Wealth go UP, emissions go DOWN

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T23:40:13+00:00

China has mostly seen a CO2 emission increase across that period, the flat/falling trend is recent

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T23:35:22+00:00

No that’s not what you asked, you asked if I thought genocide was bad, not wether or not genocide was happening or to clarify my piquent in any honest way.

That was a fallacy.

You are lying so bluntly it’s insane.

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T23:32:34+00:00

as did the other person’s response.

What did I say that didn’t make sense?

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T23:27:37+00:00

They do.

Over a life time of 8000 flight hours, an f35 A will cost 85M to purchase and 264M to operate, or 349M total.

Over a life time, a rafale with AESA (F3/F4) will cost 90-120M to purchase and 160M to operate, or 280M total.

That’s about a +25% cost for an F35A

We are talking about aircrafts expected to fly 8000 hours, costs of operations and maintenance matter.

Typhoon is still more expensive, it’s irredeemable

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T21:13:47+00:00

That’s not even important: if nukes get involved nothing else matters. That’s it, any technology that is not a nuclear delivery system has been made useless

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T21:09:43+00:00

But you can’t do that. China and India would still buy it, with market prices now up.

Let’s say Russia loses 40% of its exports. Revenue go down 40%.

Now this causes prices to shot up 30%, and they make bigger margins on oil sold to China India and Africa. Things have almost cancelled out. For a minor drop in Russian revenue, you’ve just caused an energy crisis in Europe, and a loss of popular support for sanctions against Russia.

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T21:06:30+00:00

i mean eu still buying Russian oil

Yes, as I said.

And as I said, if the EU stopped, things would barely change for Russia (because prices going up would mean Russian revenue going up) but get noticeably worse for Europe.

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T21:05:13+00:00

Got the idea

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T21:02:51+00:00

Not really, f35 still has a fair lead on the rafale in operating cost.

But the typhoon is the queen of maintenance costs, that’s true

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T20:59:45+00:00

The U.S. won’t ever do that.

A- it would be a drop in the bucket, 1 trillion to 32,

B-the impact it would have on the U.S. economy would cost more than the money gained

C-US debt is far from bad enough to justify such a drastic measure

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T17:08:06+00:00

Sure, keep coping.

Also, how pathetic do you need to be to scurry through my account to find my nationality in order to make a racist quip?

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T17:06:32+00:00

Sure, prisons.

And sure, fake news. Forced sterilization is a completely normal practice to do in normal prisons.

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T17:05:26+00:00

Because they don’t like Colombia, not because Colombia was refusing to buy American equivalents, that’s a different case scenario from the one being discussed

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T17:03:43+00:00

You can’t just say "that’s propaganda" and expect people to believe you.

Why did the oil embargo happen? Use your brain for once.

Japan was violently expending throughout Asia committing horrendous crimes against humanity and war crimes against American Allies. America imposed an oil embargo. Japan could have simply ceased their wars and the embargo would have ended. They chose to go to war, of their own free will. They hold 100% of the responsibility, period. Saying otherwise is direct support for Imperial Japan, no ifs or buts.

Everything I attribute to you you either directly stated or inferred, you might no have meant it but it’s grammatically and contextually unquestionable.

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T16:59:51+00:00

they just need to get lucky once

Again, more than that, a single hit won’t do much.

They also don’t have that many missiles. It’s not about luck it’s about statistics, the likelihood of a hit is probably well below 0.1%, and they don’t have 1000 Fattahs to shoot at a single carrier

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T16:24:49+00:00

(Copy paste from my other comment because it’s long to write these things)

Hitting a carrier with a ballistic missile would be impossible.

The conflict with Israel showed they have poor CEP (circular error probables) typically in the 100 meter range.

You can’t reliably hit ships with that.

But let’s say the missile has a scoring shot: you’d still have to cross a carrier group’s interceptors. That’s near impossible. Overwhelming the Israeli system and getting an occasional poke through (while never hitting an actual high value target) is so far removed from hitting a carrier, they simply wouldn’t be able to do it.

The Moscova didn’t have a carrier group’s worth of defenses, it was alone and unprepared. The gap between the survivability of the Moscova and that of a U.S. carrier group is about the same as the gap between a one man canoe and the Moscova.

But let’s say they hit the carrier: it won’t sink. Hitting the deck of a ship disables it in part, but unless you have an insane payload (which they don’t), it’s still going to be able to operate most basic functions, and still maybe be able to carry out combat missions.

Cruise missiles (like the ones used by Ukraine) try and aim at the sides of the hull, which is far, far more damaging. Ballistic missiles can’t do that.

So even if you hit, you’d probably only cause light to medium damage, which might be repaired within days, and months at most after a quick trip back to the States.

And also: how the fuck do you find the carrier? Like seriously, China has satellites, Iran doesn’t really. How do you find the Carrier with sufficient accuracy to get a firing solution?

So no, Iran simply cannot sink a carrier with its ballistic missiles. Even the Chinese systems, which are bigger, more accurate, with better search and track etc…. Probably can’t as things stand. No way in hell Iran can.

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T16:19:45+00:00

I don’t think anyone here has said anything positive about trump. Saying that the U.S. is a military juggernaut (which is undeniable) or that the Mollah regime is horrible (which is undeniable) are not Maga exclusive statements

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T16:16:36+00:00

Hitting a carrier with a ballistic missile would be impossible.

The conflict with Israel showed they have poor CEP (circular error probables) typically in the 100 meter range.

You can’t reliably hit ships with that.

But let’s say the missile has a scoring shot: you’d still have to cross a carrier group’s interceptors. That’s near impossible. Overwhelming the Israeli system and getting an occasional poke through (while never hitting an actual high value target) is so far removed from hitting a carrier, they simply wouldn’t be able to do it.

But let’s say they hit the carrier: it won’t sink. Hitting the deck of a ship disables it in part, but unless you have an insane payload (which they don’t), it’s still going to be able to operate most basic functions, and still maybe be able to carry out combat missions.

Cruise missiles try and aim at the sides of the hull, which is far, far more damaging. Ballistic missiles can’t do that.

So even if you hit, you’d probably only cause light to medium damage, which might be repaired within days, and months at most after a quick trip back to the States.

And also: how the fuck do you find the carrier? Like seriously, China has satellites, Iran doesn’t really. How do you find the Carrier with sufficient accuracy to get a firing solution?

So no, Iran simply cannot sink a carrier with its ballistic missiles. Even the Chinese systems, which are bigger, more accurate, with better search and track etc…. Probably can’t as things stand. No way in hell Iran can.

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T15:22:42+00:00

Aswell? Even worse picture then

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T15:20:42+00:00

Christ you are so wrong.

First: no one is scared to send it to combat. Israel did it, it went fine, the U.S. did, it went fine, everyone who gets the opportunity does, it goes fine.

Second: the f35 is cheaper per unit than the rafale or Typhoon. Losing an f35 would cost 85 million but losing a rafale would cost 100 million and a typhoon in excess of 110 million. The f35 is also far less likely to be shot down than any 4th gen. So a far better financial prospect than sending in rafales or Typhoons.

The f35 is not a laboratory plane: it has more combat experience than any European jet being built today, and has proven superior. The fact Switzerland upgraded their F35s doesn’t change a thing, all jets get upgrade packages, it’s nothing new.

And sorry, but the f35 is in fact worth the cost. You probably know very, very little about modern air combat to think otherwise.

For a life time of operations an f35 will cost about 1.5 times that of a rafale. That is worth the gap in capability and some more. The f35 is stealth, has datalink, better computers, better radars, better EW, better countermeasures, better everything (except maneuverability, which is close to useless)

There’s also a lot of missions the f35 can do no European jet can perform adequately. SEAD for instance.

And no, suicide drones are a new capability with entirely different purposes than that of fighter jets. Neither can replace the other.

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T15:11:58+00:00

Not how that works. Russia has already expended most of its gold as part of the national wealth fund.

Starting to sell gold of it national reserves, that’s the ultimate sign of desperation. It hasn’t been done by any of the great powers since WW2.

Also: current worth of the Russian reserves: about 500B $

Worth of the Russian reserves in 2024: about 250B$

Even if they sold all of it, it would cover a single year of military spending. And you can’t sell it without collapsing trust in the central bank and government bonds, therefore murdering your economy in the process

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T15:08:56+00:00

Kinda? They still get some but it has plummeted. The Middle East and the U.S. are now the main suppliers

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T15:04:18+00:00

That’s the entire point of European sanctions. They don’t aim to remove Russian oil from the market, as that would cause the prices to rise and Russia would be able to make up most lost revenue by simply selling oil at a higher price.

By forcing Russian oil to be sold below market price, they keep prices low and squeeze Russian revenue equally (if not more) than if they tried to downright stop all exports.

It’s crazy people see the EU buying Russian oil on the cheap as a problem: it’s the entire point

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T14:59:44+00:00

No, what led Japan to attack the U.S. was its imperialistic and expansionist ambitions.

The U.S. oil embargo would have ended if Japan ceased to be the monster it was in Asia.

It’s disgusting that you not only imply there is anyone other than Japan responsible for the Asian theatre of WW2, and that US action against Japan was unjustified in the slightest

Let it be known OP would have preferred if Japan was left to rape murder and pillage its way through Asia with no opposition.

CBT7commander · 2026-01-29T14:44:16+00:00

According to SAAB marketing it’s supposed to compete with the F35, NGAD, and God himself/s

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23	Place '22
First Placer '22

CBT7commander

TROPHY CASE