Nice link.

Rubbish. If satellites can be capable of visually following individual cars from orbit, a drone could easily be equipped to "peep" when operating a mere 200 feet up.

Really? So a drone 200 feet above your yard is going to look into your windows and see what exactly? Never mind the quality of the lens, the angle means you aren't going to see much.

The telemetry also shows that it was at -45.9 feet when it crashed (see the video.) We can presume the telemetry is accurate and it crashed so hard that it buried itself 46 feet under the ground, or we can assume that this "telemetry" is bullshit.

Or the telemetry altitude was referenced to a zero point 46 feet higher than point it crashed. Or the altimeter was damaged when the drone was shot.

I have read that link, and hundreds of pages of legal opinions, regulations, and related material. Unless, in this case, local municipal, county, or Kentucky state laws explicitly provides for trespass prosecution in the case of using air space that the federal agency with statutory authority in matter doesn't think is the least bit in control of the guy 200' below in his back yard... then there's no there, there. Again: what's the next crime you had in mind? The police on the spot didn't think there was anything approaching trespass involved.

china says the spratlys are on ancient chinese maps (as if that's justification, just mapping something). no chinese ever lived there

all that happened is someone drew a nine dotted line on a napkin 70 years ago:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

china plays the long game. they're an empire which has expanded and contracted for dozens of centuries. the area russia stole from them has been chinese many centuries more than russian

and is currently oveflowing with chinese:

http://abcnews.go.com/Internat...

remember how texas became part of the usa?

china wants resources

china is becoming imperialistic (they are boldly grabbing islands and you're claiming they aren't bold?)

outer manchuria was gobbled from them during the century of humiliation and unequal treaties

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

so the chinese are on the long view. they're just waiting. when the time comes, they will pounce, and no one will be able to do anything about it

outer manchuria is there's, they are certain of it, and when the time comes, it will be there's again. all it takes is a few more decades of russia continuing to rot economically, socially, and politically as it is, and china to continue to grow economically (and if they have social and political upheaval, then an ultranationalist demagogue may seize control and we'll see this happening sooner)

but you reply nonetheless, making you more useless than what you complain about

it won't be a nuclear war

siberia is already overflowing with chinese. china can complain about the poor treatment of minorities

sound familiar?

run it like russia in georgia in ukraine: inflame and create puppet separatist movements

russia can bitch as loudly as it wants that china is behind the whole thing. china can simply say it's a local uprising

if russia tries anything militarily against china itself, muscular china will smack dying russia (this is in 20 years, considering russia's current economic trajectory and china's current economic trajectory)

meanwhile china will have much more money, and simply provide "humanitarian aid" to chinese and other "repressed minorities" in siberia

small weak independent state in siberia will be created, and china will dominate them with money and social influence. no need for actual declared political control

there is no openly declared war of total destruction, so there is no reason to use nukes

you're talking about an openly declared war of total destruction

if russia continues it's economic, political, and social degradation, it will become weak enough that china can free siberia the way texas was carved from mexico: an uprising by locals, controlled by china covertly. buy off corrupt russian officials, provide "humanitarian aid", etc

then there is no war declared and no one for russia to nuke

russia can whine and bitch that china is supporting the whole thing, and china can just say it's a local uprising

if russia attacks china anyway, now muscular china has every right to openly attack dying russia

either way, you absorb the "independent state" later

sounds familiar?

yes, because this is how russia operates in abhakazia (georgian province), eastern ukraine, crimea: inflame, create, and encourage a puppet separatist movement

so what i'd like to see is: in 20-30 years china rushes in to "help" chinese minorities abused by russia

just for the irony

watch russia complain in blind hypocrisy

ukrainians and georgians are nodding their heads knowingly right now

already, chinese minorities in siberia are huge and a worry for moscow:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

it won't be but 10-20 years before the chinese are running siberia by economic and social fiat, undeclared, informally, if not officially politically, with russia's weak economy and small population. the actual political control can come later, even much later

siberia breaks from moscow with chinese covert encouragement, just like russia in ukraine and georgia today, and china runs siberia as small weak puppet states

that's eurocentric history

yes, napoleon and hitler fucked up badly

from the asian side, it's different. for example, genghis khan

... so that it will be easier for Russia to take them over. Yes, Putin would love that.

No, she mentioned it to point out that she was governor of a state that's a lot closer to a semi-hostile foreign power, and more thoughtful about the implications of that than would be the community organizer from Chicago (who had never been in charge of state police, let alone armed national guard installations). She wasn't presidential material, but nor did she claim that the right-next-doorness of Russia was an example of foreign policy experience. Her point was that when you govern a state with a huge energy and fishing and mining economy that's a stone's throw from a looming competitor in those same areas, it becomes part of your daily thought process. She's a clumsy speaker and has some wacky ideological quirks (mostly from having been raised in a religious family culture), but she wasn't wrong to point out, simply in passing, that having Russia and Canada as your next door neighbors while you're governor is different than having Indiana and Missouri as neighbors when you're a community organizer, whatever that actually is.

Better yet, systemd/Timers: https://wiki.archlinux.org/ind...

No, that rot and decay started 93 years ago with the formation of the USSR.

So what you're saying is that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and you're just continuing to make shit up. Well, at least you're consistent.

But it would be good for you to look some people in the eye and tell them that the thousands of their innocent, non-combatant fellow villagers and countrymen who've died during ground fights between various parties are only dead because they never heard your wise words about they should have just left. I'm sure now they're thinking, "Doh! We had no idea that we could have just left, and instead we were killed in the thousands by ISIS, by the Syrian government, by Iranian special forces, by sectarian IEDs, by Taliban fighters who don't care who's in the crossfire ... man, if only we'd asked MrL0G1C, we would have realized that we could just leave!"

Instead they're thinking things like, "Well, it's nice that fight is over, because that caravan of Taliban killers just got hit in an airstrike before they even made it into our town, and none of us had to die."

Yeah, I can see how you'd prefer the fake scenario you're preaching instead of reality. People who live around fighting insurgents ... they should just leave! Great plan. Millions of people who would love to get out from under the thumbs of such insurgents and the people they're fighting with are just too dumb to take your advice, right?

Just like rifles, right? You much prefer hand-to-hand combat with clubs and knives? Then it's brave and moral? Or is it possible that the tool has nothing to do with the philosophical underpinnings of why it's a good idea to stop a row of ISIS or Taliban trucks from rolling into the next village they're going to decapitate?

Sure it does. The original post spouts a bunch of BS about cops shooting people on "regular basis" and "countless times," and I'm pointing out that your vague, hand-wavy, no-context, no-citations, no-hard-numbers BS is, in fact, BS. You don't like being asked to be specific, so you're trying to pretend that being called out on it is meaningless. But it's not. You said something, and it's wrong, and you're being told it's wrong. Sorry you don't like that, so much that you're willing to try to continually change the subject, but it's what YOU BS'ed about that's being responded to. And of course you haven't offered a single scrap of more salient detail to counter that (which you can't, of course), and THAT IS THE POINT. You're just making stuff up for rhetorical reasons, and got caught. Now you can continue to try to blame the person who called you on it, or you can actually say something that's based in reality.