PortaJohn

:mad:

1.3k
Sen. Marco Rubio
Wed, June 7, 2023 at 7:00 AM EDT·3 min read


After years of obstruction, Congress is finally approving the Air Force’s plan to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt. This is the right call, as the A-10 is no longer suited to America’s geostrategic needs. However, we should not simply dispose of this venerable plane; in the hands of our international partners, it can continue advancing the national interest.
The U.S. government created the A-10 in the 1970s to provide close-air support to American ground troops. At the time it was an effective counterweight to the threat of Soviet tanks, and in the decades since it has served the military faithfully.
The A-10 proved especially useful in the Gulf War, when it flew 8,100 sorties and destroyed thousands of Soviet-era combat vehicles and equipment. Later, it helped the U.S. destroy hardened enemy positions in the war on terrorism.
But major military operations in the Middle East have ceased. Today, our greatest adversary is communist China, whose tanks and emplacements are much more advanced than those used by the Soviets or Islamic terrorists.
To prepare to counter Beijing in a future conflict, we must make the best possible use of our limited hangar space and procurement dollars. To do that, we must retire the A-10, as senior military leaders have called for. This will make room for aircraft like the F-35 Lightning II, and free funds for the development and construction of next-generation missiles and missile defense systems, which will be invaluable in any future Indo-Pacific conflict, whether that’s in Taiwan, the South China Sea or the Korean Peninsula.
However, the A-10 can still do a lot of good if transferred to allies and partners in need of it. The most obvious example is Ukraine, which is preparing to mount a counteroffensive against Soviet-era tanks and entrenched Russian positions.
At the recent G7 summit, President Joe Biden stated he supports training Ukrainian forces to operate F-16 Fighting Falcons, a first step to allies providing the planes to Ukraine. But even if we accept the president’s position, there is good reason to wonder if an air-to-air fighter makes the most sense. Ukraine’s defense intelligence chief, for one, believes Ukraine would fare better with A-10s. Moreover, F-16s require 6,000 feet of tarmac — increasingly rare in bombed-out Ukraine — to take off and land, while A-10s only require 4,000 feet of dirt runway.
Beyond Ukraine, potential beneficiaries of an A-10 transfer program include African countries in the Sahel fighting ISIS and Boko Haram, or even Latin American nations combating paramilitary rebels and drug cartels in the jungle.

 
:mad:

1.3k
Sen. Marco Rubio
Wed, June 7, 2023 at 7:00 AM EDT·3 min read


After years of obstruction, Congress is finally approving the Air Force’s plan to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt. This is the right call, as the A-10 is no longer suited to America’s geostrategic needs. However, we should not simply dispose of this venerable plane; in the hands of our international partners, it can continue advancing the national interest.
The U.S. government created the A-10 in the 1970s to provide close-air support to American ground troops. At the time it was an effective counterweight to the threat of Soviet tanks, and in the decades since it has served the military faithfully.
The A-10 proved especially useful in the Gulf War, when it flew 8,100 sorties and destroyed thousands of Soviet-era combat vehicles and equipment. Later, it helped the U.S. destroy hardened enemy positions in the war on terrorism.
But major military operations in the Middle East have ceased. Today, our greatest adversary is communist China, whose tanks and emplacements are much more advanced than those used by the Soviets or Islamic terrorists.
To prepare to counter Beijing in a future conflict, we must make the best possible use of our limited hangar space and procurement dollars. To do that, we must retire the A-10, as senior military leaders have called for. This will make room for aircraft like the F-35 Lightning II, and free funds for the development and construction of next-generation missiles and missile defense systems, which will be invaluable in any future Indo-Pacific conflict, whether that’s in Taiwan, the South China Sea or the Korean Peninsula.
However, the A-10 can still do a lot of good if transferred to allies and partners in need of it. The most obvious example is Ukraine, which is preparing to mount a counteroffensive against Soviet-era tanks and entrenched Russian positions.
At the recent G7 summit, President Joe Biden stated he supports training Ukrainian forces to operate F-16 Fighting Falcons, a first step to allies providing the planes to Ukraine. But even if we accept the president’s position, there is good reason to wonder if an air-to-air fighter makes the most sense. Ukraine’s defense intelligence chief, for one, believes Ukraine would fare better with A-10s. Moreover, F-16s require 6,000 feet of tarmac — increasingly rare in bombed-out Ukraine — to take off and land, while A-10s only require 4,000 feet of dirt runway.
Beyond Ukraine, potential beneficiaries of an A-10 transfer program include African countries in the Sahel fighting ISIS and Boko Haram, or even Latin American nations combating paramilitary rebels and drug cartels in the jungle.

Well fuck! Let's give away more shit. When does the bleeding stop? Literally the FSA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bender
:mad:

1.3k
Sen. Marco Rubio
Wed, June 7, 2023 at 7:00 AM EDT·3 min read


After years of obstruction, Congress is finally approving the Air Force’s plan to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt. This is the right call, as the A-10 is no longer suited to America’s geostrategic needs. However, we should not simply dispose of this venerable plane; in the hands of our international partners, it can continue advancing the national interest.
The U.S. government created the A-10 in the 1970s to provide close-air support to American ground troops. At the time it was an effective counterweight to the threat of Soviet tanks, and in the decades since it has served the military faithfully.
The A-10 proved especially useful in the Gulf War, when it flew 8,100 sorties and destroyed thousands of Soviet-era combat vehicles and equipment. Later, it helped the U.S. destroy hardened enemy positions in the war on terrorism.
But major military operations in the Middle East have ceased. Today, our greatest adversary is communist China, whose tanks and emplacements are much more advanced than those used by the Soviets or Islamic terrorists.
To prepare to counter Beijing in a future conflict, we must make the best possible use of our limited hangar space and procurement dollars. To do that, we must retire the A-10, as senior military leaders have called for. This will make room for aircraft like the F-35 Lightning II, and free funds for the development and construction of next-generation missiles and missile defense systems, which will be invaluable in any future Indo-Pacific conflict, whether that’s in Taiwan, the South China Sea or the Korean Peninsula.
However, the A-10 can still do a lot of good if transferred to allies and partners in need of it. The most obvious example is Ukraine, which is preparing to mount a counteroffensive against Soviet-era tanks and entrenched Russian positions.
At the recent G7 summit, President Joe Biden stated he supports training Ukrainian forces to operate F-16 Fighting Falcons, a first step to allies providing the planes to Ukraine. But even if we accept the president’s position, there is good reason to wonder if an air-to-air fighter makes the most sense. Ukraine’s defense intelligence chief, for one, believes Ukraine would fare better with A-10s. Moreover, F-16s require 6,000 feet of tarmac — increasingly rare in bombed-out Ukraine — to take off and land, while A-10s only require 4,000 feet of dirt runway.
Beyond Ukraine, potential beneficiaries of an A-10 transfer program include African countries in the Sahel fighting ISIS and Boko Haram, or even Latin American nations combating paramilitary rebels and drug cartels in the jungle.

How about we do the needful to the cartels and cut out the middle man? We’ve been fucking around with them for close to 50 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: merica and BLEE
Does anyone else think it odd that everyone everywhere that has a platform is talking about this at the same time?
Could be fallen angels cast down to earth. We think aliens look the way they do because thats what Hollywood has showed us for decades.

Who knows maybe that’s what a fallen angel looks like? Demons?
 
Last edited:

Ever notice that when cunts like this get into a scuffle with suspects they get their asses kicked? When bigger & stronger backup arrives they get out of the way.

After the suspect is subdued by the white knights, the little cunt steps back in the scuffle. By that time the suspect is already pinned, face down, on the ground and she puts the handcuffs on him.

Then she reads him his rights while the white knights are stuffing him in her car so it looks like she gets credit for the arrest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bender
9TXdBwDjLSV0.jpeg
 
"Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof...."
Oh make no mistake they know the power of religion. And they want that power.

Personally my views on God and the Bible would likely ruffle the feathers of many. I know there is a god, and his son died for ME. But much in the bible or religion for that matter is setup by men in order to control other men. All the "off chutes" of religions are my "proof" of that. Who is right a Catholic or Baptist or Lutheran or......... They all can not be correct can they.

Here the WEF is telling us just what the end goal is, just like L ron Hubbard and scientology, it is all about power over other men.

Religion is the single biggest threat to the WEF/UN/WHO and they know it. Start now to undermine it.
 
:mad:

1.3k
Sen. Marco Rubio
Wed, June 7, 2023 at 7:00 AM EDT·3 min read


After years of obstruction, Congress is finally approving the Air Force’s plan to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt. This is the right call, as the A-10 is no longer suited to America’s geostrategic needs. However, we should not simply dispose of this venerable plane; in the hands of our international partners, it can continue advancing the national interest.
The U.S. government created the A-10 in the 1970s to provide close-air support to American ground troops. At the time it was an effective counterweight to the threat of Soviet tanks, and in the decades since it has served the military faithfully.
The A-10 proved especially useful in the Gulf War, when it flew 8,100 sorties and destroyed thousands of Soviet-era combat vehicles and equipment. Later, it helped the U.S. destroy hardened enemy positions in the war on terrorism.
But major military operations in the Middle East have ceased. Today, our greatest adversary is communist China, whose tanks and emplacements are much more advanced than those used by the Soviets or Islamic terrorists.
To prepare to counter Beijing in a future conflict, we must make the best possible use of our limited hangar space and procurement dollars. To do that, we must retire the A-10, as senior military leaders have called for. This will make room for aircraft like the F-35 Lightning II, and free funds for the development and construction of next-generation missiles and missile defense systems, which will be invaluable in any future Indo-Pacific conflict, whether that’s in Taiwan, the South China Sea or the Korean Peninsula.
However, the A-10 can still do a lot of good if transferred to allies and partners in need of it. The most obvious example is Ukraine, which is preparing to mount a counteroffensive against Soviet-era tanks and entrenched Russian positions.
At the recent G7 summit, President Joe Biden stated he supports training Ukrainian forces to operate F-16 Fighting Falcons, a first step to allies providing the planes to Ukraine. But even if we accept the president’s position, there is good reason to wonder if an air-to-air fighter makes the most sense. Ukraine’s defense intelligence chief, for one, believes Ukraine would fare better with A-10s. Moreover, F-16s require 6,000 feet of tarmac — increasingly rare in bombed-out Ukraine — to take off and land, while A-10s only require 4,000 feet of dirt runway.
Beyond Ukraine, potential beneficiaries of an A-10 transfer program include African countries in the Sahel fighting ISIS and Boko Haram, or even Latin American nations combating paramilitary rebels and drug cartels in the jungle.

I am late to the party on this post. I don't mind retiring the A-10, but only if you have something to replace it. It needs to be slower than a fighter jet and have the same abilities as the A-10. To just get rid of it and say the F35 can do the job is insane.

Shit let the Army have it and increase their budget. How about build new airframes of the A-10 and update all of the systems. As a former ground pounder, I love the A-10.
 
If that were true, they wouldn't be trying to destroy it.
There is no salvation in religion.
The antichrist will be religious.

You do you.
"They" don't have the power, the "church" does. This is why the church and all it stands for must be destroyed. The new one will be NWO.

For me, and likely due to several bad experiences with "churches" I have a very poor outlook on them, and see them as half a step above Jim Jones.
To me, God gave man the ability to think, to use reason, he uses his mind like no other creature. This is unique in the universe. Now what man chooses to do with that.....well that is up to the specific person.

Personally I am not religious, but I do believe in god. In my book there is a difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmp1