Derek 2.0

I would tend to agree that the Ukrainian Government wouldn’t have much to gain, but with that said, there is no guarantee that a Putin-less Russia would be capable of invading the Ukraine.

That doesn't prove rebels shot down this aircraft.

That’s predicated on the Ukrainians attempting to kill Putin.

Is there any proof to indicate that?

That’s assuming the Russians did it……..of course there has also been this report: http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/russian-source-claims-putin-was-intended-target-in-plane-disaster/503725.html Various conflicting reports obviously, and I hardly trust Russian state-owned media, but if this was true, it would certainly change the narrative.

Exactly, both the Russians and Ukrainians operated the BUK system, and would have experienced personal in it’s operation, and it’s not unreasonable to assume (since both Russia and Ukraine have mandatory national service) that both groups of rebels have personal with former military service.

Ahh......no....There are several operational squadrons conducting conversion training currently……….And there are numerous video/print interviews with various pilots phrasing it’s attributes……..You suggest some forced silence, have you considered that the manufacturer and the various operators actually value the aircraft? No conventional warhead carried by any current cruise missile has the kinetic energy required to destroy deeply buried command and control bunkers………And yes, only ~40% of targets were hit be a handful of F-117s, but ~75% of targets actually destroyed during the conflict were done so by the F-117s with LGBs. If the F-35 was such a waste as you suggest, one would think partner nations would have actually left the program…….nobody is being forced to stay. The bulk of Soviet and Warsaw Pact Motor Rifle divisions, Class A, B and C were made up of T-55s, T-62s and T-64s…….T-72s and T-80s, during the early 80s, made up the bulk of the Soviet Shock armies, or only 1/5th of the Soviet tank strength……equivalent to the make-up of the Iraqi (and other Arab nations mechanized forces) regular army and Republican Guard, which was specifically tailored after the Soviet army…. No argument that the Abrams is a far better tank, but of course, that was the whole point of it’s development. It has no current peers to compare against……Of course once the Russians and Chinese deploy something in the 2020s, King of the skies will be a subjective title. You never specified the A6.………How many tanks has the Leo A6 engaged in actual combat? As to it’s “uber” gun, I’m sure we’ll actually see real world performance data once it’s deployed in the M1A3 later this year, fore we know the Americans will actually use their tanks..... How do engineers determine actual shock damage to the multitude of systems found within a modern tank, then address any design flaws found in real world service, to retro fit to existing fleets? It’s marginal in theory, fore we don’t actually know how a Leopard II outfitted for combat (not a laboratory) will react to hit from a 125mm shell………Of course this data was reflected in the M1A2.…… The Abrams has met and bested the very tanks that it was designed to counter………the Leopard II…..zilch. It was a rhetorical question…….you won’t, since the Leopard II has never served in such a campaign. Biased or naïve? The Americans and Egyptians have far more recent experience in actual armoured warfare then the Germans…..

Flying officers, not test pilots, of the USAF, USN, USMC, RN, RAF etc……. Wrong……During both air campaigns strategic points, critical to the early intial successes in wiping out the C&C of Saddam’s military, were attacked with a continual accuracy that couldn’t be accomplished with cruise missiles or legacy aircraft (with acceptable losses). They could leave anytime and develop their own aircraft or purchase legacy types….. What do you think it’s opposition would have fielded in the Fulda Gap? King of the skies by default.... Now you’re talking out of your ass……..The Abrams and Leopard II share the exact same gun. How do you determine the Leopard II has better protection? It’s never faced an adversary that had tanks……..As to logistics, all tanks require fleets of fuel trucks, that’s a common theme since armoured warfare was invented. How do you determine the Leopard II is just as effected? It’s never faced enemy tanks on a battlefield……. How many Leopard II tanks had their engines serviced (and replaced) during a mobility campaign? Or maybe, Egypt selected the Abrams because it had a proven service record in both desert and armoured warfare……..something the Challenger II and Leopard II didn’t have, and with the Leo, still doesn’t have.

I see…….so if the NRA are “nuts” and “dumb”, what does that make those stymied in their efforts by the NRA?

Who is to admit responsibility? As far as I know, the Russians, the Ukrainians and the Ukrainian separatists have all denied responsibility…….and the crash scene, aside from being within a war zone, has long since be contaminated.

What would be your proposed resolution, and what are the boundaries of which you would push to see said endgame come to fruition?

You term them misguided, so I assume you now feel the gun control advocates are misguided in their proposals? Well no, that’s incorrect……many of the proponents of gun control desire to ban various forms of firearms in their entirety. The NRA was in favour of background checks in the 1990s that included all mental health, criminal and arrest records……Privacy laws, aided by advocates, were able to preclude said records from any proposed workable background check system……..Background checks that don’t include such records are clearly useless, as such, the NRA doesn’t support plausible background check models. The 2nd Amendment, like the other parts of the American Constitution, are cherished by a majority, and are protected from those that wish to crap upon these rights by people with guns……… To paraphrase Mao: American political power grows out of the barrel of a gun……….

What, in your misguided view, makes the President of the NRA dumb? I'll ask again, if the NRA is “dumb” and “nuts”, what would you consider their opponents that continually loose to them?

Actually you’re wrong on both counts as evident by actual actions by both camps.

Exactly…the real question at hand, when will the gun grabbers realize that, and actually try to effect change in areas that are both in the realm of the possible, well also making a difference…….Instead of wasting the planned 50 million on a futile effort against the NRA, can you imagine if Bloomberg spent that money on mental health treatment/research and inner city programs aimed at dissuading gang violence?

I think that would ultimately depend upon the circumstances……..With that said , history has shown, a small, armed, motivated group can cause mass disruption internally against an established and entrenched State power.

I think the possibility of exploding of heads would be predicated upon the final rulings....

No difference in the root inherent technology, but differences or as you term, customizations, for individual users.

Overall yes, but several members (including Canada) could have minor specific technical differences (“Plumbed” to accept hose and drogue refuelling, the strengthened naval tail hook and larger drogue chute)……And of course, all members aircraft, sans the Americans, British and Israelis, no provisions (equipped) to allow the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons.

In some regards……..Their concern of a naturally decreasing problem could be debated as folly, but many of their proposed solutions have little to no political chance of ever happening, and if they did, would have little to no effect on said decreasing problem.

The flight characteristics and advanced technology when contrasted with legacy types….

But on the inverse, 3% of American colonists managed to toss the Crown…….

The various current users of the aircraft.

When did the National Rifle Association change the United States Constitution? Calling them nuts is certainly subjective, but one can’t argue with their successful approach to gun rights……..What would you term the gun control lobbies that continually fail in their objectives? You know what they say about doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting differing results…… Gun homicides within the United States have been decreasing for decades.

The NRA hasn’t changed the United States Constitution…….But the United States Supreme Court ruled numerous times upholding the right to keep and bear arms.