JonS

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

US design for maintainability is generally pretty excellent. It makes for expensive procurement and high maintenance budgets (ie, swap the entire Abrams power pack rather than fix the fault lòcally) but it does that in order to increase availability rates at the pointy end.
Given that general approach, I'd be surprised if the Patriot was an exception. Given *that* I'd assume there is more internal damage that both can't be seen in a photo and can't be fixed in Ukraine.
Or, alternately, the priority to date has been on pushing end-user equipment into Ukraine, and not on the support systems that keep them operational and in users hands. Edit: So what would be a simple field repair for a US unit has to go back to the States when its operated by Ukraine.
But weighing against that second conclusion is the existence of USAREUR; if it was conceivably fixable forward at Grafenwohr or Kaiserlauten (or by any of the European operators of Patriot) then they would. That it wasn't suggests significant but non-obvious damage.
I think.

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

Yeah, the Geneva conventions (or, more relevant in this case, the Geneva protocol and tangentially the Hague conventions and the 1980 convention) are all about inter-state conflict.
What happens intra-state, between you and your local law enforcement body, is entirely a matter for you and your respective legislature to figure out. 'Geneva' doesn't care a whit.
(Multiple edits: bloody sbellçzech)

Yes. It is. Interestingly though, not necessarily for crowd control by law enforcement. In war, yes, it's banned.
Yeah, the training was fun. 🙂  Stay in the shed to prove your mask works, and then take off your mask to show what happens without the mask (I guess to prove that the mask really works and it wasn't just a harmless steam sauna). Got the message for sure.
Dave

your attempt to play the both-siderism game is pathetic and shows an incredible amount of ignorance, both in historic and in current events.  What Gingerich did was completely unprecedented.  What McConnell did was completely unprecedented.  And Trump is off the charts for breaking both norms and laws.  ANd where on the left are the insane ones that are wielding power?   Where's the dem Matt Gaetz?  MTGreene?  American democracy is on the brink and it is due to one side and one side only.  Guess what --  Biden won't attempt to throw the country into a civil war to unlawfully try to cling to power.  Trump's been doing that for last 4 years, including a full on mob-coup attempt that left people dead.  So just WTF are you even talking about?  Clearly you've been watching Hannity or some other bull**** monger and now you are parroting their bulls--t.
So stop watching Fox & newsmax.  It makes you look like a damn fool.
Oh, and please respond by telling me how it's the dems fault the GOP held up UKR aid for 3 months.  Dems aint the ones on Putin's payroll.  
 

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

AFAIK, the chemical weapons convention includes irrititants. 
The USA reserve the use for "defensive action" and when its usage could prevent civilian harm, but it cannot not be used offensively e.g. for house clearing.

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

The dose makes the poison.
Looking from the outside, there is absolutely zero equivalence between the two parties. None at all.
There are ... odd individuals in both, but at the party level only one is utterly dysfunctional.
Theres also this inconvenient reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

US design for maintainability is generally pretty excellent. It makes for expensive procurement and high maintenance budgets (ie, swap the entire Abrams power pack rather than fix the fault lòcally) but it does that in order to increase availability rates at the pointy end.
Given that general approach, I'd be surprised if the Patriot was an exception. Given *that* I'd assume there is more internal damage that both can't be seen in a photo and can't be fixed in Ukraine.
Or, alternately, the priority to date has been on pushing end-user equipment into Ukraine, and not on the support systems that keep them operational and in users hands. Edit: So what would be a simple field repair for a US unit has to go back to the States when its operated by Ukraine.
But weighing against that second conclusion is the existence of USAREUR; if it was conceivably fixable forward at Grafenwohr or Kaiserlauten (or by any of the European operators of Patriot) then they would. That it wasn't suggests significant but non-obvious damage.
I think.

US design for maintainability is generally pretty excellent. It makes for expensive procurement and high maintenance budgets (ie, swap the entire Abrams power pack rather than fix the fault lòcally) but it does that in order to increase availability rates at the pointy end.
Given that general approach, I'd be surprised if the Patriot was an exception. Given *that* I'd assume there is more internal damage that both can't be seen in a photo and can't be fixed in Ukraine.
Or, alternately, the priority to date has been on pushing end-user equipment into Ukraine, and not on the support systems that keep them operational and in users hands. Edit: So what would be a simple field repair for a US unit has to go back to the States when its operated by Ukraine.
But weighing against that second conclusion is the existence of USAREUR; if it was conceivably fixable forward at Grafenwohr or Kaiserlauten (or by any of the European operators of Patriot) then they would. That it wasn't suggests significant but non-obvious damage.
I think.

US design for maintainability is generally pretty excellent. It makes for expensive procurement and high maintenance budgets (ie, swap the entire Abrams power pack rather than fix the fault lòcally) but it does that in order to increase availability rates at the pointy end.
Given that general approach, I'd be surprised if the Patriot was an exception. Given *that* I'd assume there is more internal damage that both can't be seen in a photo and can't be fixed in Ukraine.
Or, alternately, the priority to date has been on pushing end-user equipment into Ukraine, and not on the support systems that keep them operational and in users hands. Edit: So what would be a simple field repair for a US unit has to go back to the States when its operated by Ukraine.
But weighing against that second conclusion is the existence of USAREUR; if it was conceivably fixable forward at Grafenwohr or Kaiserlauten (or by any of the European operators of Patriot) then they would. That it wasn't suggests significant but non-obvious damage.
I think.

I mean ... I think that's a joke? But with MT "Empty" Greene (proud veteran of the Bowling Green Massacre) it's really really hard to be sure. That is bat**** enough to have actually leaked out of her ears.
 
Edit: oh FFS. Those really were among the proposals she submitted 🥸

I mean ... I think that's a joke? But with MT "Empty" Greene (proud veteran of the Bowling Green Massacre) it's really really hard to be sure. That is bat**** enough to have actually leaked out of her ears.
 
Edit: oh FFS. Those really were among the proposals she submitted 🥸

I mean ... I think that's a joke? But with MT "Empty" Greene (proud veteran of the Bowling Green Massacre) it's really really hard to be sure. That is bat**** enough to have actually leaked out of her ears.
 
Edit: oh FFS. Those really were among the proposals she submitted 🥸

Vertically oriented solar panels are a thing, I just saw a whole video about it (w manufacturers/installers/users being interviewed).  They are not installed as fences, but can double as fences.  Installing solar panels as fences would be really stupid & expensive, unless these are old, worn out ones that don't work anymore.
edit: By the way, california generated enough renewable energy to provide 100% of grid demand for for 30 of last 38 days.  That's california, the 6th largest economy on earth.  

Not to dispute the general direction of this post, but I have to set some things right:
- no one is using solar panels instead of fences in Germany. But some people have installed solar panel as(!) fences. That did occur, but is very rare
- Germany has willingly killed her own solar industry herself about 10 years ago. Mostly by ****ing up subventions which went to China instead of European manufacturers. Germany basically paid for the creation of the solar industry in China, and we lost 5-figure jobs here. Thanks to the ignorance on the side of the Merkel government which believed that solar (and wind) had no future
Now China owns the market and the US is paying immense subventions for solar factories so that companies relocate there. Currently, it is pointless for Germany (and Europe in general) to push money in that direction because that would only end in an economic fight with the US & China.
OTOH if China would embargo solar panels that would be annoying but would mostly hurt China itself. The biggest market is the West.

The one thing that the US is indisputably great at is logistics. I would say "days".