Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
x9 And while the US may have the majority of the assault rifle market, Europe has the majority of the handgun market, with most handguns in use with civilians, security, police and military forces worldwide, including those in the US, being European models, especially the Beretta, Glock and SIG P series.
Edited by CookingCat on Sep 11th 2018 at 3:10:53 AM
Handguns are pretty useless in a military context however, there little 2 inch barrels render them inaccurate at combat ranges, and they just dont have the fire power to deal with body armour reliably.
There normally not even issued to soldiers due to this, being just an emergency backup for officers or non-combat troops.
Edited by Imca on Sep 11th 2018 at 2:48:33 AM
I just checked, its about half way between both of us at 4.... which is still way too damn small to be effective in combat.
Your talking 490 Joules at of energy at 375m/s vs 1,800 at 910 m/s.
Thats not even touching the long range accuracy (non existent).
Edited by Imca on Sep 11th 2018 at 3:22:18 AM
That Europe has one assault rifle with a barrel problem and the others it's made aren't super popular doesn't somehow render it, as a continent, incompetent when it comes to making guns. Lack of popularity doesn't make them bad.
We could probably spend all day cherry-picking examples of US military procurement and design that's gone horribly wrong.
Meanwhile, from the other page...
People committing pointless atrocities against small defenceless groups is hard to imagine? Not much imagination here, then.
Edited by RainehDaze on Sep 11th 2018 at 11:26:40 AM
The thing is it is a problem consistent with the rest of the hardware, missiles on ships exploding in tubes, APC's being too small to fit troops in the back, the air forces having 4 out of over 100 airplanes being flight worthy.
If it was JUST that one gun, compared to all the others I would agree, but the thing is your missing the forest for a tree there, its a consistent and continuing problem amongst European military hardware to just.... not work.
The US may have procurement issues out the ass, and may have some sub-par pieces of hardware in service, but overall at least there stuff is operational. You can pick a random airplane and it is more likely to fly then not for instance.
Edited by Imca on Sep 11th 2018 at 3:34:39 AM
No, the data you've provided, if anything, shows that the Bundeswehr in particular is making some very sketchy choices. That's not a random sample. That isn't evidence that if you pick random military hardware from Europe it's not going to work. There's an enormous numerical disparity and the US Navy in particular shows exactly how imbalanced a comparison of forces is, but it's dishonest to simply cite how one country has faulty equipment and say "thus the entire continent must be, as a whole, incapable of making things that work".
The country which makes up a significant chunk the European forces, and produces most of the hardware.
You cant just throw the Bundeswehr out and say they don't represent Europe, because on a military level they very much do.... the UK is leaving, which puts only France in a comparable position and although France is impressive for a country of there size, they can in no way go at it alone.... and definatly no way for them to be able to exert even a fraction of the force projection even a crippled US can.
Europe is kind of a package deal, and to stand up to the US it has to bundle itself together, which leaves it quite vulnerable to weak links.... honestly besides just the sheer size of the US that is its other major advantage here, its hegemony.
Edited by Imca on Sep 11th 2018 at 3:48:25 AM
If we're talking militarily, the UK isn't going anywhere for the sake of this strange comparison and it seems dishonest to immediately remove it from the equation.
... and again, you're specifically cherry-picking examples. If we wanted to be perfectly honest, the M4 hasn't been entirely without incident.
> The UK is leaving
Nah, it isn't. It will still be a part of various defence pacts and organisations that have little bearing on its position in the EU. As far as Germany goes, the mismanagement has been pretty staggering though.
The US policy currently being what it is, intelligence and military relations are even closer. And they're far more lasting than political ones anyhow.
Si Vis Pacem, Para PerkeleThe Bundeswehr is in a category of its own when it comes to issues with its forces, but I wouldn’t exactly describe the rest of Europe’s militaries as being in a state of readiness. Even historic powerhouses like France have been suffering lately, simply having a domestic small arms industry doesn’t imply an effective military.
Regardless, it’s academic either way. Nothing that they or anyone else does will challenge US military supremacy any time soon, so it’s not even worth considering that outcome.
They should have sent a poet.So the UK isn't going "Fuck that" to its defense obligations with Brexit? I could have sworn that was one of the things they were upset about, not liking having to contribute defense in the ways requested by the EU...
Thought, this seems a bit off topic, I am actually curious as to the defensive ramifications of Brexit, since most of the coverage is understandably on the social and economic impacts of that impending train wreck.... is there a proper thread for it?
Oh I know, and the F35 also has its own pile of issues, but at least the later flies, and the M4 can be.... reasonably expected to work just not as well as the standard it should be held too.
Has kind of hit the nail on the head.
Edited by Imca on Sep 11th 2018 at 4:05:26 AM
The military thread is probably the best place to talk about the defence implications of Brexit.
Also Europe is more than the big three, Poland, the Netherlands, Italy, Belgium, Denmark, Spain and even Greece are all mid level European powers (which puts themselves on par with most regional (not global) powers in the rest of the world).
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran![]()
Both of those do a little better than just work. The M16/M4’s teething troubles are long in the past and it’s now one of the most popular rifles worldwide, and the F-35 has broken out of its funk and is doing quite well. That’s not coincidence.
Edited by archonspeaks on Sep 11th 2018 at 4:59:58 AM
They should have sent a poet.While I agree that the Military Thread is the better place to discuss Brexit and its military implications...I'll just point out that Article 50 going into effect will only render the treaties and deals that were made as part of the EU null and void in the event of a No-Deal Hard Brexit. The EU is primarily an economic union that does not really have a military of its own. There is currently no EU military.
Basically, any and all defense agreements the UK made would not be directly affected by Brexit.
Disgusted, but not surprisedIn Senate news, The Weekly Standard are running a senate model[1]
and have just updated their predictions to include fundamentals and this has shifted their predictions a bit, they now give the Democrats a 40% chance of taking control of the senate and their median seat projection has the Democrats gaining 1 seat overall.
This compared with the big three election analysts (Sabato’s crystal ball, Inside Elections and Cook Political Report) who respectively have have the senate at 45/49 with 6 toss ups[2]
, 45/50 with 5 tossups[3]
and an early outlook of +1 net for the Dems (however no update since July), and 44/48 with 8 tossups[4]
.
Additionally Real Clear Politics show 44/47 with 9 tossups in the main model but with tossups assigned it comes to 49/51 with each side picking up 3 seats.
The senate isn’t a toss up yet, but it’s surprisingly close.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranThis compared with the big three election analysts (Sabato’s crystal ball, Inside Elections and Cook Political Report) who respectively have have the senate at 45/49 with 6 toss ups[2], 45/50 with 5 tossups[3] and an early outlook of +1 net for the Dems (however no update since July), and 44/48 with 8 tossups[4].
Additionally Real Clear Politics show 44/47 with 9 tossups in the main model but with tossups assigned it comes to 49/51 with each side picking up 3 seats.
The senate isn’t a toss up yet, but it’s surprisingly close.
Damn that's higher then expected, considering that Trump had a 30% of winning even these odds are rather encouraging.
Mind you, I wish they'd get some dynamite and deal with this.
Ideally I'd want it to be dynamited while I watch while drinking Lemonade.
But unfortunately it's not realistically going to happen unless state politics radically change, I just don't think there is the public will to destroy what is probably perceived as a state landmark.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Sep 11th 2018 at 10:04:29 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangWell, we can always try vandalizing it and see if that fixes things...
Edited by Ramidel on Sep 11th 2018 at 6:29:29 AM
> Someone definitely shouldn’t spray paint klan hoods and white robes all over the statues. And they definitely shouldn’t add blood on the generals’ hands and spray paint WHITE SUPREMACY IS EVIL, NOT GLORIOUS on it in very large letters.
easier just to pull to pull down then waste all that spray paint
have a listen and have a link to my discord server

In an interview with MSNBC, former Ted Cruz strategist Rick Tyler is saying Cruz defending his Senate seat from Representative Beto O'Rouke is taking away resources from other Republican candidates from around the US because the race is so close.
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."