s been a crunch my Republican talking point for a while.

Some counties have voted to remove it based on inconclusive data from some studies on fluoride exposure.

Problematically the results to childhood issues require doses far in excess of the FDA minimum. More problematic is the example we have of a similar country with similar demographics removing it, and seeing a massive uptick in oral cavities. So we know what happens as a massive test already unintentionally from Canada.

The will do nothing but cause harm to long term oral health.

What does that have to do with the comment I was responding to then?

Ok, but we already gave him the money 5 years ago.

So, what changes by selling it?

I bought one when no other option for an EV really existed for reasonable range batteries.

I have never owned a luxury car. My other car is a Honda accord from 2016.

I would be happy to have any other car brand, but the cost to replace the car with a different EV of similar range would cost us $30k. Is it really that important to harm yourself financially to signal to others your preferences for a person?

They wrote. It down.

It may prove to not end in consequences, but they took notes on a criminal conspiracy before the outcome and it’s part of evidence submitted in federal court.

Nothing burger is not nothing.

If your portfolio was a Fidelity target date fund, it would not be impacted by the local industry you mention in your post.

I also happen to know more about the details of how our retirement fund recommendations to clients works at Fidelity… because I worked there for the last 5 years.

You are showing the results of poor selection on your part.

As much as this is the dream, she is not electable in American politics for president.

They very much did.

The numbers I gave are the model outputs for the state as of yesterday off his subscriber based model talk page.

So no.

Of course these are the likelihood of a win and not polling differences. That’s why I said model output, not a poll aggregate.

An 8 point spread in a state for polling averages is incredibly large. For reference Ohio is as deeply spread red in polling averages as Nee Jersey is blue. You think New Jersey votes red this year in any reasonable reality? No.

For an even more crazy but accurate comparison: Alaska has the same mid point statistical odds of going red as Ohio, but its error bars are more than double Ohio. Meaning? There is an incredibly slim but massively more possible chance Alaska goes blue than Ohio.