Well, it had bipartisan senate support so I wouldn’t immediately jump to the conclusion that the senate would agree.

If they don’t approve it that’ll cause a crisis and something will happen, whatever it may be.

Edit: Leaving NATO is a lot more serious than the corrupt stuff he does they don’t bat an eye at.

He’d be breaking a law passed by congress saying congress must approve it if he tried that.

.

wiki says

Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they “should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used”.

what assistance would that not be if not protecting them in some way or another?

I think you got that wrong enough it warrants a correction…

They gave them up for assurances that Russia and the USA would protect them if they were attacked.

Edit: that’s why the USA is giving them weapons, they’re honoring the deal, or at least trying to, not 100% sure on specifics, I’m sure it was vague on what protecting them would entail.

Hopefully they can be moved

.

Very possible, but putins crazy.

I don’t know how Ukraine would convince Russia the threat is real without at least a test detonation somewhere and that’s better than bombing someone, but also not ideal.

I really hope it doesn’t come to that as escalation will be fast, but if they keep being strung along and not being given means to end the war there might not be another choice =(

They’ve been talking about those trials and pre-trials for many years, probably over a decade at this point.

Everything I’ve heard is they still haven’t figured out how to do it effectively on a ship. Stationary land based would probably be easier though as that removes the size/power restrictions.

The challenge is both the production time and the high cost of such a high-tech missile. Typically, the US Navy fires two missiles at each given airborne target to guarantee its downing, and an interceptor missile costs millions of dollars, much more than the Iranian missiles it shoots down.

This was always going to be a problem and it’s their fault for not moving sooner on it.

If an adversaries missiles costs a million dollars, how do you challenge them? Make missiles that costs less and overwhelm them.

Not only do you gotta worry about Iran’s or others cheaper missiles, but now there’s drones that are a fraction of the cost.

If the US enters a major conflict, I wouldn’t be surprised to see high value assets get lost or damaged due this problem.

Lets see the US come out with some new advances in tech with lower cost.

FWIW spacex doesn’t actually have a lot of patents for their ships. Patents mean making things public but hold society back for the duration of the patent.

SpaceX treats it’s rocket stuff as trade secrets so countries like China that don’t respect patents can’t use it. However, if someone does figure it out on their own, SpaceX has no protections.

The Pentagon is directly working with SpaceX on this. Awhile ago they said they had a handle on it but that it was going to be an ongoing problem as Russian evades their measures.

This was in May, and they’ve obviously figured another way around.

“At this time we have successfully countered Russian use, but I am certain Russia will continue to try and find ways to exploit Starlink and other commercial communications systems,” Plumb said. "It will continue to be a problem, I think we’ve wrapped our heads around it and found good solutions with both Starlink and Ukraine.”

I think the title need a little work…

How can I prove I’m dead?

Someone else can, but the title says I have to.

I mean that’s what the California law is.

If you buy it you own it, but we aren’t buying the games.

A law that says they have to let us buy it instead of license it would be nice though.

Pretty cool how this was being made for mortars and then it worked well for this

They’re bigger so it’s hard to know, but it’s usually something like 2.9% + 10c a transaction.

At their scale though who knows

They should almost just make it so the blaze plan of firebase or other cloud services has a $1 non refundable pre-payment so they can just whittle away at the pennies instead of getting charged processing/transaction fees on a $0.01 transaction. Tops up to $1 if it goes to $0

I think people would pay $1 to enable the paid plans. If you’re going that far, you’re getting $1 of use out of it.

I’ve had Google charge me $0.01 before for firebase usage.

They really should have waited until I owed more since that cost them money.

I’d never even heard of this before. Wtf