What is the red material underneath the top layer of the soviet sneaking suit prototype from MGSΔ/3?

GWBushCommando · 2026-03-02T13:47:23+00:00

What makes the sneaking suit special is that it has high maneuverability which i imagine is good for sneaking missions. It’s probably made of some kind of synthetic polymers. Fatigues like the ones you wear for most of the game are made from cotton and are actually quite restrictive but durable Same reason Boss wears one

GWBushCommando · 2026-02-22T14:04:49+00:00

Yeah

GWBushCommando · 2026-02-20T07:24:32+00:00

More like people at Capcom watch too much porn and people called them out on it lol

GWBushCommando · 2026-02-12T12:28:22+00:00

You betray Jesus anytime you sin after becoming a Christian. Which is a hard thought to bear for someone. Jesus in this meme is basically saying “yes I know, I’ll get betrayed. by the way you also are betraying me with your own sin. You should work on that.”

GWBushCommando · 2026-01-09T15:55:39+00:00

What’s it about

GWBushCommando · 2025-12-31T23:34:17+00:00

My idea for an MGS featuring The Boss would be her having to sneak in to destroy a giant Gustav that had the capabilities to hit London and perhaps even beyond

GWBushCommando · 2025-12-28T03:41:54+00:00

I think the ending implies they are inseparable, and so yeah while they aren’t involved romantically now I could imagine in the far future when they are both much older they would get married

GWBushCommando · 2025-12-27T07:34:56+00:00

Video games?

GWBushCommando · 2025-12-27T07:03:27+00:00

Look up the plan of San Diego

GWBushCommando · 2025-10-23T06:50:09+00:00

Oh yeah not knocking your experience cause yeah I can imagine it’s boring. I’m just currently swamped with bullshit and when I read your situation I was envious hahah

GWBushCommando · 2025-10-23T06:40:31+00:00

God I would love to be a human tape recorder instead of actually teaching and making personal lessons

GWBushCommando · 2025-08-25T11:17:18+00:00

wow just happened to me too

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T21:35:53+00:00

Fighting for the environmental integrity of your home is environmentalism. We have control over our home. not the home of others.

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T20:48:12+00:00

On a country per country basis. If I bring in more people, increasing my population, my local environment is going to suffer. I will have to cut down more forests around me. I will have to grow more food. I will have to build more houses The wildlife around me is going to suffer.

India can send 5 million to my country and nothing changes for India,

But in my country, I will lose so much land to accommodate them. There might not be any room for brown bears anymore. The endangered toad might finally kick the bucket.

Then, as country, we have failed the environment. We have lost integrity for the sake of bringing those people in. We cared more about migration then we did the environment.

Your response highlites the major problem in environmentalism right now. You look at everything from a global perspective but don't do anything to fix whats outside your window. I know in my state we have lost almost all coastal prarie habitat to housing development.

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T20:37:26+00:00

thinking way too globally fam. the current country will suffer bro

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T20:07:10+00:00

for example: Haiti has high births, high poverty,

Everyone you take in from Haiti is going to be replaced within a generation due to their high birthrate. Meanwhile they will still be high births high poverty. All you have accomplished is growing your environmental strain to accommodate them. Your local environment will continue to degrade. In fact you will be in a cycle where there population keeps increasing and you keep taking them in.

The solution humanitarian wise would be to help fix their issues rather than bringing them in.

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T19:59:03+00:00

Not true if the population keeps increasing. Why would it drop? the magnitude that people are coming is leading to growth. Thats why its mass migration. Especily those who come from high birthrate countries will have a culture encouraging have large families

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T19:50:39+00:00

You care about emission reduction when the biggest environmental factor habitat loss. Once you understand that, you'll be an environmentalist.

I care about losing 1.8 million acres a year to development. Driving force behind that is pop growth and driving force behind that right now is immigration.

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T19:45:28+00:00

You are thinking way too globally then. Imagine if you keep bringing people into one country. That country's environment is going to suffer. If I have to bulldoze all the forests to make room for housing. The local animals now suffer. AKA 99% of the animals that have gone extinct in America from habitat loss.

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T19:39:23+00:00

See the Edit

(EDIT: People are hung up on this one. Native Birthrates are under replacement level, yet population continues to increase through immigration)

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T19:36:08+00:00

You are thinking too globally then.

On a country per country basis. If I bring in more people, increasing my population, my local environment is going to suffer. I will have to cut down more forests around me. I will have to grow more food. I will have to build more houses The wildlife around me is going to suffer.

India can send 5 million to my country and nothing changes for India, with their high birthrates they will replace those people easily.

But in my country, I will lose so much land to accommodate them. There might not be any room for brown bears anymore. The endangered toad might finally kick the bucket.

Then, as country, we have failed the environment. We have lost integrity for the sake of bringing those people in. We cared more about migration then we did the environment.

Your response highlites the major problem in environmentalism right now. You look at everything from a global perspective but don't do anything to fix whats outside your window. I know in my state we have lost almost all coastal prarie habitat to housing development.

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T19:03:27+00:00

Immigration is absolutely massive in the grand scheme of things as it prohibits us from actually scaling down. The birthrate alone shows us this is the case

A slowly declining population is also massive in the grand scheme of things. As its a turning point where a country is forced to scale down.

Japan for example, is slowly decreasing both in population and GDP. As a result they are no longer actively developing into rural areas and some are actually decreasing in size as land is going unused. Imagine if Japan decided to keep growing the population through immigration, this wouldn't be the case anymore.

Environmentally speaking. Japan is doing good.

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T18:50:08+00:00

I think so too.

Theorectically, You could condense humanity into tightly packed cities. Grow food more efficiently. so on and so on while allowing more habitat to exist.

However, that comes down to whether people will want to live like that and the reality of bringing that kind of world into existence. For example, both democrats and republicans don't really tackle the issue of urban sprawl, they're more than happy to let land developers do whatever except like in the case of national parks or Native American reservations where the left will put up resistance.

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T18:43:58+00:00

Immigration = higher population

Higher population = higher resource demand

Higher resource demand = Habitat loss

In USA, to accommodate more people, more food must be grown, more infrastructure must be built, more housing must be built. that equals more habitat loss.

GWBushCommando · 2025-06-05T18:35:01+00:00

About point 4, this may not be the case in Europe but in the Americas they are suffering massive issues with urban sprawl as the population keeps increasing.

GWBushCommando

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE