GRcade

twitter.com/IraqiSecurity/status/850386466207387649

twitter.com/IraqiSecurity/status/850385429144711173

Only 23 of the 59 fired Tomahawks actually made it to the airfield.

Even when he's decisive he's utterly useless!

The best Admirals, really just tremendous.

Too be fair I don't think they attempted to take out the runway at all. From all the pictures I've seen there's no impact damage on the runway, unless all the ones that missed were intended for the runway which I doubt. I would assume that going on the wording of the warnings that the Americans gave that they were trying to take out the aircraft and stores only. Cruise missiles are pretty useless at damaging a mass area like a runway, runways are very easy to repair quickly as has been shown repeatedly. The only thing capable of making a good dent would be hundreds of bombs dropped from a b52 or b2.

Michael Portillo won't like this one...

Trump budget to cut rail services to hundreds of rural communities

'These hard working, small town Americans don’t have airports or Uber to turn to; they depend on these trains,' says Jim Mathews of the National Association of Rail Passengers

Donald Trump’s proposed budget cuts could lead to 220 US cities across 23 states losing out on all of their passenger train services, according to a new study.

The analysis from the National Association of Rail Passengers (NARP) concluded that cuts to the infrastructure budget, would cut off Amtrak, transit, and commuter rail programs, and even air service to some rural towns.

This would not only cost construction and manufacturing jobs, but place a disproportionate amount of pain on rural and working class communities, it said.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... ommentsDiv

2018 is going to be murder for the GOP if they actually follow through on any of these proposed anti-rural and anti-poor policies.

So naturally I hope they try really hard to do it, because we really need a leftward swing of that pendulum.

KK wrote:Michael Portillo won't like this one...

Trump budget to cut rail services to hundreds of rural communities

'These hard working, small town Americans don’t have airports or Uber to turn to; they depend on these trains,' says Jim Mathews of the National Association of Rail Passengers

Donald Trump’s proposed budget cuts could lead to 220 US cities across 23 states losing out on all of their passenger train services, according to a new study.

The analysis from the National Association of Rail Passengers (NARP) concluded that cuts to the infrastructure budget, would cut off Amtrak, transit, and commuter rail programs, and even air service to some rural towns.

This would not only cost construction and manufacturing jobs, but place a disproportionate amount of pain on rural and working class communities, it said.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... ommentsDiv

I think the big problem here is that conservatives in the US who don't use the train service (they wouldn't as it's obviously government subsidised and thus evil and wrong) will automatically call for it to be cut all public funding as why should they pay for something they don't use.
They don't give a gooseberry fool how many people get to work via the train who have no other method to do so and will therefore become unemployed (they should just move and retrain and get a job elsewhere it's super easy and nobody has reasons to stay in one area and if they do they're obviously moochers) and they hate anything funded by government as government running things is always terrible ecpect for the armed forces which is government run and they will pump as much into that as they possibly can as it's unAmerican to consider doing otherwise.

It's why the train service in the US is and always will be a joke.

Good news. It looks like America is going to stage a tactical incursion into North Korea. What could go wrong.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-39542990

Obama does have to take the blame for some of this. He was too laid back and let despots get away with too much. Now all these situations are having to be dealt with by Donald Trump, and I have no faith he knows what he's doing. Out of the 3 choices that were on the table (Obama, Hillary, Trump) that literally is the order you'd want in command of the next war I think we're inevitably heading towards at some point. Trump is gung-ho and gun happy. Diplomacy and 'the art of the deal' are not something you associate with The Donald (even though that ironically is partially his brand image). Military posturing (of which there has always been a lot) could easily escalate.

If I was the American tax payer, I'd also be aghast at how much money he's going to burn through as well. $70 million on pretty much bugger all already.

He's spent a few million dollars of taxpayers money on weekend trips to his own golf resort hasn't he?

He has, despite the constant argument that Obama spent a lot of time playing golf as well.

American presidents really do seem to like the golf course.

The problem is that North Korea has mutual protection act with China, so if the US goes to war with North Korea they'll be at war with China which will pull in Russia and most of Europe and put of on a short walk to nuclear war.

Ironically if Trump waited a bit longer and did nothing China would probably have started quietly distancing themselves further and further from North Korea. As I understand it the current dictators of China are getting pretty sick of Kim Jong Un's bullshit and he's listening to them less and less.

lex-man wrote:The problem is that North Korea has mutual protection act with China, so if the US goes to war with North Korea they'll be at war with China which will pull in Russia and most of Europe and put of on a short walk to nuclear war.

Let's hope Trump had this conversation with China's President Xi Jinping this week and have agree to something.

The Chinese can't be happy with a rogue nuclear state on its doorstep though I guess they're limited in what steps they can take. I think the South China Sea situation is more likely to create tension between China and the USA.

China won't ever distance themselves from NK; it is an essential buffer state between the Chinese border and a major US ally & military proxy (South Korea) - juch like Russia cannot abide a string of NATO countries on their border. The end game for the Kim family leadership is not open warfare or reunification, it's China arranging a coup and placing a friendly general in charge, to put the country on a path to stability (albeit without democracy).

I really don't think that when push comes to shove, China will honor its protection pact with NK.

Alvin Flummux wrote:I really don't think that when push comes to shove, China will honor its protection pact with NK.

That'd be a bit of a risk to chance it though.

Moggy wrote:

Alvin Flummux wrote:I really don't think that when push comes to shove, China will honor its protection pact with NK.

That'd be a bit of a risk to chance it though.

I certainly wouldn't want to chance it with Trump at the helm and Tillerson doing... whatever he does.

Alvin Flummux wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Alvin Flummux wrote:I really don't think that when push comes to shove, China will honor its protection pact with NK.

That'd be a bit of a risk to chance it though.

I certainly wouldn't want to chance it with Trump at the helm and Tillerson doing... whatever he does.

They can't seem to have their bluff called so they would have to react.