The thing I like about the Starship Troopers movie is that Dina Meyer out hot-chicks Denise Richards. Roll that one around in your mind.
The thing I like about the Starship Troopers movie is that Dina Meyer out hot-chicks Denise Richards. Roll that one around in your mind.
They have spent many scenarios "rolling around together" in my mind over the years. Some of the first tits I ever saw on film was from that movie, each school holidays I'd travel interstate to see my Dad and he'd let me rent some videos for the week. Starship troopers was always one of them.
Since the movie/book has come up, the definitive comparison and answer to any modern questions about the movie/book is here:
The Politics of Starship Troopers - YouTube
It is 80 minutes long but well worth the watch.
There is a podcast called What's Going on With Shipping hosted by Sal Mercagliano, former merchant mariner and now a professor. He says based on helicopter footage that the ship did drop anchor on the port side and that the anchor was dragged. I highly recommend his podcast to anyone interested in commercial shipping. He also has much to say about the issues in the Red Sea and the Panama Canal.
Simplicius's take on the Moscow attacks:
This seems reasonable to me, although I won't rule out Jovan being correct about it all being fake and gay. That possibility should at the very least be considered for everything the media insists is true. In fact, the ludicrous amount of heat that Alex Jones has gotten over Sandy Hook is pretty compelling evidence that it was indeed complete fantasy.This is how modern hybrid warfare works. Each attack is different: there are some where Ukraine wants to have its footprint or responsibility publicly known as a direct message to Russia, as well as morale-boosting effort for its own audience. But there is another class of attack whose purpose is to destabilize Russia from the inside without acknowledging Ukraine’s fingerprints on the action.
In fact, to know Ukraine did it in this case would be to defeat the whole point: the entire purpose of this attack was to engineer the narrative that “Putin’s regime” is generating such global discontent that it’s bringing mass harm to its own people, with the aim being to mobilize discord within society against the Kremlin. Were people to know Ukraine was behind it, it would totally reverse the effect, making Ukraine the lightning rod for the devastating terror attack and galvanizing Russians even more against Ukraine.
In this case, it was absolutely paramount that Ukraine had to utilize the services of a third party—so they hired some patsies through an intermediary with a convenient ‘ISIS’ link. But the timing is too ludicrous to believe—it’s akin to the CIA’s ‘best hits’, like the farfetched gas attack Assad carried out just when he had broken the enemy’s back and was winning the war. It’s utterly unbelievable that just as Russia had dealt some unprecedented blows to Ukraine, including a massively crippling air attack, and just as MSM outlets were sputtering out reams of devastating headlines about Ukraine’s impending collapse, ISIS just happens to decide to make a totally uncharacteristic attack in Moscow? You have to be utterly infantile to believe that’s the case.
The most fascinating thing about the bridge to me is how everyone, regardless of any particular ideology, will be enraptured and make any number of conjectures, but no one will consider the objectively important near and long term implications that the loss of such a structure will invariably have on the many complex and interwoven systems we depend on.
There are some terribly interesting things in this story: Jon Stewart found to have overvalued his NYC home by 829%
What does the question "What is your house worth?" actually mean? Who gets to determine this?