Leaderboard

Do we get to have a description of this thing before we all set out to make a shrine to it? Or do we just grab the image you provided and start printing out pillows?

What. No. He's the fucking White House press secretary, not Joe from backwoods Georgia. People like him should carefully consider what they're going to say. Not run their mouth like a retard and later apologise.

That's some pretty epic bullshit there Don, sorry. Hiitler gassing people in the camps might not be 'warfare' use, but it is definite chemical weapons use. Gassing thousands and thousands of people with pesticides and nerve agents is chemical weapons use in any sense of the word.

Chamber tightness and case fit in the chamber is a surprisingly complex topic. For a manually-operated weapon the chamber can be much tighter around the case. If the case gets a bit sticky, the person working the bolt just works it a bit harder. A manually-operated weapon probably isn't going to fire enough rounds between cleaning sessions that the grunge will build up to the point where that's a problem anyhow. Automatic weapons tend to have slightly looser chambers, and machine guns looser chambers still. Machine gun chambers are so loose, in fact, that it's generally not a good idea to re-use brass that's been through a machine gun. The chambers are so loose that there can be significant stretching and thinning of the case around the case head area. In general though, cases get significantly distorted during firing. I know that if I take a once-fired piece of brass and try to chamber it, it doesn't fit without some shoving. 6x49 needed that expansion groove because it was going to be quite high pressure, used in machine guns, headspaced on the shoulder, and made of mild steel, which isn't as stretchy as brass. On a rimmed cartridge the shoulder basically becomes the expansion joint. If it had been made of brass rather than steel, or if it operated at a more typical pressure, they probably could have gotten away without having the joint.

I'm not giving it too much weight? I literally only posted it here because it's a retarded comment, I think I've posted Spicer's retarded comments here before. I'm seeing a jump to justify a military strike. And if they're doing it here, who's to say they won't do it on other issues too? 2. Yes. It looks more like a press release than an intelligence report though, but hey. That's the report we're talking about right now. That's where this organophosphates vs nerve gas discussion comes from. Citing intelligence agencies as a source are usually a bit sketchy imo. Personally I don't trust the "Trust us, our intelligence agency said so" arguments at all. We've seen what can happen with that in Iraq, although that might be an extreme case. 3. Depends on what chemicals you use. Yes, one is isopropyl alcohol (MSDS here), which is not flammable in presence of shocks, but can explode due to mechanical impacts or open flames. But using isopropyl alcohol isn't the only way of making sarin. Another way is to use methylphosphonic dichloride instead of isopropyl alcohol, but that has a whole range of other problems, including it being super toxic. But it's not highly flammable or explosive. So yes, according to Wiki it's possible to create sarin without explosive/highly flammable materials. I guess that a provocation would be something like jihadis storing chlorine in a house, have it look like an HQ or important place and wait until it's bombed: "We've been bombed with chemical weapons!!!!!111!1". While a false-flag would be something like deliberately blowing up the house yourself and claiming you were being bombed with chemical weapons. But anyway, I have literally no idea what to think about this whole incident. Sometimes I'm leaning to one side, then something gets posted and I start leaning to the other side. I've been trying to give other perspectives but it seems that with a lot of people it's "You're either with me or you're a conspiracy nut/brainwashed by the media". I've been IP-banned on a forum that's totally unrelated to the SCW or even weapons because I told a moderator that maybe the proof wasn't as definitive as he claimed. Obviously that meant I support a mass murdering dictator and he perma'd me. Anyway, I think we'll have to wait on further information for this discussion to get anywhere. If you don't mind I'll drop it here since I think we can keep discussing endlessly and I wasn't planning on doing that. That was the second time he said that. I mean come on Spicer.

Contest Idea: Wehrapocalypse now You work for a model-making company, and have been instructed to come up with a new line of tank/afv models to sell to punters. Unfortunately, the market for german tanks (ie: the biggest market in the industry) is completely filled - with manufacturers making every single variant of german AFV for which any historical documentation exists, usually in at least three paint schemes. Digging desperately through the archives one night for a varient which has not already been made, you have a flash of inspiration: why not design your own? The tank/afv you will present to the board must be plausibly German (or modified by Germans, captured by Germans etc), and must fit into a 1939-1946 time period. It must be recogniseably teutonic in terms of design and construction, but must use the minimum number of existing parts and components in order to make a design/trademark filing easier and prevent your competition from reusing their old moulds. The history of the tank/afv must be plausible, and must include some reason why it hasn't been discovered up until now. This means that the design should be for a 'lost' prototype, limited production type or exotic conversion of a captured design done in very small numbers. The design must be appealing to punters for some reason, which must be explained in the pitch. It should also be detailed enough so that said punters can get their wehraboner one by drooling over all the technical specifications and fancy-sounding german equipment names. The winner of the competition will be judged by a board of wehraboo and model experts (I'm nominating EE and Walter to start with, please provide other suggestions), with part of the prize being that someone will try to slip the winning design into wikipedia in the hopes of getting it taken up by real-life model makers. The ultimate prize here would be to buy your own model back in 1:35 scale to mount of a plinth. For this reason it would be great for each pitch to include faked documentation, design drawings, archival footage and the like for inclusion into wiki.

US statement: WHO report: So the US went from "some cases" to "the victims", and from "organophosphorus chemicals" to "sarin". Those are quite the jumps. Come on Don, have you read the shit that has come out of the mouths of US governmental people? It goes from "this is a one-off strike, we won't take further action" to "Assad didn't do this" to "Trump wants to destabilise Syria" to "Trump wants to destabilise the region" to "we're looking for more military options" to "the US cannot separate Assad from ISIS". The US twists and turns just as much as Syria, just on another level and in the US' case the public eats it. Like I said before, Syria almost immediately offered to accept an international inspection team, why was this denied? You can go shouting like "SYRIA HAS NOTHING TO DEMAND", but why shouldn't an inspection/investigation be from an international team? What inspection team in recent years hasn't been an international team? Syria also said it should start in Damascus, shouldn't that be absolutely perfect? Start in Damascus, drive to Shayrat, inspect that. If the US knew if came from Shayrat, wouldn't this be the easiest course of action? Of course, if you then can prove it came from the Syrian air force, you can then bomb to shit whatever you want to bomb to shit. For me this isn't about something like "The US shouldn't hamper the fight against the jihadis" but it's about the US straight up denying an international inspection and that they were the investigator, attorney, judge and the executioner. A major power doing that scares me, sugarcoat it all you want, but it fucking scares me. What if Russia had completely destroyed the Ukrainian air forces over MH17? What if we had destroyed Russian air defences over MH17? I mean, we had perfectly good (according to us) evidence to blame the Russians, and the Russians had perfectly good (according to them) to blame the Ukrainians. But none of the parties involved in that incident did that. I wonder why. More about the Spicer remark: Makes it a little more nuanced, but it's still a dumb statement.

LoooSeR posted estimates from Russian economists on how long it would take the Syrian economy to recover to its pre-war level. That was about a year ago, and they were estimating two decades. Obviously, the situation has not improved since then. @Donward's comparisons to the Thirty Years War are apt. This is a massively confusing proxy war that has vastly exceeded the original scope of the conflict and dragged in much larger foreign actors. It will leave the country devastated for decades. At this point, given the reports of CIA backed and DOD backed militias fighting each other, and US-backed Kurdish forces coming to blows with militias armed with US-supplied weapons, let alone Seymour Hersh's allegations that senior Pentagon officials were passing intelligence to Israel and Russia to undermine the Obama Administration's policy, the US basically has been fighting itself in Syria by proxy for the past five years. It's a hell of a thing for a country to have a foreign policy that was written by Azathoth. It's even worse when that country has the world's largest economy and the best weapons. Can you imagine what Cardinal Richelieu would have done if he had TOWs, nuclear weapons and tertiary syphilis? Wonder no more!

Isn't the modern mode of civil war one where both sides get propped up by various powers so that nobody gets a decisive upper hand and the host country is comprehensively ruined in ways that neither side could achieve on its own? If so, isn't one country propping up AND bombing both sides simply the best way to cut out the middleman?

Rich Anderson already roasted this fool I'd personally like to see Rich and Kenny over here, they seem to be goodboys who are also hated by Luigi which is a good sign

Chambers actually tend to be fairly loose, that groove thingie is basically extra slack in the case so that it doesn't have a breech when it its hits peak pressure of 65,000 PSI or whatever.

Looks like that Russian 6x49mm SCFUV. The weird expansion joint above the extractor groove is the giveaway.

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

"Hello? Yes, this is Hilter."

More of DVL-10

You being offended or not has nothing to do with me thinking it's a retarded statement that shouldn't have been said. This isn't the first time Spicer has said dumb shit. He said that Trump's goal is to destroy healthcare and he has said that Trump's goal is to destabilise Syria/the region twice now. A press secretary shouldn't have so many "slips of the tongue", if he can't stop saying stupid shit (and having to apologise for it), maybe he shouldn't be press secretary? 1. Except the US didn't refer to it as organophosphorus chemcicals, they said nerve gas. Some organophosphates are nerve gasses, not all organophosphates are nerve gasses. So you can't simply make the jump from organophosphates to nerve gasses, but the US did do just that. WHO said "the symptoms are consistent with exposure to organophosphates (which include nerve gasses)". WHO didn't say "the symptoms are consistent with nerve gasses (which are organophosphates)". The US completely dropped the organophosphates part and went straight to nerve gasses. If WHO had said "organophosphorus chemicals, a category of chemicals that includes phosmet" (which is a true statement) would the US have said "World Heath Organization stated [...] the victims of the attack in Syria showed they had been exposed to phosmet" (which could be a true statement)? 2. They say they have proof, an inspection can confirm that proof. It's one thing to go look for proof, it's another thing to confirm the proof you already have. You give Iran as an example, I can give MH17 as an example. I think the only country that didn't (fully) accept the JIT's findings is Russia. For as far as I know every other country has accepted JIT's findings as correct. Syria's only demands were: International team and start in Damascus. There was nothing like "Only non-NATO countries allowed, who have to start in Damascus, cannot go anywhere without military protection, and are not allowed to visit military installations". Nothing in the two Syrian demands prevented an inspection team from visiting all military installations, airbases or factories they suspect of making and/or storing sarin. 3. I'm not saying that the Russian/Iranian/Syrian sides aren't sketchy. Also, as soon as the two compounds come into contact, it would make sarin. Sure, properly mixing everything would make sure that the binaries are fully converted to sarin, but as soon as the binaries come into contact with each other, sarin is formed. It also has to be noted that Putin didn't say it was a false flag, he said it was a provocation. The term "false flag" was a mistranslation: This was Putin's statement: Which, according to a Redditor translates to: Now, I can't confirm the accuracy of that translation, but I do know that "провокации" transliterates to "provokatsii".

Maybe it's just low tier MM, but WT is way way WAY easier than WoT.

Longstreet?

The debt is down 101 Billion dollars since Trump took office. https://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/search?startMonth=01&startDay=20&startYear=2017&endMonth=04&endDay=11&endYear=2017

Since the Holocaust is an essential part of WWII, its really pedantic to say that the gas chambers aren't part of the war that Nazi Germany waged against Europe.

Oh boy it's that implaccable gud boi of high moral standing, John McCain. Him and his wilting southern belle counterpart need to just retire already.

More from that thread, from Paralay posts:

A bunch of Berkut/Firkin goodness has dropped, courtesy of Paralay on the Key Publishing forums: Model of a further-developed Berkut with rectangular nozzles. Sukhoi actually test-flew a rectangular nozzle on an SU-27 testbed: They found that the nozzle dramatically reduced infrared signature, but that it was heavier and developed about 15% less thrust. It is unclear why the PAK-FA uses traditional, round nozzles. Paralay confirms what I had read before; Berkut was conceived as a naval bird: Forward-swept wings are particularly attractive for carrier-based aircraft because they give a little extra lift and a little extra roll authority during landing when compared to aft-swept wings. Landing airplanes on boats is hideously dangerous, so even small advantages can make the difference. And here is a deck plan of an Ulyanovsk-class carrier filled with naval Berkuts!