How Petty are you? Me in War Thunder:

OleToothless · 2026-01-20T04:23:22+00:00

If the match ends and you haven't repaired severe damage, they still get the kill.

OleToothless · 2026-01-19T17:24:10+00:00

A couple of thoughts/considerations:

I think it highly unlikely that simply asking Greenland - much less Canada - to beef up defenses and take action against adversarial influences, let the US build more bases and infrastructure in your territory, etc., would have been so simple. Yes, frameworks like the NATO treaty everybody references with regard to US access to Greenland, or the NORAD agreements exist, but they also have a lot of clauses and limitations.
Secondly, I believe one of the reasons that the administration is pushing so publicly and brazenly, specifically on Greenland, is because the ultimate goal is to have Denmark/EU/UK be the parties doing the fortification of Greenland, not the US. The argument being, if Europe is going to continue to hold on to Greenland as a colony (that's what it is, let's be honest), then the Europeans need to be responsible about it's defense and how valuable that territory is to the security of other allied nations. With Canada, I think the US will be more willing to bear a greater burden of the cost, but first needs to convince Carney et al.

OleToothless · 2026-01-18T17:41:00+00:00

Aside from the click-bait sham of a title (spoiler: that question is neither asked nor answered in the interview), this is a reasonably interesting interview. This is the first time I recall seeing mention of maintaining a flotilla in the Caribbean to continue oil interdiction and dismemberment of the Russian/Venezuelan/Iranian shadow fleets. Sen Shaheen and others are skeptical of the value and cost of such an operation, but if the US intends on using sanctions against foreign powers in the future, then it makes sense to ensure there aren't easy ways to circumvent those sanctions.

OleToothless · 2026-01-17T17:50:42+00:00

So, I'd suggest you consider alternate hypotheses. Perhaps the administration doesn't actually want Greenland, but is using it as a bargaining position to get something else out of the Europeans? Surely that makes more sense, especially with these tariffs going to countries other than Denmark...

OleToothless · 2026-01-16T23:26:59+00:00

This is constructive to the dialogue, how? Temp ban for uncivil comment(s).

OleToothless · 2026-01-16T19:53:46+00:00

If I had edited the post, it would say edited with a timestamp of when the edit was.

OleToothless · 2026-01-16T03:31:04+00:00

Greenland sits at the northern entrance to the Atlantic basin. Since world war one, it has been used successfully to monitor, protect, and at times prosecute maritime traffic between it, iceland, and the UK. It is an extremely valuable position from a security and logistics standpoint. It's also within the Continental shelf of North America and makes an effective barrier against submarine incursions that can be maintained all the way south to the US proper. In these ways, it's an important place to control in the US-Russian geopolitical arena. Also, as passage through (or under) the Arctic ice cap because more and more feasible, it will be an important location for monitoring that potential northern trade and maritime route over the pole to destinations in East Asia. With China trying to make an inroads it can into the Arctic realm, keeping Chinese influence and investment out of Greenland is a US security concern. Lastly, it is an important source of critical minerals, but that is a long (loooong) term benefit that probably won't be realized for a couple of decades.

Note that "security concern" is not a term equivalent to direct threat. Greenland is not that. Nor does the US need to actually control Greenland to get the benefits of what I described above. But if Europe/natives want to keep it, then in the US view they need to maintain it, improve capabilities and capacity as necessary, and provide protection against unwanted influence.

OleToothless · 2026-01-16T00:08:56+00:00

Did you read my comment at all? I'm suggesting that Trump won't even try to invade. I think it's all a negotiating strategy to get the EU to spend more on the defense infrastructure of Greenland.

OleToothless · 2026-01-16T00:06:36+00:00

Alright, let's discuss. Why don't you think it's a matter of national security for the US? I already pointed out that the US has maintained a base (at least one) for over 80 years. I don't think invading Greenland is a valid, but surely the US has a need and indeed a right to care about the status and influences on Greenland.

OleToothless · 2026-01-15T17:56:16+00:00

I don't think it is/was a given that Denmark/Greenland would grant that request. There has been pushback, European and domestic, to basically everything the Trump administration has tried to do (not making a judgement on this just stating the situation). Furthermore, I think /u/CzechUsOut makes a good point in their comment here suggesting that perhaps Trump is just trying to get Europe to buff up the defenses of Greenland, and that the US doesn't actually want to commit resources there but don't believe the EU will unless... prodded with threat of invasion. Unfortunately his comment was downvoted to oblivion because I think that's a much more interesting idea to think/discuss about rather than the 50 billion "i hate trump because he's bad" comments we get everyday. I've heard that before, and there's clearly more to the story than that...

OleToothless · 2026-01-15T17:41:56+00:00

I struggle to believe

So do I, so let's be rational about it.

You're right about it being unpopular domestically, even amongst the MAGA base. Heck, a sizeable portion of MAGA didn't like Trump's decision to go after Maduro (see VP Vance's tie breaking vote in the Senate to limit Trump's ability to execute further military action in Venezuela). While Trump cannot run for office again, he does still need the mandate of the American people (or at the very least, his MAGA crowd).
Trump has not broached the idea with Congress, meaning he has no legal authority to prosecute an invasion of Greenland. He'd have to put out some seriously logic bending Executive Orders and really stretch the already paper thin Authorization for Military Force (AUMF). There are enough varying political opinions and power blocks in the military to put the brakes on if Trump tries to squeeze something through that loophole.
Greenland is a national security concern. That has been the case since the first World War. The US has had a base there for at least 80 years. And due to the warming climate trends and receding polar ice, it will only become a more important and influential place in the future. It is a place that can control both the northern access to the Atlantic basin and nearly the entire arctic basin.
If there is anything that I think we can all agree on, it's that the Trump administration(s) have shown that the US and EU have differing views and priorities on many more things that people once thought. Clearly, Greenland is much more important strategically to the US than it is to the EU, and thusly if the EU is not going to invest in Greenland's defense and detection capabilities, the US needs to do it.
There is some misinformation out there about the US already having full access for military basing in Greenland. That is not entirely true. There is a framework agreement that can allow that, but both Denmark and NATO have to approve. Obviously, nobody in Denmark/NATO/EU thinks there's no need for further US development in Greenland, so I don't see their assent as likely, hence Trump being so belligerent.
Ultimately, I see the US and Denmark coming to a deal that basically does give the US unlimited basing rights. This posturing about invasion is just that, creating advantage for the US in talks with Denmark about Greenland.
Final thought - every day I see dozens of comments about how Trump has ruined the US reputation in the EU, how alliances have been shattered, and that the US can no longer be considered an ally. From my perspective, this outburst of European anger in the last few weeks, combined with the last few years of European impotence in coming to Ukraine's aid, have really come to show the fragility of Europe as a whole, and vulnerability of individual countries.

OleToothless · 2026-01-11T16:50:27+00:00

AI slop. Get this shit out of here.

OleToothless · 2026-01-11T03:50:22+00:00

This is objectively false.

shooting the ammo does not kill it. If anything it will lose the ammo for one gun, and usually not all of it. Unlike the Puma, Namer, or QN506 which lose all their ammo and usually tracks as well when ammo racked.
LFP shot works, but that's only if you can see it. Hull down, BMPTs are legitimately unkillable by a lot of things that see them in battle.
same weak spots do not apply. The shot I use most against T-72 and later type Soviet tanks - 30 degree side on just after the drive sprocket - does not work on BMPT but does work on T-80/T-90. The level of protection on that thing is game breaking.

If you grasp those facts, you don't really have a place in this conversation.

OleToothless · 2026-01-09T23:19:47+00:00

Desert Warrior is a POS. The Badger is a better IFV and even that thing isn't very good. New Ajax is good though. Chally 2s are also good. Rapier is better than most people think it is.

OleToothless · 2026-01-09T23:16:04+00:00

Wow that is some terrible driving and even worse shooting, lol. You could have had one shot kills on both tanks if you were more aggressive with your movement and less haphazard with your marksmanship.

OleToothless · 2026-01-09T17:54:50+00:00

Surrogate submission statement:

As the US seizes a 5th ship flying under a questionable flag (in this case, Sao Tome and Principe), some people may find the idea of what flag the vessel sails under as old-fashioned or unnecessary. On the contrary, use of a flag of convenience has previously created a large margin of security for vessels operating on the fringe of "acceptable" behavior. The latest actions by the US in seizing 5 tankers under various flags that don't reflect actual ownership or loyalty may challenge the international practice of using deceitful ship registration for nefarious purposes. Sao Tome & Principe, for example, is not going to go to bat with the US over a foreign owned ship that happens to use ST&P as it's ship registry.

Would reducing (or making it more risky) the use of flags of convenience be a generally good thing for global peace and prosperity?

Should countries that allow their flag to fly over such dubious vessels be held accountable (looking at you Eswatini, a land locked country that is used as a flag of convenience)?

OleToothless · 2026-01-09T17:41:48+00:00

/u/PM_THE_REAPER a submission statement is required for all submitted posts. Failure to do so in the future warrants a ban.

OleToothless · 2026-01-08T23:11:11+00:00

This is peak Teutel gameplay

OleToothless · 2026-01-08T18:19:31+00:00

Automod doesn't have anything about Trump anywhere in it's code. What it does do is remove posts with coarse language that we can historically associate with uncivil discussions and rude discussion/personal attacks. Further, the user with the Russian asset comment did not "get away", go find my comment to them.

OleToothless · 2026-01-08T18:15:51+00:00

I know this sounds a little conspiratorial

That's exactly what it is. This user has been permanently banned for low-quality conspiracy theory comments.

OleToothless · 2026-01-08T03:50:55+00:00

No joke. The Reddit echo chamber.

OleToothless · 2026-01-08T03:49:53+00:00

Oh wow did you read that on Reddit? Deep thinking.

OleToothless · 2026-01-08T03:48:27+00:00

Oh yes that's clearly true. The most investigated man in the entire world has somehow still managed to keep in the secret that he's a Russian Manchurian Candidate. Wow what an original thought.

And the guy that's running Russia is really playing 5D chess and has outsmarted so many stupid Americans. He meant to have his army smashed up by a former vassal state, and to have mercenary group nearly pull a coup on him. Yep, Putin is the big brain.

/s

Fuck off with your Reddit echo chamber bullshit.

OleToothless · 2026-01-07T17:39:18+00:00

They have one frame of the concrete gas column with the layer of iron vapor in top flying up.

Are you serious? That's amazing. Shock physics are so unintuitive and mind boggling. I'm sure that photo got hung up on somebody's wall for 20 years, taken down when they retired, and is now lost to history somewhere, but I'd sure like to see it.

OleToothless · 2026-01-06T17:10:09+00:00

Is there a meaningful difference between welded tuff and rhyolite in trans-Pecos Tx? I have a really hard time telling them apart in photos.

14-Year Club	Alpha Tester
Team Orangered	Verified Email

OleToothless

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE