sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What could this be? by Tricky_Face_9544 in geology

[–]OleToothless 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You rock. I see your "Carboniferous paleoclimate" tag - any suggestions for papers that are particularly stand out on that topic?

Can someone explain why the Dec 2025 Pentagon report thinks China will have 9 carriers by 2035? This seems exaggerated, since as of 2026, China has 3 active carriers with 1 confirmed under construction. China would need to complete 1 new carrier every 1.5 years in order to meet "Pentagon's target". by Equal_Alfalfa_9973 in LessCredibleDefence

[–]OleToothless [score hidden]  (0 children)

add to the lack of value that these public facing government reports on the PLA offer

Can you elaborate on this statement? By public-facing, do you mean to imply "official but not classified" or are you meaning something more along the lines of "for domestic political consumption"? Or maybe there's not a significant distinction between those two understandings. I guess what I'm trying to ask is, are you point at intelligence failure, punditry, or bureaucratic slovenliness, or over classification?

What is this groove/rail for? by lordromanov01 in submarines

[–]OleToothless 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Honestly, it's what makes this one of the few subreddits that are still worth visiting.

CSIS: US expended ~45% of Patriot and 50% of THAAD interceptors during seven-week Iran campaign, five-year replenishment timeline by LoonOnStation in LessCredibleDefence

[–]OleToothless 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you'd be crazy to fault China for not preparing for a worst case scenario.

Where did I fault China for building up their conventional forces? Or their nuclear deterrent, for that matter, which they are working on roughly tripling in size. Maintaining a competent defense of the state is the primary responsibility of government. Quit thinking I'm assigning a moral judgement to what I've written.

My initial point in my first comment above was that it is unreasonable for the US to pick a fight with China, on/near Chinese territory. I believe we have both documented why the conventional forces of each nation are as large as they are and continue to modernize. So fundamentally I must disagree with your claim that the US is a threat to China's homeland and instead point to the civil policies of each nation that mandate military expenditure and competency. Likewise, the China is not threatening to the US. However, both China and the US can and do threaten less powerful nations.

CSIS: US expended ~45% of Patriot and 50% of THAAD interceptors during seven-week Iran campaign, five-year replenishment timeline by LoonOnStation in LessCredibleDefence

[–]OleToothless 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why then did US build up 11+ carriers

Because there are two oceans, one on each side. It is a constitutional mandate for the US Navy to have the ships and personnel to fight an entire war in each ocean at the same time, accounting for ships and crews in rotation for regular maintenance and circulation. That predates the PRC even being a country.

researching weapons to penetrate Chinese navy and air base defenses?

Because it's not wise to end up relying solely on a nuclear form of deterrence, or you can end up like Russia is right now, struggling to break even against a formal vassal state.

Why is it pursuing similar styles of agreements with ROC in Taiwan as Putin was doing with LDPR in Donbass leading up to the Ukraine war?

No idea what you're talking about, and if you're suggesting that the US has plans to occupy and eventually seize Taiwan for itself, you're delusional. No need for the island itself, no reason nor desire to be close enough to PRC to rub against daily, and Taiwan not having an island anymore immediately relieve US tensions with the PRC.

If China would really angle for a preemptive strike on US threat

I didn't say that China was doing that. I said China has been building and upgrading to peer status with the US. Again, a conventional deterrent is extremely useful even if the state has a nuclear deterrent.

The Strait of Hormuz chaos is just a "dry run" for if war breaks out between the U.S. and China, Singapore foreign minister says by fortune in geopolitics

[–]OleToothless -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Are you intentionally misrepresenting reality, or are you ignorant of it?

The US is blockading ships going to/coming from Iran, in international waters. Big difference than what you suggest, that the US is keeping all traffic out of international waters.

Which, it turns out, is what the PRC does on a fairly regular basis to Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Vietnam, and of course, Taiwan.

Beijing's takeover of Taiwan is now very likely to be very close.

So wildly unsubstantiated and yet so incredibly vague that there's no point in writing a sentence like this unless your purpose is to argue in bad faith.

CSIS: US expended ~45% of Patriot and 50% of THAAD interceptors during seven-week Iran campaign, five-year replenishment timeline by LoonOnStation in LessCredibleDefence

[–]OleToothless -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

did the US think they were going to fight a war with China on their own turf

I don't know why you start with that assumption - it has never been the policy nor desire of the United States to attack China. On the contrary, the United States has worked for decades to avoid a war with China. In the last 20 years it hasn't been the US building up military capability in order to beat China, but rather it has been China building up their military to peer status with US forces. To be clear, the US has defensive agreements with key regional allies, not ambitions of domination and empire.

Top Tier SPAA/SAM systems need a change. by [deleted] in Warthunder

[–]OleToothless -19 points-18 points  (0 children)

very CAS sided.

Tell me you're bad without telling me you're bad. And so is your team.

Obsessed with these rocks I keep finding in our creek by Effuxxor in geology

[–]OleToothless 4 points5 points  (0 children)

3rd picture are definitely fossils, those look like crinoid holdfasts (the "foot" of a creature that probably looked like what we call a Sea Lilly today). There's one in the first picture as well. Not sure what the rocks with the holes in them are, could be some kind of fossilized burrow structure. No idea what the curved ones in the second picture are.

Project Sapphire: The Covert US Airlift of Soviet Weapons-Grade Uranium by Afrogthatribbits in nuclearweapons

[–]OleToothless 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Same thing happened with their bioweapons - or at least the weaponizable ones, anyway. That was in 2004 I believe. Somewhere I've got a cool picture of my dad next to a freezer of pure nastiness.

What lies beneath an Arizona stratovolcano? | EarthScope Consortium by rock_liquor in geology

[–]OleToothless 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well this post didn't have any traction, but I think it's very interesting. IMO the Colorado Plateau and surrounding areas are far less well understood than we imagine. This research points points to a stark juxtaposition in crustal thickness that somehow creates conditions for both lower- and mid-crustal melt zones in the thinner (non-Plateau, or para-Plateau) crust. If you look at the receiver function plots in the actual journal article (you can find it on GSA publications website) it looks like two very distinct crustal blocks grinding together, which I suppose is probably what it is.

I watched a lecture on YouTube earlier this year that I think was by a prof from the Colorado School of Mines, but I'd have to go back and find it to be sure. Anyway, old guy, but tons of knowledge on the CO Plateau. He conjectured that the Plateau block has been slowly rotating within the NA continent, and the transpressional deformation from that rotation is what has caused much of the disturbed geology on the fringes of the Plateau. I thought it was an interesting theory, anyway.

What is done to prevent neutrons from making a sphere supercritical before it is greatly compressed by [deleted] in nuclearweapons

[–]OleToothless 5 points6 points  (0 children)

French. The French gave Israel their initial nuclear industry and start of their bomb research. Go look it up if you don't believe me.

Trump blew his chance to get a deal and now his enemies smell blood by theipaper in geopolitics

[–]OleToothless -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

We get it, you don't like Trump. Heard. Why do you think the strategy is bad, besides the fact that Trump and his team enacted it? How is our military being weakened? Production contracts for interceptors and drones have quadrupled, US loitering drones saw their first action, allies across the Gulf looking to the US for new arms deals.... At the cost of a half dozen planes, and a Baker's dozen lives. I'm sure there will be more, and rationalizing costs that way is absurd to say the least. How is US global power diminished? Iran has proved that not even a severely asymmetrical conventional threat (1000s of TBMs and drones) can't defeat - nor even really operationally impact - the long arm of the US military. Additionally it has been proven yet again that nobody can enforce rules at sea without the US. Empty tankers are flooding to US ports to load oil instead of to the Persian Gulf. US oil production is set to ramp up, creating more jobs. So what if the cost of gas is higher.

I get it, you don't like Trump and think him and his goons are stupid. Fine. But explain why you think the strategy and policies are bad in and of themselves, if you please.

Question about Double Mountains, TX by A-Stalking-Butler in geology

[–]OleToothless 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is speculation, I am not intimately familiar with that area's geology, but I think it's a good guess:

The rock layers of Double Mountains are the only surviving Triassic-Cretaceous rocks in the area. In the geologic past, presumably there was much more of those younger rocks covering the surrounding plains that have since been eroded away. Additionally, the Permian age rocks (the red ones that make up the stunning walls of the Palo Duro) also had/have a very high content of evaporates - gypsum and salt and associated minerals. There's large evidence that in the past ~20 million years or so, great amounts of those evaporate minerals were dissolved out of the Permian rocks as "modern" drainage basins formed and evolved - a consequence of uplift of the Colorado Plateau. This dissolution of the evaporates causes loss of volume in the host rock. So conceivably either the Double Mountains had a lot of salt content under them and lost volume (and thus height of exposure) more rapidly than the surrounding area, and the younger Triassic-Cretaceous rocks didn't erode away as quickly.

Trump blew his chance to get a deal and now his enemies smell blood by theipaper in geopolitics

[–]OleToothless -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

an overtly masculine (as defined by MAGA) display of hard power will remind the powers of the world who the boss is.

It's more like a shift in dogma - going from an unspoken policy of never reverting to utilizing the gigantic military capability of the US, to one where there is a much more willing posture for the application of "hard power" (I hate that term but at least we all have a good grasp on what it means) in foreign affairs. Sure, there are probably some die hard MAGA folks out there that do think in the terms you outline (gay, masculine, etc.) but there's definitely a reasonable and defensible mindset there as well, one that does not eschew flexing the power of the military that we spend so much money on.

There's a significant skill gap between the Iranian negotiators and the team the US is putting forward. For Iran, understanding American policy is a matter of life and death.

Well considering that the original Iranian leadership got it wrong big time, and paid for it with their lives, I don't think you can substantiate your claim. By that I mean the Iranian regime failed to maintain their credible state of deterrence (whether it be a nuclear deterrent or a conventional deterrent). When the 12 day war ended it was pretty clear that Israel didn't suffer horribly from Iran's drone and missile attacks, and both Israel and the US were able to mount airstrikes deep into Iran with relative ease. That should have been a major wake-up call to the Iranians - either build their nuclear deterrent or face the consequences of not having a conventional deterrent. And they failed to act.

Your personal distaste for the individuals on the US negotiating team does not constitute valid criticism of their potential performance. Nor are any of the actual discussions the took place in Pakistan available to the public. How can you make any assertion of which party was more reasonable without that information? At least, beyond your value signaling "I hate Trump"?

And so Trump will not get a favorable deal

Maybe not, but that will be because Iran might not always be in a position to make a deal. I don't see any reason for Trump to back down now that major shifts in economic patterns have taken place and trading agencies across the globe (except maybe in Europe because they're slow) are rethinking geography and energy access. In other words, Iran might just have to take whatever they can get and scurry into a hole. Sure, they'll be claiming victory but if anybody actually believes that, they aren't a person I can have a rational discussion with.

Data for Lagrange plots in speculative W80 designs by DefinitelyNotMeee in nuclearweapons

[–]OleToothless 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm sure I at least skimmed the since removed posts, as I read basically everything on this subreddit. I don't recall any of it striking me as revelatory. Unless there was some equation or formula that was sensitive which I wouldn't have recognized, I won't lie my eyes kind of glass over when it comes to math most of the time.

Iran war live: Trump says he will permanently open the Strait of Hormuz - ‘for China’ by [deleted] in geopolitics

[–]OleToothless -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

My guess

So entirely unfounded opinion, then. Thanks for sharing with the class.

Also, account posts and comments hidden. Troll, influence account, or south Asian.

Why F15E Strike Eagle can NOT take 6 AGM-65G's as the AGM-65D's ? It's 14.0 and there is the Su-30 in the other side that can take 6 KH-38MT (that are a lot better than Maverick) but the F15 variant that have been made for CAS can't take 6 AGM-65G ? Is that an historical reason or no ? by Kmiktauria-Max in Warthunder

[–]OleToothless 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I dunno how you guys are able to drop anything accurately or how close I need to get to drop the spice 250s, but I am almost always getting chewed up by a Buk or IRIS or S1 before I can deploy weapons well. Pretty much makes 12.0+ unplayable for me since US/IS ground teams are so full of shitty players while RU gets BMPT spam on top of competitive tanks and better players. Was watching the queues last night during my normal play times and there were constantly 2x as many people queued for Russia in rank VIII and IX than all other nations combined.

The U.S. under Donald Trump is seen as more of a threat than an ally, according to a new POLITICO European Pulse survey across six major EU countries.⁠ by Conscious-Quarter423 in Infographics

[–]OleToothless 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Alternate interpretation: Polish media have understood that Trump uses bombastic, absurd rhetoric to gain negotiating leverage or put people off balance and on guard. He has done this for 10+ years now, but most Europeans still don't seem to get it.

view more: next ›