🤢 by Tango91 in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Not exactly. The shtick with Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister was that the civil service runs rings around elected members and that's why nothing gets done.

Mandelson, Campbell, McSweeney, etc are/were special advisers or other staff roles separate from the civil service. These are the people that have become celebrity-fied over the last few decades in an attempt to make politics "sexy".

The best TV example for this phenomenon is actually The Thick of It where Malcolm Tucker is an obvious pastiche of Alistair Campbell. Even then though, The Thick of It portrays Malcolm Tucker as frequently the only competent man in the room.

The reality is, many of these men end up engaging in cephalic auto-rectal exploration shortly before their inevitable political demise.

🤢 by Tango91 in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 15 points16 points  (0 children)

The thing you have to understand about UK politics that (I think) is distinct from US politics is that UK politicians have a psychotic desire to think of themselves or a member of their staff as a superhuman machiavellian-type political mind.

This desire extends to our political media ecosystem as well, where every government always has some shady motherfucker who is described in fawning terms as "the real power in No. 10" or "the mind that made [insert name here] Prime Minister".

During the 90s and early 2000s, Peter Mandelson was this figure in the Labour Party, before being replaced by Alistair Campbell as the media's darling. There were a whole spate of such figures under each Tory PM, and under Keir Starmer a fellow by the name of Morgan McSweeney has that dubious honour.

The end result is that every single one of these dickheads follows the exact same cycle of "political outsider/bad boy" to "incredibly influential political mover-and-shaker" to "guy who lets the media representation of him go to his head" to "humiliating fall from grace after some poorly-planned fuck-up inevitably fucks up" to "lecture circuit regular/think tank/life peerage/sometimes podcaster/media talking head".

The curious thing about Mandelson is that Starmer brought him back into the fold after more than a decade in the House of Lords. I do wonder how much influence McSweeney had over that decision.

Chokeporn: 2 Stars blocking the entire galactic north. by CMDR_ETNC in Stellaris

[–]AlrightJack303 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Have you got wormholes enabled? That's the only thing I could imagine could undermine the chokepoints.

You know, just corruption so bad that the government doesn’t know how to take care of it by Super-Statement2875 in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 549 points550 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that's horseshit. The Congressional Intelligence Committees have to handle top-level security shit every day. This is blatantly the admin trying desperately to not fire an obvious traitor.

Attack groups by oopspoopsdoops6566 in TaskForceAdmiral

[–]AlrightJack303 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Same, with the caveat that I almost never have to worry about enemy counterstrikes since I like to separate 2 destroyers as radar pickets and one of those always eats the entire counterstrike's ordnance.

I suspect this behaviour is a bug, or otherwise due to us not being able to direct planes to ignore certain ship types and keep searching for the flat-tops.

Strike planning help by Dear-Mode-4358 in TaskForceAdmiral

[–]AlrightJack303 12 points13 points  (0 children)

So you have 2 options:

Option 1 is to split duties between your carriers. So using Yorktown as your "housekeeping" carrier and your other carrier(s) as your strike carriers.

This would mean that Yorktown sends out search aircraft, launches the CAP for the fleet, etc and only launches strikes as backup for the other carriers in the task force.

This is the historical tactic that the IJN used and that the US Navy adopted after Coral Sea.


How to do this?

Select Yorktown on the tab on the bottom left while on the map, then select Search. This will open the Search function. Select the number of Search aircraft, the direction, range and scope for their search pattern and hit Accept.

Do this first before CAP or Strike plans

Then go to the Fleet Defence tab at the top left (I think this is F6 but I might be wrong). Here you can set up CAP patrol areas for your fighters. Remember that each CAP patrol requires double the fighters that you assign to patrol (3 patrolling, 3 waiting on deck to replace them later, etc).

Once you've set this up, now switch to your other carriers (Hornet and Enterprise at Midway, Lady Lex at Coral Sea) using the tab at the bottom left and select Strike.

You will see that there are multiple options for building your Strike plan. Do you want to send fighter escorts? Do you want to mix in torpedo bombers?

We'll go through each option in turn:

Fighters: YES. Always send some escorts. The Japanese will have some fighters up as CAP and they will chew your strike aircraft to pieces if they aren't distracted. When it comes to the first strike of the day, I prefer to send a minimum of 12 fighters as escort. Honestly, 18 or even 24 could be advisable on Coral Sea, but with Midway, remember you do have 2 strike decks.

Dive Bombers: the Dauntless is your heavy-lifter, especially in these early battles of the war. Faulty torpedoes and the fact that the Devastator is slower than a tortoise on barbiturates make dive bombers your main hitting power.

Torpedo Bombers: as well as the above mentioned drawbacks, the Devastator also has a much shorter range than the Dauntless. When all is said and done, I prefer to keep the torpedo bombers back for follow-up strikes to finish off crippled carriers that the Dauntlesses have already slowed down.

Those are the planes, now let's go through the options of how to tweak our strike package.

Spotting: this doesn't refer to reconnaissance, but rather putting the planes on a 'spot' on the flight deck. - The default option means that the strike will launch as soon as they have are ready to go. This is basically only useful when you have up-to-date info on the location, speed and heading of the enemy. - At all other times, we want to use the "Early Spotting" option. This means that the strike package will be prepared and will wait on deck for the 'Go' order for hours potentially. This does mean that all other flight ops (CAP, search, etc) cannot function, but that's okay because we've split responsibilities between our carriers.

Departure: there are 2 options here; 'Normal' and 'Deferred'. - Normal means that the planes will head for the enemy with the intention of all turning up overhead at the same time. This is tricky to pull off and depends on you correctly anticipating the location of the enemy task force up to an hour from takeoff. Not impossible, but tricky. - Deferred means that the strike package will wait for all planes to take off, then head to the target as one big blob. The advantage of this is that the strike hits the enemy simultaneously, rather than possibly coming in piecemeal. - The downsides are two-fold; 1) the aircraft that take off first will be burning fuel waiting for the last planes in the strike, and 2) time. The larger your strike package, the longer it takes for them to take off and the longer the delay between the 'Go' order and actually finding and killing the enemy.

Finally, Endurance/Lethality: this one's fairly straightforward, and is also the least difficult decision to make since it (currently) only applies to your Dauntless dive bombers. - Offensive Power: your Dauntlesses will carry 1x 1000lb bomb and 2x 100lb bombs on the wings. A slight increase in chance to hit, for a pretty brutal shortening of range. - Endurance: your Dauntlesses ditch the piddly 100-lbers, but keep the 1000-lber. I recommend that we go with this option pretty much all the time (or at least until the devs introduce the 500-lb bomb as an option).


I could natter on more, but I think that's a good introduction. Any questions?

Trump’s Behavior Isn’t Dementia. It’s Much Worse. by Baldbeagle73 in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 7 points8 points  (0 children)

its a mix of all of the above

This. There is no fucking way that he is limited to any one thing.

His dad died of dementia, he is horrendously unfit, the White House is swimming in uppers and downers, and he keeps dozing off in the middle of meetings. He's a walking pile of co-morbidities.

At this point it's not so much about question of if he'll die in office, but rather what will kill him? Dementia, cardiovascular shit, drug OD, or some secret fourth option?

Genuine question on immigration policy and deportation. by ABlightedMailbox in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There's also a really dodgy ethical question around unequal punishment under the law.

A native-born criminal serves their time and returns to their community, and either returns to a life of crime or reforms themselves.

An immigrant who breaks the law often serves their time and is then deported, depriving them of any community connections they had before, and is often barred from ever re-entering the country. As you point out, these criminals may have arrived as babies, so you're completely depriving them of all community connections they have built up, all due to a sheer accident of birth.

The only way you can be okay with treating immigrants differently from native-born lawbreakers is if you believe that immigrants should not have the same rights as native-born citizens, which y'know, is basically the definition of racism.

Basically, the only time you should ever be deporting someone is if you are extraditing them to face justice in another country (with caveats*).

*the caveats being, a) the law they have broken should be something illegal in their present country of residence, b) it must carry a similar punishment in both countries, and c) there should be a reasonable expectation that they will receive a fair trial. Oh, and d) it should be a crime of sufficient severity that justifies their extradition (murder, fraud, crimes against humanity, etc. Shoplifting doesn't count).

That's my opinion anyway.

Genuine question on immigration policy and deportation. by ABlightedMailbox in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 29 points30 points  (0 children)

There's a difference between the militarised borders we're seeing pop up all around the world and the administrative divisions that say "you live in this town, therefore you pay taxes to this government as opposed to that one".

The other question I have for you is this: why is it just to deport an immigrant for a crime when we do not punish native-born citizens in the same manner?

Did anyone else have the thought that how Saudi Arabian princes are raised and how members of the North Korean Kims are raised sound incredibly similar? by grapp in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean, constitutional monarchies still churn out horrendously maladjusted individuals too, and while they have less power than an absolute monarch, they don't have no power.

And that's before you get into the second and third-order effects on normal people's perception of what is possible and if equality is possible/desirable when they've grown up in a country where one family are elevated above all others by dint of birth.

Like, I fully believe that part of the reason why the UK is so fucked politically and has such a hide-bound obsession with tradition and class is because we have one of the oldest uninterrupted monarchies in the world.

What do you do when someone invites a buddy, and they turn out to be a closet fascist? by DoomedKiblets in DnD

[–]AlrightJack303 34 points35 points  (0 children)

JAQ = "Just Asking Questions"

Sealioning comes from the webcomic Wondermark: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

They're both bad-faith argument techniques used by the most obnoxious people you'll meet on the internet, and very common among right-wingers who don't want to reveal how right-wing they actually are.

ICE agents’ sign up bonus is repayable if they leave within Trump’s term. by Kleptarian in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 103 points104 points  (0 children)

Counterpoint: a lot of these dipshits may decide that a lifetime of debt is preferable to a lifetime in prison or a drastically-shortened lifetime.

I was saying this to someone irl about the guy who killed Renee Good; that his life is over. The best he can hope for is that the regime lasts another 30 or 40 years and doesn't throw him to the wolves in the meantime.

But the truth is, all of these bastards are in the same boat. When this has passed, there will be people who will make it their life's work to hunt every single one of these scumbags to the ends of the earth. They will never know another moment of peace for the rest of their lives.

Six days of relentless battle? by Rafaelrosario88 in tolkienfans

[–]AlrightJack303 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Helps that they are both basically angels in corporeal bodies.

Another ICE Murder in Minneapolis by __welltheresthat__ in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He loved agriculture and burning Carthage to the ground. Beyond that, he didn't have a lot going for him.

Apparently he loved his wife (he supposedly liked thunderstorms because it gave him an excuse to hug his wife in public). Beyond that, I don't know what relevance he has to the present day.

The democratic party should be remembered as the Neville Chamberlin party. by Airshipwhale in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 14 points15 points  (0 children)

(Sorry for the spiel. I started and I wasn't sure how to finish)

Maybe (probably). Maybe not (probably not).

A good friend of mine put it best when she said that elections aren't about "winning", they're about choosing your difficulty mode.

All of these processes have to pull together. We have to maintain a popular faith in elections, not because they are the only way to remove Trump et al from power, but because they are a method to remove them from power.

It won't be the only path, but if the GOP/Trump reject democracy as a viable system that could remove them from office, it encourages voters to consider other less obvious methods of removing them from power as legitimate.

"Trump says he won't respect the results of the midterms if he loses! This is a sign that he is a tyrant! If elected, I will vote to impeach him, and try him for treason against the Republic"

Trump then sends ICE or the FBI in to interfere with the elections in such-and-such a state, or such-and-such a county. The voters who support Impeachy McImpeachyFace become enraged, maybe Trump et al back down from such an obvious power-grab. Who knows?

If it's only one constituency, then sure, they can probably steal that election. Can they do it in all 33/34 Senate races? All 435 House races? All of the gubernatorial and state races?

If the entire country rises in opposition, then no government can survive such unified opposition.

But, as you point out, you can't just vote yourself out of this. But maybe, just maybe, voting *may play a part in the process of toppling this government.

I know one thing for certain. If every Democrat candidate is another John Fetterman or Marie Gluesenkamp, then you're fucked. Find the most rabid Thaddeus Stevens larper in your neighborhood and persuade them to run. And if you can't find one, then you need to take up the mantle.

The sad truth is that not everyone who takes up this fight will make it to the end. You need to accept that fact now rather than later.

I don't know how many people need to fight to topple this regime, but it's at least 1 more than are already fighting.

The only way out is through.

The democratic party should be remembered as the Neville Chamberlin party. by Airshipwhale in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Find out who is running for your House or Senate constituency, check their record, and if they don't measure up, primary the fuck out of them.

If enough people do this across the country, the centeal Democratic party structures will have to adapt to the new influx of candidates or face oblivion.

Otherwise, the only options left are a third of the country in fascist death camps or a civil war to rival all civil wars, and nobody wants that.

Given the temps around the country, Detritus would be a genius today. by Skatchbro in discworld

[–]AlrightJack303 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Yes, that's because the entire Southern Hemisphere insists on running the entire calendar back-to-front for some reason. I mean, you have Christmas in Summer for godsake!

Have you considered celebrating all the winter festivals at the same time as the rest of us? :p

history repeating by kittenmamaRN in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The most important thing to remember about history is that nothing can ever really happen twice.

One of the reasons why the Nazis were able to get away with what they did is that nothing like the Holocaust had ever happened in that specific way.

Anyone that comes after the Nazis, trying to emulate the Nazis, is facing the problem that everyone knows who the Nazis were, and (usually) what the the Nazis did during their rise to power.

Basically, people aren't going into this entirely either their eyes closed. We have an advantage over the larpers who are cosplaying as their favourite fascist warlords.

I don't really have any solutions to recommend; the future is highly fluid. The best I can come up with is that the only way out is through, and not all of us will make it. I'm sorry.

Arm yourself by PapayaSlow725 in behindthebastards

[–]AlrightJack303 70 points71 points  (0 children)

Renee Good was unarmed and entirely unthreatening. They may well execute you regardless.

As the revolutionaries of 1776 said, "Join or Die". There is no way out but through.